Iraq: Doomed to failure!! Oh... wait...

[Caine]

Its call left wing spin and talking points.....They think if they keep saying it over and over again that the American people will start believing it.....They are wrong though, the American people are smarter then the left wing gives them credit to be......

This type of idiot partisan talk can go both ways.

"If Bush continues to mention Iraq and Al Qaeda together, the American people will think that Iraq attacked us... many already do"

How is that?

 

[Navy Pride]

This type of idiot partisan talk can go both ways.

"If Bush continues to mention Iraq and Al Qaeda together, the American people will think that Iraq attacked us... many already do"

How is that?

Only Liberals will think that...Moderates and Conservatives are way to smart....:lol:

 

[Caine]

Only Liberals will think that...Moderates and Conservatives are way to smart....:lol:

Whatever, your lack of intelligence when figuring out what is spin and what is truth is embarrasing to the Republican party.

 

[Navy Pride]

Whatever, your lack of intelligence when figuring out what is spin and what is truth is embarrasing to the Republican party.

Who cares about the republican party?

 

[Caine]

Who cares about the republican party?

Lol... Is this the situation where you claim you don't support the Republican party? That is hilarious and ridiculous.

And, its obvious that you have nothing in common with the Democrats, especially after focusing 3000 of your 4000 some posts on attacking them.

 

[Navy Pride]

Lol... Is this the situation where you claim you don't support the Republican party? That is hilarious and ridiculous.

And, its obvious that you have nothing in common with the Democrats, especially after focusing 3000 of your 4000 some posts on attacking them.

I belong to no party.......I have voted for both dems and republicans.......JFK, LBJ and "Scoop" Jackson come to mind but that was before yyour party was hijacked by the far left whacko base.........

 

[Caine]

I belong to no party.......I have voted for both dems and republicans.......JFK, LBJ and "Scoop" Jackson come to mind but that was before yyour party was hijacked by the far left whacko base.........

Negative, You only focus on the words of the far left whackos, because thier words get media coverage.
They have hijacked nothing.
Your arguments are false, as always.

 

[MSgt]

Hmmm. I note that conservatives don't seem sick of the word "sovereign" when it comes to US interests. We withdraw from the world court because we are sovereign. We don't have to abide by the UN because we are sovereign. We don't have to listen to what other nations think when we decide to invade a country because we are sovereign.

The EU views our practices of putting people to death as immoral. But does that stop us from doing it? Nope. Because we are America, the God blessed nation, and we have a God given unique capacity to determine what is moral in the world, and what is best for their culture. Why? Because we have the most powerful military forces on earth.

That is the basis for imposing our morality.

I am sick of the arrogant double standards. We are paying for our arrogance.

1) I've never seen the word "sovereign," as used by "old Europe" used to describe America. It wasn't "old Europe" that led the charge to help South Vietnamese, South Koreans, Kuwaitis, Haitians, Somalis, Croatians, Iraqis, etc.

2) Our "sovereignty" comes from a free voting democracy...not a brutal dictatorship.

3) We have a say in the world because our blood has been spilt in the defense of nations all over the globe. (If we did things like "old Europe" than we would have colonies and flags planted all over the place. We are the super power and it is our obligation to be that. When complaining about our obligations, one should remember that our power has been in the hands of less than honorable nations in the past (Germany, U.S.S.R.) The basis for imposing our morality is that we come to the rescue every time Asia and Europe needs us. Our morals aren't good enough to impose free democracies, but our might is good enough to safe gaurd these hypocrits? Old Asia and Old Europe have devoured American lives and consumed our wealth. Now that we are expending it in the Arab home lands and not using up our resources saving their asses on European lands, we are wrong?

4) We've done what we have done because we are right. It has nothing to do with anything else. The UN pulled from us. The UN and the nations that govern it would rather sit by and watch the world rot while lining their pockets. The UN would rather sit idly by and watch this civilization continue to produce terrorists, because the threat isn't to them.


