Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Agnostic007 on September 11, 2011, 09:42:31 AM
-
On a day where we are remembering the 3000+ lives lost in tragic terrorists events and the anger being refueled while we watch the towers being destroyed and thousands of innocent lives coming to a horrible end..we fast forward 10 yrs to this day.
American soldiers killed in Iraq 4669
American soldiers killed in Afghanistan 1468
Trillions spent on the war
estimated 100,000 + Iraqi civilians killed
Bin Laden Killed
Hussien killed
Gaddafi toppled
Knowing what you know now, was invading Iraq worth it? Do we seperate Afghanistan and Iraq with one being worth it the other not?
-
Still open for debate. If the "arab" spring spreads democracy and Iran implodes...yeah it was worth it.
-
On a day where we are remembering the 3000+ lives lost in tragic terrorists events and the anger being refueled while we watch the towers being destroyed and thousands of innocent lives coming to a horrible end..we fast forward 10 yrs to this day.
American soldiers killed in Iraq 4669
American soldiers killed in Afghanistan 1468
Trillions spent on the war
estimated 100,000 + Iraqi civilians killed
Bin Laden Killed
Hussien killed
Gaddafi toppled
Knowing what you know now, was invading Iraq worth it? Do we seperate Afghanistan and Iraq with one being worth it the other not?
Uhm, no, but that is only my opinion. I am sure plenty will disagree.
-
Afghasstan: yes ( but drawn out because of Iraq)
Iraq: fuck no.
-
When I first heard OBL's reasoning of draining the US economy, I thought it was just ludicrous.
Now, it appears he has nearly pulled it off, with our economy teetering on collapse.
Iraq was the biggest mistake the US ever made. How does America benefit from a better ME if our own country is in shambles?
If we could go back, anybody with half a brain would realize that we should have treated as more a police problem within AFG. Of course, we are so invested with blood and treasure that it's become a truth no one can admit to.
Face it, we got burned on our own hubris. We laughed at those 'stupid Russians' for getting drawn in and thought we were some kind of invincible force. Fact is, we just didn't learn from history and were indeed doomed to repeat it.
This is why you should elect leaders who know their shit, not ones who you can have a beer with because it's just like a guy from down the street.
-
Afghanistan, yes... Iraq and Lybia, no.
There will never be democracy in that region.
-
Afghanistan, yes... Iraq and Lybia, no.
There will never be democracy in that region.
You think we should have stayed in Afghanistan for 10 years? or do you mean tactical strikes?
-
You think we should have stayed in Afghanistan for 10 years? or do you mean tactical strikes?
I think if we hadn't gone into Iraq that we could have mopped up Afghanistan and been out in 4 years.
I don't think splitting our forces to run after the "Boogey man" did us any favors as far as timeline is concerned.
-
You think we should have stayed in Afghanistan for 10 years? or do you mean tactical strikes?
-
Yes to both, although the war in Iraq was mismanaged. Bush should have listened to Shinseki about the size of the force necessary to invade.
-
Iraq no.
Afghanistan yes.
If our military was allowed to fight a war to actually win instead of this pussyfooting around not to look bad to the "international community" and we had not squandered so much money and manpower in Iraq, Afghanistan would have been conquered already.
And Gare, I find it hard to believe that you're military. Your entire take on politics reads more like a cross between the Communist Manifesto, Village Voice and Arriana Huffington if she were a special education high school student.
Comparing the Russian invasion to our invasion is both simplistic and idiotic. If you can't tell the obvious differences between the two, you're too dim to offer an opinion on the topic at hand.
-
gare has posted pics of him in various overseas and back home settings over the years. and disappeared at times when serving.
politics aside, i'm pretty sure the dude is in the service.
-
gare has posted pics of him in various overseas and back home settings over the years. and disappeared at times when serving.
politics aside, i'm pretty sure the dude is in the service.
It's interesting that many assume anyone in the military will be far right ring but look at Hugo or Gare, neither are far right wing. I suspect the reason is because they have spent time in other countries in a non-military fashion.
-
It's interesting that many assume anyone in the military will be far right ring but look at Hugo or Gare, neither are far right wing. I suspect the reason is because they have spent time in other countries in a non-military fashion.
it's usually the old guys who served and now don't like the way things are run,
or those that never served and are 3 year out of college with Team America T-shirts...
or the lifer who understand it's a business
that think perpetual war is a-okay.
