[Knight Templar]

Originally posted by Mr. Vega
America is, in a sense, uniting the world.

Now there's a thought.

[commerical] Brand new! World Unity! Brought to you by Daisycutter Inc.

Slogan:
~If you're not with us, then your probably one of the other 190+ countries that are against us~

[CP5670]

First option, of course. I don't have time to respond to everything in the thread, but I'll get some of the funnier ones:

America says "but they have weapons of mass destruction".
Everyone says "but so do you, so does Korea, so does Britain, so does Russia and a handful of other countries, why can't they?"

Actually, I am pretty sure the reason that this is exactly the real reason they are going after Iraq first and not the others. Iraq is much weaker than the rest and thus easy to get rid of quickly so you can deal with the others in the future without any possibility of disturbance from these guys.

More international support is a must. The government's attitude of "We are the supreme country: Friends, we could use your help, but if you aren't going to help, then **** off." Is so wrong and anti diplomatic..

Call that approach whatever you like, but the experimental truth is that it is exactly what the winners have used throughout history. Remember that these "friends" are really your enemies in general, and both sides know it well; for example with the US and EU, their common goal has already been met (destruction of the USSR), and so they are enemies once again. All of these international "friendships," are like that with Germany and the Soviet Union in WW2; as it is commonly depicted, each is shaking the other's hand with one hand and holding a knife behind his back with the other hand. International support has some chance of actually hindering US operations here, since then they would have to be subject to the constraints placed by the others and share the spoils of war, so there is no point of creating additional problems when they are quite capable of doing it alone.

I'm going to call up "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" again

And as I said before, that statement has two completely opposite interpretations. You see, if it is the last refuge, then they would use all other options first, so the peace guys are the incompetent ones, eh? (which is actually probably true, since  in the past they have been smashed up by the others; just look at the infamous Gandhi)

America is, in a sense, uniting the world.

Exactly, that is what imperialists are there for. Everyone wants a world government; it is just a competition of who gets to run it.

[LtNarol]

Two of my close friends are in the Marines, two more in the Army, one going Navy, and another going Air Force.  I'm not really in favor of going to war for the sake of going to war, but honestly, what if we did wait?  What if we postponed everything like we did back in WWII?  What if we kept backing up an inch at a time until finally, Iraq not only has nuclear warheads but also the means to deliver them to any location around the globe?  When do you stop giving concessions and when do you go to war?

The way I see it, if we waited a few years, or even one year, things will only get nastier and dirtier and more people will die in the end before the smoke and ash clears.  War is never a good thing, but when you know its coming, you might as well get it over with before the other side has the ability to wipe out half the world.

Just to put things into perspective, there were studies performed prior to the dropping of the two atomic bombs over Japan.  If the U.S. had invaded the islands with troops, the Japanese would have - without a message of surrender from their emperor - fought to the last man, woman, and child.  By the time the Emperor surrenders, half of Japan would have been destroyed along with half of its population.  He wouldn't have given in after just 2 cities, perhaps he wouldn't have waited till half his country was in ruins by he certainly would have held on far past 2.  Casaulties would have been astronomical.  I say this not to necessarily justify what the U.S. did, only to put it into perspective.

[Mr. Vega]

What the quote means is that violence is the last thing the incompetent can hide behind before they have to face the truth.

[CP5670]

I know that's how Hardin meant it in Foundation but it can be interpreted just as easily in the other way; just having a little fun there.

[Stealth]

Originally posted by Knight Templar


I thought Bush said he'd give till the 17th before he declares war or the next UN resolution or summat..

Bush has said a lot of things.

The Government lies on a regular basis.  even a 14 year old should know that.  You think they're going to broadcast "We're going to war next week on the 19th"?  hell no.  they'll lie to the public rather.

oh, and another thing that was brought up here and that's quite true:  Americans are hypocrites, in a way they're actually cowards.  If Russia did something like what they're accusing Iraq of doing (all the reasons) they wouldn't do anything to Russia.  It's funny how the biggest world power picks on the smallest and most undefended country in the middle east.

Now that my friends, is a display of the biggest peace-keeping nation there is.

[CP5670]

That is very smart, like I said. Any sensible nation can see that the others are easier to get rid of while still weak, so take them out before they become strong and are able to threaten you; that's the logic in all this. Just like the world of business actually, where the big corporations focus their resources to eliminate emerging small ones.

[Dan1]

Originally posted by Stryke 9


Wow. Way to summarize an opinion you utterly don't understand. IN YOUR FACE, VIETNAM PROTESTORS! YOU JUST WERE BITTER YOU DIDN'T VOTE LBJ!