And just how are we paying for our deserved arrogance? We are on top of the world and have been for some time. You should re-evaluate what your allegiance is. I guarantee that the average Arab in the Middle East and the average European could care less about you. Stop caring to appease them and turn your TV off.

 

[Touchmaster]

I can tell you (as a European) that it is terrifying for outsiders when the democrats are characterised as 'far-left whackos', when the majority of the party would these days be described as conservatives in most countries (they are at lot less economically and socially progressive than they used to be) and even its most left wing fringe would be regarded as centre-left in the politics of most states. It shows quite how extremely right wing the US mainstream has become, and with the ignorance and single-mindedness that extremism invariably brings with it, the most powerful country in the world is a very scary thing these days - us outsiders who still have to share the same world cant even vote to stop its lunatic schemes around the globe..

 

[MSgt]

I can tell you (as a European) that it is terrifying for outsiders when the democrats are characterised as 'far-left whackos', when the majority of the party would these days be described as conservatives in most countries (they are at lot less economically and socially progressive than they used to be) and even its most left wing fringe would be regarded as centre-left in the politics of most states. It shows quite how extremely right wing the US mainstream has become, and with the ignorance and single-mindedness that extremism invariably brings with it, the most powerful country in the world is a very scary thing these days - us outsiders who still have to share the same world cant even vote to stop its lunatic schemes around the globe..

Democrats (The left)
Liberals
Global Left

Republicans (The right)
Conservatives
Neo-Con

These are six different things. What you have to realize is that in America, right and wrong does not matter. What matters is what party you are enslaved to and what they tell you is right and wrong. Each Party desperately attempts to destroy the other at the expense of the military and the average American. The average American is as naive as an infant and cast their votes for whomever persuades them. Most don't even know the world outside their comfy little borders. The are inclined to obey the influence of any reporter that agrees with what they want the world to be and they form their opinions around that. They do not study the issues objectively and they do not discover the truths beneath the facade. This is why I am quite comfortable in what I believe in and my opinions. All politicians and reporters get in the way of the truth. Has Bush lied? More like exxagerated, but sure. I also understand why and I agree with what had to be done. No leader of the free world can get on International TV and tell the world all of the problems with the Middle East and what must be done to repair this civilization. Especially not in America where rival political parties lunge at any chance to discredit the other. These problems existed long before Bush in which there are scores of literature on.

Most think the threat in the Middle East is just a few rogues of Islam running around as terrorists.

...and by the way, most "outsiders" would vote to do nothing to help their fellow neighbor. Ask Bosnia and Kosovo. Once again, American military had to travel across the ocean to European lands to do their job for them. Didn't hear very much European complaints then. It's just a matter of time before the Islamic issues in France erupts into extremism. I wonder who they will call and I wonder if "Old Europe" complains about our "warmongering" then too. No...never in the defense of Europe.

 

[Touchmaster]

The US army acts in the interests of the US elite that it serves, and nothing else. If it so happens that these interests coincide with humanitarian interests then its overseas actions can have some positive side-effects on occasion, but they are not the primary motivation for US military adventures, and never have been. Id be happier if 90% of US military actions hadnt happened since 1945, WWII being perhaps the only military action the country should be proud of - essentially based as it was on defence against huge military powers rather than attacking small countries to preserve global economic hegemony.

 

[MSgt]

The US army acts in the interests of the US elite that it serves, and nothing else. If it so happens that these interests coincide with humanitarian interests then its overseas actions can have some positive side-effects on occasion, but they are not the primary motivation for US military adventures, and never have been. Id be happier if 90% of US military actions hadnt happened since 1945, WWII being perhaps the only military action the country should be proud of - essentially based as it was on defence against huge military powers rather than attacking small countries to preserve global economic hegemony.

Of course. To say otherwise would be naive. But, despite all of the issues surrounding our wars, there were still a people that were or would have benefitted.