It's often the guys who haven't served too long that don't like obama all that much, but sure as shit don't like getting shot at on the streets of some shitbird city on the other side of the world, for some bullshit reason. You won't hear many of them tell you "it's about spreading democracy". They know it's about oil and bases.
-
Spreading democracy? We should try that here.
-
it's usually the old guys who served and now don't like the way things are run,
or those that never served and are 3 year out of college with Team America T-shirts...
or the lifer who understand it's a business
that think perpetual war is a-okay.
It's often the guys who haven't served too long that don't like obama all that much, but sure as shit don't like getting shot at on the streets of some shitbird city on the other side of the world, for some bullshit reason. You won't hear many of them tell you "it's about spreading democracy". They know it's about oil and bases.
Yeah your exactly right. ::)
What oil exactly....seriously what oil. If your gonna beat a dead horse, find the correct one.
-
Afghanistan, yes.
Nation building after eviscerating AQ and the Taliban? No. Playing nice to the world community, the very same community that ignores Darfur and every other atrocity? Why bother? The UN is a sad, sad joke and we have little use for it.
Pakistan is 100% the reason we're still in Afghanistan. Nothing more, nothing less. When you have a fucking terrorists state posing as an ally while their ISI stabs us in the back every chance they get, you have little chance of accomplishing this. Read some books on it as it has been well-discussed by people from the intelligence community. Relying on Pakistan from the get-go was mistake #1. They've done nothing more than suck $20+ billion out of us.
-
Iraq was worth it because it got rid of Saddham and his sons who were a criminal Mafia running that country.....it brought democracy to the country and showed the Arabs a different way of living.....
Afghanistan was worth it because it got rid of the Taliban who were harboring Al Qaeda...and installed some type of democracy as well...although its not perfect by any means.....the nation building was a noble cause and a good try since now women are going to school and stuff like that but we can't stay there for ever..ultimately the afghans have to fight off the Taliban on their own..we gotta get out of there...
We spent way too much money and have lost a lot of blood over these wars...time to come home
-
Yup, all them TSA pat downs, the elevated threat levels, the Patriot Act, the talk of domestic terrorism caused by potentially disenfranchised Americans, encouraged spying on your neighbor, a strained economy, a strained military, $60 billion lost into a black hole, the trillions more on the wars, yeah, it's all worth it.
-
Just my opinion as an average citizen. I have no insider information that perhaps those making the decisions have..but
In my opinion if we had credible information that Afghanistan was housing Al Qieda and their main base of operations were in that country then I support our early action there. I did not fathom we would be there 9 yrs later nor do I think we should be. I recall early on that I was ready to go kick some Al Qieda ass in Afghanistan and was happy when we did begin military action. I never supported the invasion of Iraq. I felt frustrated that Bush seemed set on it even though the inspectors would report progress.
I've always felt human life is precious and wars should be a last resort and something to avoid if at all possible. The toll on human lives as well as the impact on the families, not to mention the cost of engaging in a war is astronomical. When people making the decision to go to war have no family in the military it makes it too easy to de personalize what war actually costs.
I was pulling for Obama because he ran on a platform of ending the war. That was important to me. Every day lives were being lost and I personally don't feel the result was worth even one soldiers life much less thousands of lives. He backed out of that promise and here we are 9 yrs later, still at war, still losing lives, still spending billions that we don't have to fight it and I can't help thinking we should have learned our lesson in Vietnam.
-
Yup, all them TSA pat downs, the elevated threat levels, the Patriot Act, the talk of domestic terrorism caused by potentially disenfranchised Americans, encouraged spying on your neighbor, a strained economy, a strained military, $60 billion lost into a black hole, the trillions more on the wars, yeah, it's all worth it.
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
Dictators are a threat to everybody......they are a threat to human kind....we cannot always look the other way when regimes are inherently evil and murder and abuse their citizens....we as a civilized people should by all means topple these dictators when it is possible to do so......some would argue against this doctrine but its my belief
-
Iraq would have been worth it if we took the oil and did not dilly dally for months on end with that hearts and minds bs.
Kill em all, let allah sort em out.
-
Dictators are a threat to everybody......they are a threat to human kind....we cannot always look the other way when regimes are inherently evil and murder and abuse their citizens....we as a civilized people should by all means topple these dictators when it is possible to do so......some would argue against this doctrine but its my belief
What about a countries responsibility to stand up for themselves? Freedom or democracy won FOR you by another country probably won't work in the long run. I wouldn't mind so much helping another country but doing it for them? Not so much. We generally have the government we deserve
-
Dictators are a threat to everybody......they are a threat to human kind....we cannot always look the other way when regimes are inherently evil and murder and abuse their citizens....we as a civilized people should by all means topple these dictators when it is possible to do so......some would argue against this doctrine but its my belief
We do look the other way. All the time, even right now. We did Not topple Saddam because he was a dictator abusing his poeple. So your belief is based on a false assumption.
