Author Topic: Yet another victory for diplomacy  (Read 8820 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nuclear1

  • 211
Re: Yet another victory for diplomacy
Quote
Huh?  They capitulated to them, yes, but they didn't set them up unless you define 'them' as the entire Iraqi police force.


What I'm trying to say is that US decided to totally throw away the old state, which basically caused this to happen. The US is responsible for doing that, which basically give this field of dried brush a spark. Then they capitulate to the death squads which ethnically cleanse sunni neighborhoods, which is the same as pouring petrol on the brush fire.

you have to admit, surely, that there's rather a large semantic difference between stating the US failed to adequately plan or execute the occupation than that stating it actually created Death Squads, though.

Exactly.  What you have in Iraq right now is like what I said in my previous post:  the sort of civil war you would have if Saddam had passed without US intervention.  The US presence hasn't done much to put an end to the death squads, but it's hardly true that the administration or military established the death squads and let them go.
Spoon - I stand in awe by your flawless fredding. Truely, never before have I witnessed such magnificant display of beamz.
Axem -  I don't know what I'll do with my life now. Maybe I'll become a Nun, or take up Macrame. But where ever I go... I will remember you!
Axem - Sorry to post again when I said I was leaving for good, but something was nagging me. I don't want to say it in a way that shames the campaign but I think we can all agree it is actually.. incomplete. It is missing... Voice Acting.
Quanto - I for one would love to lend my beautiful singing voice into this wholesome project.
Nuclear1 - I want a duet.
AndrewofDoom - Make it a trio!

 

Offline aldo_14

  • Gunnery Control
  • 213
Re: Yet another victory for diplomacy
Quote
Huh?  They capitulated to them, yes, but they didn't set them up unless you define 'them' as the entire Iraqi police force.


What I'm trying to say is that US decided to totally throw away the old state, which basically caused this to happen. The US is responsible for doing that, which basically give this field of dried brush a spark. Then they capitulate to the death squads which ethnically cleanse sunni neighborhoods, which is the same as pouring petrol on the brush fire.

you have to admit, surely, that there's rather a large semantic difference between stating the US failed to adequately plan or execute the occupation than that stating it actually created Death Squads, though.

Exactly.  What you have in Iraq right now is like what I said in my previous post:  the sort of civil war you would have if Saddam had passed without US intervention.  The US presence hasn't done much to put an end to the death squads, but it's hardly true that the administration or military established the death squads and let them go.

That's not necessarily true; you're assuming the response to Saddam would be that the ruling hierarchy and their apparatus of power totally collapsed or fought each other, without anyone taking over power directly and the whole country degenerating into, well, where it is now.

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: Yet another victory for diplomacy
[Sigh]

I've promised myself never again to get in the threads like these, but here we go again.

Even though I consider discussing WWII somewhat pointless in threads like these, I've always wondered why Americans think that they saved Europe from Germany. Personally, I have always thought that it's actually Soviet Union you saved us from. Military aid during the war, but also rebuilding and assistance to the Central Europe with Marshal Aid was probably the reason why Europe did not fall at that time. For that, I'd like to thank those Americans who made it happen by that time. The another war I'd like to mention here is the Korean war, where I think again you did something remarkable, given the situation there. Unfortunately you couldn't stop the division from happening.

Unfortunately, I've to consider that wars after Korean war have been failures for US. I see that the reason for these is the lack of justification for those wars, or lack of support from the general population in the country you have had operations in. From my point of view, the wars you are fighting now are not the ones you should be fighting - or timing is wrong. Nor are your soldiers convinced of any morality in their doings (currently).

As there is no clearly defined enemy in war against terrorism and no clearly defined objectives there cannot be victory. Nor is your country able to sustain operations like these without massive economical impacts, imagine billion dollars a week for war! Remember, it was reckless defense..., sorry, attack budget in Soviet Union that brought it down to its knees. General education level is dropping in US, clearest sign of a nation lacking future. However, I'd like to mention this text is not meant to be taken US bashing. It's more like friend telling to a friend that he is doing something wrong which he hasn't seen.

Before I used to think that Americans are hypocrites and dumb. But after travelling around the world, and seeing the countries that would be the next world leaders if America falls, I would prefer America would remain at its status somewhat. Yes, I still see Americans as hypocrites and mostly dumb if you wondered, but that is definitely not the worst thing I could say. At least they behave quite decently abroad - as tourists at least. This I actually consider to be one of the most revealing things about the internal problems in the homeland.

After having seen the characteristics of the other possible leading nations in near future, I can say I wouldn't trust them to keep their words. Americans still have some of that trust left. What kind of predictions can you make of a nation still existing today that has had written language before the born of Christ but still a great deal of population cannot read, write or calculate? Now if Americans wouldn't allow that to happen to themselves also.

Also I'd advise Europeans to consider Russia at the moment and the history of that nation. I wouldn't like to get in to a situation where we need to warm up relations to US so that they could help EU against hulking Russia, and no matter what they say, most of the Europeans are not so eager to fight any more. Once I used to be a pacifist, but later on I've to admit that the old saying of preparing to war during time of peace to uphold peace is probably more realistic one. If there is disarmament, the big ones do it first.

Its quite sad that I can't even trust EU to come aid us if problems arise even though we are a part of it already and pay quite heavy fees for the membership. Even if we joined in NATO, most likely there would be no-one, except our neighboring states that would probably assist in any case.

Someone said here that if one refuses to use every available measure to defeat the enemy, one loses. While I clearly understand this one, why do I find Americans so surprised when the rest are applying the same rule on them on personal life basis? There has been some incidents where this proud and confident American came to me and wanted to spar with me. After these things the American was not so proud and not so confident any more i.e. a much nicer person :). For real, I'd say be very careful with that statement. Sometimes the line when to apply and when not to apply it might be blurred - I think that decides when and when it is not applied on you!
Your president said it best, be polite but always carry a big stick with you.

I've said what I've had to say, nor that it would really matter or change anything. I still believe in freedom, democracy and free speech and would die fighting rather than losing them.

From beneath the Northern Star,
Mika
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.