Kuwaitis
Iraqis
South Koreans
South Vietnamese
Somalis
Haitians
Croatians

All of these countries had multiple reasons and dismiss the humanitarian because money was made or trade partners were secured or strategic bases came from it would be irresponsible. You would be happier id South Korea was ruled by the North? I doubt they agree. You'd be happier if Bosnia and Kosovo continued it's extermination machine before we got involved? I doubt they agree. You'd be happier if Kuwait and Saudi Arabia was under the thumb control of Saddam Hussein and now controls the world's oil source? I doubt those people and the world governments agree.

Our country should only be proud of WWII? Would that be because of European defense? Would that be because we were securing our trade partners? Would that be because dictator controlled Europe was not in our best interests? This is where the disconnect is. America can claim that, despite mundane details and self serving notions that people strive to dig up, America has ventured to help others. What has Europe done but followed our lead sometimes or simply stood by as things have happened in their own back yard for fear of getting involved? It's easy to say what America stands for. What does Europe stand for?

 

[Touchmaster]

I was of course not making this into a competition between the US and Europe - European states have not been known for their pacifism over the last century or so, and the armed forces of my home country the UK has committed some horrific atrocities abroad in the name of Empire, Im just saying that the US is no different, yet appears to have built this do-gooding myth of righteousness despite the fact that most of its wars are thinly-disguised campaigns of conquest - WWII while very necessary as a military action in order to save large areas of the world from brutal and aggressive regimes, still aided the US hugely, allowing them to attain the economic superiority in the world they have held ever since. The Cold War also hugely benefited the US elite, both in providing an excuse to crush independence movements across the globe (which were likely to adversely affect US business interests) and also in allowing vast amounts of taxpayers money to go directly into the pockets of the arms company's shareholders (read most of the US establishment) - although the Soviets were portrayed as the aggressor (and there is no denying they were a highly repressive regime at times) one only has to compare the number of US military interventions in other states affairs compared with the USSR's during the cold war to see that this is not exactly an accurate picture.

 

[Touchmaster]

Kuwaitis
Would never have been attacked were it not for the fact that Saddam Hussein had been given the green light to do as he wished by the Bush I administration.

Iraqis
Would not have had Saddam Hussein if Western interests had not fought against nationalist movements in the 60s.

South Koreans
The totalitarianism of North Korea was born in the fires of the Korean War itself.

South Vietnamese
The South Vietnamese government was extremely repressive itself - and the fact that many hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese were in the Viet Cong shows that this intervention was not universally welcome - Im sure that the many millions of Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians that died during US intervention were very pleased to have been 'saved'.

Somalis
As Somalia still has no central government and is in a state of perpetual civil war I dont think this is a good example.

Haitians
Actually the US Marines helped depose the democratically elected leader of Haiti twice in the last 15 years and as a result the country has been mired in civil war.

Croatians
The croatians and bosnian muslims were themselves responsible for many atrocities in the Yugoslav civil wars, and peacekeeping efforts were to little too late.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Kuwaitis
Would never have been attacked were it not for the fact that Saddam Hussein had been given the green light to do as he wished by the Bush I administration.

Horseshit.
No such authorization was ever given.

South Koreans
The totalitarianism of North Korea was born in the fires of the Korean War itself.

Thank you, Communist China and the USSR.

 

[MSgt]

I was of course not making this into a competition between the US and Europe - European states have not been known for their pacifism over the last century or so, and the armed forces of my home country the UK has committed some horrific atrocities abroad in the name of Empire, Im just saying that the US is no different, yet appears to have built this do-gooding myth of righteousness despite the fact that most of its wars are thinly-disguised campaigns of conquest - WWII while very necessary as a military action in order to save large areas of the world from brutal and aggressive regimes, still aided the US hugely, allowing them to attain the economic superiority in the world they have held ever since. The Cold War also hugely benefited the US elite, both in providing an excuse to crush independence movements across the globe (which were likely to adversely affect US business interests) and also in allowing vast amounts of taxpayers money to go directly into the pockets of the arms company's shareholders (read most of the US establishment) - although the Soviets were portrayed as the aggressor (and there is no denying they were a highly repressive regime at times) one only has to compare the number of US military interventions in other states affairs compared with the USSR's during the cold war to see that this is not exactly an accurate picture.