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
"Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."
State Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois)
Speech at Federal Plaza, Chicago, Illinois
October 2, 2002
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States and to our allies.
If Saddam persists in thumbing his nose at the inspectors, then we're clearly going to have to do something about it."
Howard Dean, Democratic Presidential Candidate
During an interview on "Face The Nation"
September 29, 2002
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
"The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people."
President Clinton
Oval Office Address to the American People
December 16, 1998
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
Regime change in Iraq has been official US policy since 1998. The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, signed into law by President Clinton, states:
"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime."
Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
105th Congress, 2nd Session
September 29, 1998
-
But we took down a dictator who was next to ZERO threat tot he USA!
just sayin that we will never know what the world would have been like if we hadn't invaded Iraq. It's so easy to sit there now and say it was unnecessary. just so you know though, EVERYONE democrat or republican believed that Sadaam was an imminent threat to the world and the US. The liberal propoganda machine we have today conveniently ignores this fact whenever they discuss Iraq and GWB. I can't even tell you how many of my liberal friends flat out did not believe that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Edwards, and Harry Reid all voted in favor of invading Iraq until I showed them. Without fail every one of them backpedal and say "Well they were tricked into voting yes." It's like they simply refuse to hear it.
-
"Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people. And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them."
President Clinton
National Address from the Oval Office
December 16, 1998
http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html#baS7aVmeAo
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/19981216-3611.html
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html
-
You could have just put that all on one post :)
All that is nothing but political blabber. I hope you can tell the difference. After the gulf war we were looking for any reasonable excuse to attack Iraq and Saddam knew this, and knew that if that happened it would be the end of him. 9/11 gave us that excuse. Saddam was no threat simply because anything he did would have resulted him losing his power and likely his life.
Yes I agree, we don't how it would turned out. But we do how it likely would have been because of the last 12 years since the gulf war.
Also please remember, for me this was never ever about lib, conservative, repub or dem for me.
-
You could have just put that all on one post :)
All that is nothing but political blabber. I hope you can tell the difference. After the gulf war we were looking for any reasonable excuse to attack Iraq and Saddam knew this, and knew that if that happened it would be the end of him. 9/11 gave us that excuse. Saddam was no threat simply because anything he did would have resulted him losing his power and likely his life.
Yes I agree, we don't how it would turned out. But we do how it likely would have been because of the last 12 years since the gulf war.
Also please remember, for me this was never ever about lib, conservative, repub or dem for me.
what do you mean by political blabber? They are all lying? I'm all ears.
-
what do you mean by political blabber? They are all lying? I'm all ears.
Never said they were lying. But the "need" to invade Iraq because he is a threat to the USA is total 100% BS.
So they can go on and on about how much a threat Saddam is, but in reality to the USA he is not. Hence: Political blabber, because they can in no way make statements indicating what i just said because that could mean trouble for them politically. Especially in 2003 when war fever was rampant here. That's why its blabber, nothing but blabber. Kind of like Hope and Change.
-
Never said they were lying. But the "need" to invade Iraq because he is a threat to the USA is total 100% BS.
So they can go on and on about how much a threat Saddam is, but in reality to the USA he is not. Hence: Political blabber, because they can in no way make statements indicating what i just said because that could mean trouble for them politically. Especially in 2003 when war fever was rampant here. That's why its blabber, nothing but blabber. Kind of like Hope and Change.
but thats exactly what you're saying. if they purposefully do not make statements about what they actually believe to be the truth because of the fear of political retribution thats the same as lying.
-
Just weight the pros and cons, you would be absolutely insane or blind to not see what a complete waste this "war on terror" has been.
-
but thats exactly what you're saying. if they purposefully do not make statements about what they actually believe to be the truth because of the fear of political retribution thats the same as lying.
A politician is lying? that's a new idea. :)
What i was referring to was some if the things they were citing as facts, that were not likely lies.
Their "opinion" based on those facts is blabber.
-
Just weight the pros and cons, you would be absolutely insane or blind to not see what a complete waste this "war on terror" has been.