Have you been to one of those crazy rallies?  Those people are utterly insane.  Here in chicago some buddies of mine went to one and we were almost attacked because we didn't share the "love and togetherness" of what they were feeling.

Let me ask you this.  WITHOUT the united states ever existing....where would the world be right now?  Can you HONESTLY say it would have worked out better if America wouldn't have existed..cause that's what it sounds like you people are saying.  Or just bring in any WW..  yeah..maybe america shouldn't have gotten involved in those either...i mean..it's another national conflict on the other side of the world, some dictator is using his weapons to inflict his views on others and is/has invaded nearby countries..i mean..it's not America's right to get involved in anything like that.  

[CP5670]

All of the people who are involved in the rallies are already morons right there; even if they are opposed to a war, demonstrating is a total waste of their time and is not going to do a thing other than make everyone else laugh at them. They must be pretty bored if that's the best thing they can find to do; they should start doing some math instead.

[Stealth]

Originally posted by CP5670
That is very smart, like I said. Any sensible nation can see that the others are easier to get rid of while still weak, so take them out before they become strong and are able to threaten you; that's the logic in all this. Just like the world of business actually, where the big corporations focus their resources to eliminate emerging small ones.

no, it's not.

believe it or not, America shouldn't be aiming to take over the world, "getting rid" of nations while they're "still weak"... America claims it's all about peacekeeping and helping others... which is another lie.

[Fetty]

hmm actualy where do i fit in in the poll
hers my problem
fathers american mothers austrian im turkish
but all of my remaining relatives are in usa i sped 3-4 weeks each year in the usa and of cource im in close contact with em

and why i dont think usa should bomb iraq to the stoneage (again)
in 1982 usa provided billions in aid to saddam for him to kill the iranians
1983 usa gave iran weps to kill iraqis
iraq decides to get to kuwait in 1990 with us weps
and well all know the storys from gulf war 1
other reasons
iraq has so much oil
(give the fuel prices america citicens pay its realy important, we europeans pay a whole lotta more than others do )
iraq is the perfect staging area for short n medium range weps to control the middle east
and frankly i think its none of your bussines
iraq has no weps at all that could reach usa
usa hasnt show any conclusive proof that iraq is planing to attak usa or has bio weps or has nukes or or or or or
only the ol there are 3 houses and a truk that looks like .....


now if iraq decides to attak one of their neighbors and they ask usa for help
or iraq honestly realy thretens usa (comon who would be so stuped ?!?!? ) go knock ur self out , bomb them to whatever age you desire

why i think thats all a play n usa gona attak anyway:
there are howmany , 5 aircraft carriers , allotta troops and stuff based now all arround iraq they have been preparing and gathering troups for months now u think us administration will say
okidoki thats all come back => money sped for nothing and possibility to return again n do whateveer needs to be done in my book thats a total waste
and second durring the summer months there are sandstorms n such wich makes it nearly impossible to fight a war unless they start soon
+ reasons given above
i think its prety obvious


on another topic what i find especialy amusing about politics
if somebody says :" the average people who will get "pension" (dunno if its right word , if somebody stops working and gets his interest blablabla) will rise while the people who will be working will decrease but out "pension" level will be stable for the next 10 years " youd think that guys a ripoff or hes just plain stuped
but if a politician says that people go out n vote for him
hmmmmmmmmmmm

i rest my case

[Warlock]

Isn't it time for the new season to start already ? Damn I'm tired of all these reruns

[diamondgeezer]

I'm behind Blair (for those Americans reading, he's our prime minister )

[Dan1]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer
I'm behind Blair (for those Americans reading, he's our prime minister )

(Priding himeself on being an informed american)

Tony Blair is the smartest man in the entire British organization.  He understands the complexities of the Mideast Situation better than most over in all of Europe.

[Fetty]

i bet he doesnt even know what a falafel is

[Stryke 9]

I just love how "understanding the complexities of the Mideast situation" is synonymous with "agreeing with me" these days.

****, none of these armchair sociologists understands the complexities of the Mideast situation for ****. The Palestinian getting rocket bombed by an Apache helicopter, the Israeli settler kid who has to go to school with a rifle, the Iraqi soldier standing on the front lines waiting to get killed so that Bush can save face- THEY understand the complexities of the Mideast situation better than anyone in Europe or the US, and they don't know nothin'.

[Fetty]

amen

[Tiara]

Well, currently 64% says we shouldn't (32% American, 32% non-American) And 42% says we should.

Iiiiiiiiiiiiinteresting...

[Stryke 9]

The figures pointed roughly the other way a while ago, though.

[Zeronet]

Why does it say we then (you) in brackets? Unless im mistaken, there are 45,000 British troops in Kuwait.