Conquest? Where in the world has America planted a flag and declared a colony? Big business is in our best interest. It is also in your best interest. Free trade, capitalism, and democracies are what makes economies strong. "Oil" is necessary for all nations. Even those that snub their noses at us for protecting it. We're not the only one's that receive from Saudi. We're just the scapegoat for other hypocritical governments.

 

[Touchmaster]

Firstly I must point out that I appreciate some intelligent thoughtful debating here, it is rare for someone to reply with reasoned replies rather than just 'your talking **** you whacko liberal-lefty' without actually refuting my points. I will also point out that I have no problem with moderate capitalism and free trade, but what has gone on is neither - it is international gangsterism supported by the most advanced military in the world. And it is not you or I who benefit - it is the super-rich who own the apparatus used to ransack the natural resources of the global south while leaving billions in poverty, with the connivance of small selfish elites in those countries - which is why true democracy has not been welcome in many places. It isnt an obvious conquest, as such things would be inefficient - this sort of imperialism isnt based on taking the land, its based on taking money - lots of it. Yes we need oil - and do you think that oil wouldnt be available if the US didnt fight wars? Of course it would, its just it might not be the executives of BP and Exxon making the money, it might be people in the countries where the oil sits in the ground - who are usually still dirt poor.

 

[MSgt]

Kuwaitis
Would never have been attacked were it not for the fact that Saddam Hussein had been given the green light to do as he wished by the Bush I administration.

Garbage.

Iraqis
Would not have had Saddam Hussein if Western interests had not fought against nationalist movements in the 60s.

Garbage. Would not have been a Cold War if the U.S. didn't ally with Russia to save Europe. Would not have had a Berlin Wall if the U.S. decided to continue the war instead of appeasing a forseen future enemy. Would not have been OIF if the US had continued the war into Iraq in '91. Would not have been a 9/11 if the U.S. didn't help repel the Soviets out of Afghanistan or parked their military in the sands of Saudi to repel Saddam. We can play this game all day.

South Koreans
The totalitarianism of North Korea was born in the fires of the Korean War itself.

Garbage. The issue was the spread of communism into the South where it was not wanted by the South government.

South Vietnamese
The South Vietnamese government was extremely repressive itself - and the fact that many hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese were in the Viet Cong shows that this intervention was not universally welcome - Im sure that the many millions of Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians that died during US intervention were very pleased to have been 'saved'.

They weren't saved. Our people gave up on them. A great example of not finishing what you start. Choosing to side with the minority's wishes and dismissing the majority's wishes is called appeasement. Way to go Europe.

Somalis
As Somalia still has no central government and is in a state of perpetual civil war I dont think this is a good example.

This was about feeding the hungry. This was a good example of what the UN is worth and also another example of starting something without finishing. More appeasing the priviledged local public at the expense of the abused and under priviledged.

Haitians
Actually the US Marines helped depose the democratically elected leader of Haiti twice in the last 15 years and as a result the country has been mired in civil war.

Haiti is a mess of corruption and what you think is a "democratic" island is nothing more than a gang leader enforcing laws.

Croatians
The croatians and bosnian muslims were themselves responsible for many atrocities in the Yugoslav civil wars, and peacekeeping efforts were to little too late.

They were too little too late because Europe chose to ignore it. Much like what they did to events leading up to Hitler's conquest and much to what they are doing today with regards to Iran.


So again I ask you...."Despite mundane conspiracies, interests, and details, it is easy to see what America stands for. What does Europe stand for?"

By the way, I did Somalia, Haiti, and Iraq. I've seen it first hand.