I guess i agree. However i'm not stupid or arrogant enough to think that i would have had a better solution. And i absolutely cannot stand people who sit on internet boards proclaiming that they know exactly what should have been done. And i am also intelligent enough to know that anyone can make up conspiracy theories that make sense. However making sense and being true are two completely different things. And i think most people forget that.
I mean there are still a lot of people who think GWB planned 9/11. Its funny back when Fahrenheit 9/11 came out about half of the people i knew believed it to be 100% true and argued mercilessly with anyone who disagreed. Now none of those people will even admit that they ever believed it, let alone that its true.
-
I guess i agree. However i'm not stupid or arrogant enough to think that i would have had a better solution. And i absolutely cannot stand people who sit on internet boards proclaiming that they know exactly what should have been done. And i am also intelligent enough to know that anyone can make up conspiracy theories that make sense. However making sense and being true are two completely different things. And i think most people forget that.
I mean there are still a lot of people who think GWB planned 9/11. Its funny back when Fahrenheit 9/11 came out about half of the people i knew believed it to be 100% true and argued mercilessly with anyone who disagreed. Now none of those people will even admit that they ever believed it, let alone that its true.
I pretty much agree with you completely. Although I do believe that Bush and Company had ulterior motives in taking us to war in Iraq.
-
What about a countries responsibility to stand up for themselves? Freedom or democracy won FOR you by another country probably won't work in the long run. I wouldn't mind so much helping another country but doing it for them? Not so much. We generally have the government we deserve
that would definitely be the ideal but the dissidents in many countries need help and a country like the U.S. can give those regimes a little push in the right direction or a big push if necessary
-
We do look the other way. All the time, even right now. We did Not topple Saddam because he was a dictator abusing his poeple. So your belief is based on a false assumption.
I never said that was why we toppled Saddham..I simply stated that it was a happy by-product of such.....and that we should topple dictators as a matter of policy..no false assumptions here....I know we only go after dictators when it serves our best interests (such as when oil is involved)
-
I never said that was why we toppled Saddham..I simply stated that it was a happy by-product of such.....and that we should topple dictators as a matter of policy..no false assumptions here....I know we only go after dictators when it serves our best interests (such as when oil is involved)
It's irresponsible for a POTUS to put American soldiers in harms way, not to mention all the other effects of war, for both of those reasons.
We also have a history of propping up or supporting dictators when it serves our interests.
-
I pretty much agree with you completely. Although I do believe that Bush and Company had ulterior motives in taking us to war in Iraq.
As long as you concede that "and Company" includes Pelosi, Clinton, Reid, Kerry, and Biden I can begin to entertain that theory. Again, I'm not saying that the US government is not capable of misleading the american public. I'm just saying that I won't let the men and women who authorized the US armed forces to invade Iraq off the hook simply because they belong to the Democratic party. The fact is they all believed that Iraq was a threat (or at least they said they did), and I will not allow them to backpedal. That's just fucking weak. And if you are a 9/11 conspiracy theorist who voted for John Kerry after his vote and his statements concerning Iraq and Sadaam, I don't really know what to say to you.
-
What about a countries responsibility to stand up for themselves? Freedom or democracy won FOR you by another country probably won't work in the long run. I wouldn't mind so much helping another country but doing it for them? Not so much. We generally have the government we deserve
good post. the idea of "imposing democracy" is inherently hypocritical.
-
that would definitely be the ideal but the dissidents in many countries need help and a country like the U.S. can give those regimes a little push in the right direction or a big push if necessary
right and when they do they are accused of exploiting a weaker country for financial gain by the members of the non incumbent party. i.e. half of the country. it's none of our business unless it will negatively affect us. I disagree. it's simply not our reponsibility.
-
"Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."
State Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois)
Speech at Federal Plaza, Chicago, Illinois
October 2, 2002
Good luck with that. This goes way back on the board. http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=128312.0
-
As long as you concede that "and Company" includes Pelosi, Clinton, Reid, Kerry, and Biden I can begin to entertain that theory.
Those bastards were definitely complicit.
-
Those bastards were definitely complicit.
Fuck yes they were.
-
Ask that question to Emmanuel Kelly:
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29099.htm
-
Fuck yes they were.
i've never actually heard a conspiracy theory specifically implicating them. thats why i find the theories so irritating.
-
Ozmo laying down the cold hard facts. :)
-
Ozmo laying down the cold hard facts. :)
educated guess i'll give him. cold hard facts? come on man.
-
educated guess i'll give him. cold hard facts? come on man.
One man stood agains the war machine...
-
One man stood agains the war machine...
i never knew his stance was that firm back then. thats pretty damn cool. it's interesting what he says about "you must be willing to win the war". Which is very much along the lines of what I have been saying for a few years now.
-
One man stood agains the war machine...
Plain talk for sure. Hard to argue.
I would say in addition to that, that the one thing any Dictator will never jeopardize is their hold on power. Any significant offensive attack outside Iraq would have been the end for Saddam and he knew it. ESPECIALLY after 9/11.
-
i never knew his stance was that firm back then. thats pretty damn cool. it's interesting what he says about "you must be willing to win the war". Which is very much along the lines of what I have been saying for a few years now.
Ron Paul has never wavered, even 30 years ago.
-
i never knew his stance was that firm back then. thats pretty damn cool. it's interesting what he says about "you must be willing to win the war". Which is very much along the lines of what I have been saying for a few years now.
I didn't either. I respect him more now.
-
I didn't either. I respect him more now.
yup. me too.
-
Dictators are a threat to everybody......they are a threat to human kind....we cannot always look the other way when regimes are inherently evil and murder and abuse their citizens....we as a civilized people should by all means topple these dictators when it is possible to do so......some would argue against this doctrine but its my belief
Between 500,000 and 1.5 million native Darfurians were massacred by the imperialist Arab Muslim janjaweed (usually hacked to death while the women were gang-raped) in Sudan and the President of North Sudan has an active warrant on his head for crimes against humanity yet no one does anything about it. So piss off with your bleeding heart "I want to save the oppressed" trash. The whole world sat there and pulled their dicks while the OIC stonewalled everything at the UN regarding Darfur.
People like you and the UN are gigantic hypocrites and further proof that the billions of dollars we funnel to that inept, incompetent organization and various third-world shitholes every year is completely for naught. People only care about dictators when it suits their agenda. For even more proof, see Syria, where Assad has massacred countless more civilians than Gadhafi has.
-
right and when they do they are accused of exploiting a weaker country for financial gain by the members of the non incumbent party. i.e. half of the country. it's none of our business unless it will negatively affect us. I disagree. it's simply not our reponsibility.
I disagree with you that it is simply none of our business.....the U.S. has traditionally stood up for human rights and we must continue to do so......we can't stand idly by all the time and let people be slaughtered...we have to stand for something.....not doing anything is the easy and coward's way out
-
I disagree with you that it is simply none of our business.....the U.S. has traditionally stood up for human rights and we must continue to do so......we can't stand idly by all the time and let people be slaughtered...we have to stand for something.....not doing anything is the easy and coward's way out
LMFAO
The US has only stood for these things when it was covenient for our special interests, the US didn't give a shit about Rwanda, Sudan, Indonesia and countless other countries. The US intervenes abroad because it serves certain special interests that have nothing to do with human rights.
-
Between 500,000 and 1.5 million native Darfurians were massacred by the imperialist Arab Muslim janjaweed (usually hacked to death while the women were gang-raped) in Sudan and the President of North Sudan has an active warrant on his head for crimes against humanity yet no one does anything about it. So piss off with your bleeding heart "I want to save the oppressed" trash. The whole world sat there and pulled their dicks while the OIC stonewalled everything at the UN regarding Darfur.
People like you and the UN are gigantic hypocrites and further proof that the billions of dollars we funnel to that inept, incompetent organization and various third-world shitholes every year is completely for naught. People only care about dictators when it suits their agenda. For even more proof, see Syria, where Assad has massacred countless more civilians than Gadhafi has.
I guess you see my name attached to a post and you automatically freak out..sorry I have that affect on you...I guess it comes from all the times I've owned you...
It has nothing to do with being a bleeding heart as you put it.....I am a realist......not a limousine liberal nor a hard right neo-con like you..I don't live in fantasy like you.....realistically, it has always been United States policy to stand up for human rights and the oppressed.....yes we have supported dictators as long as they were able to keep order and not lose their grip on power to the point where they have to use the military on civilians..thats usually where the U.S. jumps off the bandwagon and turns against said regime......
the fact is the Libya operation was the exact scenario mentioned above...Ghadaffi was convenient for us until he began to murder his way into staying in power....the U.S. then changed its policy toward him as they should have..Obama did a very good job and this has been the consensus..
Saddham was an indirect threat to the U.S.. he was constantly making war with his neighbors which drew us in to defend Kuwait and he was allegedly financing terror, paying the families of palestinian suicide bombers when they committed acts against Israel
sorry you have to be wrong again
this is the real politick......whether you like it or not......