 

[MSgt]

Firstly I must point out that I appreciate some intelligent thoughtful debating here, it is rare for someone to reply with reasoned replies rather than just 'your talking **** you whacko liberal-lefty' without actually refuting my points. I will also point out that I have no problem with moderate capitalism and free trade, but what has gone on is neither - it is international gangsterism supported by the most advanced military in the world. And it is not you or I who benefit - it is the super-rich who own the apparatus used to ransack the natural resources of the global south while leaving billions in poverty, with the connivance of small selfish elites in those countries - which is why true democracy has not been welcome in many places. It isnt an obvious conquest, as such things would be inefficient - this sort of imperialism isnt based on taking the land, its based on taking money - lots of it. Yes we need oil - and do you think that oil wouldnt be available if the US didnt fight wars? Of course it would, its just it might not be the executives of BP and Exxon making the money, it might be people in the countries where the oil sits in the ground - who are usually still dirt poor.

That's because you haven't talked with me before. I don't do that.

All of this doesn't matter. It is common sense. I'm not concerned with executives making money. People make money in every war. A smart man would invest in our weapon systems companies.

How many countries in the Middle East have raised extremists?
How many countries in the Middle East have spawned terrorists?
How many countries in the Middle East are democratic and without oppression?
How many terror organizations have been formed from this region's religion and have been based throughout said region?

My point is that there is no other region on Earth with such a dark essence to do harm and commit violence on a mass scale. We are dealing with a failing civilization that is ruled by a domineering religion. Our future securities depend on this civilization changing. It is just a matter of time before this deseased civilization's symptoms get their hands on a nuclear bomb. They must join the progression of the rest of the world. Their treasured values and inherited behaviors simply do not work in the 21st century.

 

[Caine]

Garbage.

Garbage.

Garbage.

Do you need a trash bag??????

:moon: :moon: :moon: :moon:

 

[Touchmaster]

The US did of course deal with Hitler as well, it must be remebered. Im not defending European foreign policy over the last century - it has been execrable on many occasions, and has nothing to do with me now, let alone before I was born. But the fact remains that Saddam Hussein was a friend of the US, so any attempt to get on your high horse about him is nonsense. And any look at the REAL facts regarding Haiti will show that the US government's aim was to depose the incredibly popular Aristide (mainly due to his very mild nationalisation projects) and destabilise the country.

The North Korean government were indeed Soviet pawns - but South Korea in 1945 had a socialist government with the broad support of the populace that was replaced by a repressive right-wing regime with the support of the US shortly after the war - so US interference wasnt entirely benign, as South Korea was essentially a dictatorship until recently.

 

[MSgt]

Do you need a trash bag??????

:moon: :moon: :moon:

I was working on a theme. I do that sometimes when I don't want to get into a side discussion, but mostly because I don't agree with what I read.

It's the a$$hole in me.

 

[MSgt]

But the fact remains that Saddam Hussein was a friend of the US, so any attempt to get on your high horse about him is nonsense.

as South Korea was essentially a dictatorship until recently.

Fact. What is also a fact is that America has befirended many that have turned around and showed their ass.

Like I said...we befirended communism to fight Nazism. Why isn't Europe so quick to jump on that point? It doesn't mean we support communism and what occurred behind the Berlin Wall.

America befriended the Afghani fighters also. This doesn't mean that we support the Tali Ban.

America befriended Iraq over Iran. This doesn't mean we supported his use of chemical weapons on innocent civillians or support his invasion into Kuwait or the way he abused his people.

America befriended the Sauds. This doesn't mean that we support their oppression over their people or encourage their civilization's decline into desperate fanaticism against us.

Regarding South Korea...all the more reason to declare America as not a "conquerer" or a colonizer.

...and by the way. Leave my high horse out of it. It's my snooty birth right as an American.

 

[Caine]

I was working on a theme. I do that sometimes when I don't want to get into a side discussion, but mostly because I don't agree with what I read.

It's the a$$hole in me.

I thought it was hilarious :rofl

 

[Touchmaster]

The alliance with Stalin was a very special case - both the UK, US and the USSR were under attack at once by a couple of military states quite capable of taking over a good proportion of the world... I dont think any of these other military interventions can be described in similar terms... it is likely that the USSR would have won the war against Germany on its own anyway, which it was well on the way to doing on the Eastern front by the time the US/UK had a foothold on the continent in 1943, and would have ended up influencing the whole of Europe, so the intervention on the Western front was as much about curbing soviet influence as anything else..