-
LMFAO
The US has only stood for these things when it was covenient for our special interests, the US didn't give a shit about Rwanda, Sudan, Indonesia and countless other countries. The US intervenes abroad because it serves certain special interests that have nothing to do with human rights.
of course...and whats wrong with that???..we simply cannot squander our resources by intervening everywhere..we have to pick and choose our spots..what you are saying above is nothing new
-
of course...and whats wrong with that???..we simply cannot squander our resources by intervening everywhere..we have to pick and choose our spots..what you are saying above is nothing new
Nothing new, sure but that was not the point. The US does not, I repeat, intervene for human rights, it intervenes for special interests that have nothing to do with most American people's interests. You invoke realpolitk but the fact is that it is not necessary to do the 'pick a dictator routine' for the US to be prosperous, in fact it hurts the country.
-
LMFAO
The US has only stood for these things when it was covenient for our special interests, the US didn't give a shit about Rwanda, Sudan, Indonesia and countless other countries. The US intervenes abroad because it serves certain special interests that have nothing to do with human rights.
Boofuckinghoo. No one else on the planet gave a shit about those, either. And that includes those Eurotrash countries you worship.
-
Nothing new, sure but that was not the point. The US does not, I repeat, intervene for human rights, it intervenes for special interests that have nothing to do with most American people's interests. You invoke realpolitk but the fact is that it is not necessary to do the 'pick a dictator routine' for the US to be prosperous, in fact it hurts the country.
the U.S. only does this when the alternative would be much worse
-
the U.S. only does this when the alternative would be much worse
And when would that be?
-
And when would that be?
well..examples....
1...U.S. supported Saddham for a time due to their not wanting Iran to gain more influence in teh region....Saddham was a buffer to prevent this from happening
2. U.S. supported the dictator of the Phillipines, Fernando Marcos, for many years in part because he was a staunch anti-communist and prevented the Marxist Guerilla movement there from taking over
3. U.S. was staunch supporter of many of the dictatorships in south America during the 60's and 70's due to their keeping the communists out of power and fighting the various leftist Guerilla movements
4. U.S. was staunch supporter of Mubarak in Egypt for 30 years due to their not wanting the Islamists to take over..when they began to murder people, support was dropped
5. U.S. supported military dictatorship in Pakistan because the alternative would have been Islamists taking over and having access to the bomb
I could name many many more.....
-
Boofuckinghoo. No one else on the planet gave a shit about those, either. And that includes those Eurotrash countries you worship.
I still don't care about them... But then I don't care about the middle east at all... except when it comes to my gas tank.
Can I just take the oil and run?
-
I still don't care about them... But then I don't care about the middle east at all... except when it comes to my gas tank.
Can I just take the oil and run?
Just think, if the EnviroNazis on the left weren't fucking our country and economy, we could drill our way to our own oil (making up whatever difference with Canada, if need be) and give a big "fuck you" to the Middle East.
-
Just think, if the EnviroNazis on the left weren't fucking our country and economy, we could drill our way to our own oil (making up whatever difference with Canada, if need be) and give a big "fuck you" to the Middle East.
I have thought about this many, many times.
It's why I always think to myself... If you do the best you can to not cause an environmental issue, then let's do the best we can and drill for oil at home.
The only time it makes sense to not is if we're trying to take all of their oil first, then turn around and sell it to the rest of the world for A GAZILLION times what it is now when we are the only oil producing nation left.
Of course, no one ever says that's the plan, so how would I know. :/
-
Just think, if the EnviroNazis on the left weren't fucking our country and economy, we could drill our way to our own oil (making up whatever difference with Canada, if need be) and give a big "fuck you" to the Middle East.
"EnviroNazis"?....how old are you anyway???.......It is good that the environmentalists do not allow the oil industry or the coal industry or any other industry to just do as they please and destroy the environment in any way they see fit..yes I find them to be a pain in the ass as well sometimes but you know what??..they serve a vital purpose and are a check against the business lobby which is a good thing..this is why compared to countries like Russia and china our air, food, and water are pretty good.......those countries have unchecked business and gov't interests and their environments are truly fucked up and some may never be cleaned up due to the severity of the pollution..... China has the worse fog and food problems.....Russia has severe problems with nuclear waste and unclean water..and lets not even talk about chernobyl
again..your thought process shows one-dimensional thinking
-
"EnviroNazis"?....how old are you anyway???.......It is good that the environmentalists do not allow the oil industry or the coal industry or any other industry to just do as they please and destroy the environment in any way they see fit..yes I find them to be a pain in the ass as well sometimes but you know what??..they serve a vital purpose and are a check against the business lobby which is a good thing..this is why compared to countries like Russia and china our air, food, and water are pretty good.......those countries have unchecked business and gov't interests and their environments are truly fucked up and some may never be cleaned up due to the severity of the pollution..... China has the worse fog and food problems.....Russia has severe problems with nuclear waste and unclean water..and lets not even talk about chernobyl
again..your thought process shows one-dimensional thinking
Who said anything about completely unhinged drilling? Quote me on it and I'll delete my account tonight.
I have no respect for people who would rather see this country's economy run into the ground if it means keeping a few carbons out of the air. Especially when what we do means fuck-all in the grand scheme of things given the uninhibited pollution coming from countries like China and India. The only thing we're doing is keeping this country's recovery down.
There is no proof whatsoever that fracking is hazardous to the environment. The only thing you people have to lean on is a fabricated piece of propaganda. With no proof after years/decades of fracking I'm willing to risk it if it means putting people back to work.
You keep claiming that you're "moderate" and "lean right" yet everything you post reeks of far-left insanity. If the shoe fits.
Learn to punctuate, too. You come off even stupider when....you....type...li ke....this.
-
Who said anything about completely unhinged drilling? Quote me on it and I'll delete my account tonight.
I have no respect for people who would rather see this country's economy run into the ground if it means keeping a few carbons out of the air. Especially when what we do means fuck-all in the grand scheme of things given the uninhibited pollution coming from countries like China and India. The only thing we're doing is keeping this country's recovery down.
There is no proof whatsoever that fracking is hazardous to the environment. The only thing you people have to lean on is a fabricated piece of propaganda. With no proof after years/decades of fracking I'm willing to risk it if it means putting people back to work.
You keep claiming that you're "moderate" and "lean right" yet everything you post reeks of far-left insanity. If the shoe fits.
Learn to punctuate, too. You come off even stupider when....you....type...li ke....this.
I seem far left to you since you lean to the right of the Nazis.....everything I said in my post was moderate and true....I never said not to drill or frack or whatever, all I said was that the environmental lobby serves a good purpose in our country....and contrary to what you might think, they don't always win in court to stop business projects.....you and others just seize on their victories..they often lose a lot in court.....but as you said, I guess us turning into another India , china, or Russia doesn't bother you as long as every one is working right??!!!!
-
I disagree with you that it is simply none of our business.....the U.S. has traditionally stood up for human rights and we must continue to do so......we can't stand idly by all the time and let people be slaughtered...we have to stand for something.....not doing anything is the easy and coward's way out
do you see why I say we should stay out of it?
Essentially, there really is no way to truly help a third world country without being accused of exploiting said country. Because in the end, those people who need help don't need help. They need money. It's a sad fact that most don't want to hear. But in this world, money solves everything. And that's what these people need. A way for them to get some of that power away from the government and into their hands. Money does that. If they have money AND the freedom to spend that money as they wish, they have a say. And when the people have a say, now they have a chance to change shit.
But the answer to that is to allow US corporations to work with them and give a boost to both of our economies. Because at the end of the day it's not the US government or US corporations giving the aid. It's people. And those people need to be paid. They have families and bills just like any of us. So the best situation and the only realistic situation is that both sides get something out of the deal. Thats the real fucking world and people need to shut the fuck up and deal with it.
-
do you see why I say we should stay out of it?
Essentially, there really is no way to truly help a third world country without being accused of exploiting said country. Because in the end, those people who need help don't need help. They need money. It's a sad fact that most don't want to hear. But in this world, money solves everything. And that's what these people need. A way for them to get some of that power away from the government and into their hands. Money does that. If they have money AND the freedom to spend that money as they wish, they have a say. And when the people have a say, now they have a chance to change shit.
But the answer to that is to allow US corporations to work with them and give a boost to both of our economies. Because at the end of the day it's not the US government or US corporations giving the aid. It's people. And those people need to be paid. They have families and bills just like any of us. So the best situation and the only realistic situation is that both sides get something out of the deal. Thats the real fucking world and people need to shut the fuck up and deal with it.
I can live with this
-
do you see why I say we should stay out of it?
Essentially, there really is no way to truly help a third world country without being accused of exploiting said country. Because in the end, those people who need help don't need help. They need money. It's a sad fact that most don't want to hear. But in this world, money solves everything. And that's what these people need. A way for them to get some of that power away from the government and into their hands. Money does that. If they have money AND the freedom to spend that money as they wish, they have a say. And when the people have a say, now they have a chance to change shit.
But the answer to that is to allow US corporations to work with them and give a boost to both of our economies. Because at the end of the day it's not the US government or US corporations giving the aid. It's people. And those people need to be paid. They have families and bills just like any of us. So the best situation and the only realistic situation is that both sides get something out of the deal. Thats the real fucking world and people need to shut the fuck up and deal with it.
And this is what our sons should die thousands of miles away for?
-
Not in my opinion
-
And this is what our sons should die thousands of miles away for?
As long as they are not the sons of politicians. ;)
-
As long as they are not the sons of politicians. ;)
There are plenty of sons of politicians who serve.
-
There are plenty of sons of politicians who serve.
In locations that are not war zones... Yes they do.
-
And this is what our sons should die thousands of miles away for?
yes this is what they're dying for. but is it because they're not doing anything good? or is it because of our liberal media choosing only to report when they do something bad?
-
yes this is what they're dying for. but is it because they're not doing anything good? or is it because of our liberal media choosing only to report when they do something bad?
They are doing tons of good stuff. I would expect nothing less. But that's not the issue. The issue is going to war unprovoked or irresponsibly. OR....... As you said for those reasons, none of which are good enough for our sons to die for.
-
They are doing tons of good stuff. I would expect nothing less. But that's not the issue. The issue is going to war unprovoked or irresponsibly. OR....... As you said for those reasons, none of which are good enough for our sons to die for.
here's my problem. you show me a "just war" and i'll show you a whole lot of people who disagree. there hasn't been a war in this country that hasn't been called a "war we shouldn't be involved in" by a whiole lot of people.
to prove my point, start a thread listing the good things the US army and US corporations have done for impoverished 3rd world countries. you'll see what i mean.
-
here's my problem. you show me a "just war" and i'll show you a whole lot of people who disagree. there hasn't been a war in this country that hasn't been called a "war we shouldn't be involved in" by a whiole lot of people.
to prove my point, start a thread listing the good things the US army and US corporations have done for impoverished 3rd world countries. you'll see what i mean.
WW2
Afghanistan
Those are the first that come to mind. I know, lol there people who were aginst WW2.
Feel free to start that thread if you want. I am not sure at what you are getting at.
The US army does all kind of good things. I witnessed it myself in a 3rd world country.
-
WW2
Afghanistan
Those are the first that come to mind. I know, lol there people who were aginst WW2.
Feel free to start that thread if you want. I am not sure at what you are getting at.
The US army does all kind of good things. I witnessed it myself in a 3rd world country.
there was plenty of opposition to WW 2. do you think WW2 was about saving the jews? seriously? it was about free trade. period. and there were many factions opposed to it. socialism was quite prevalent in that era and WW2 was the biggest step away from it. you claiming that WW2 was unopposed is just plain wrong.
and there are plenty of war protestors of the new millenium that are opposed to being in Afghanistan as well. So I don;t quite know what you're getting at.
-
WW2
Afghanistan
Those are the first that come to mind. I know, lol there people who were aginst WW2.
Feel free to start that thread if you want. I am not sure at what you are getting at.
The US army does all kind of good things. I witnessed it myself in a 3rd world country.
and which 3rd world country?
-
there was plenty of opposition to WW 2. do you think WW2 was about saving the jews? seriously? it was about free trade. period. and there were many factions opposed to it. socialism was quite prevalent in that era and WW2 was the biggest step away from it. you claiming that WW2 was unopposed is just plain wrong.
and there are plenty of war protestors of the new millenium that are opposed to being in Afghanistan as well. So I don;t quite know what you're getting at.
Where did say ww2 was unopposed? ??? Where did I say it was about the Jews ???
Why would say or assume that and then use them as a debate point?
I was simply listing what I believe were just wars. There is always opposition no matter how just a war is.
Even in ww2. But both t hose for the most had less opposition than Iraq, veitnam, Korea, ww1 etc.
Philippines in the 70's during the monsoon floods.
-
Not worth it at all. Would have been worth it if we hadn't been lied to about WMD's in Iraq.
Afghanistan is not worth it. It brought the Soviets to there knees, will do the same to us. If there truly is an imminent terrorist threat in Afghanistan, the CIA, with their black budget, has more than enough resources to fight a covert war to take out al queda in that region. Oh, wait, al queda is a CIA creation from back in the 80s.
-
I have to wonder, if America knew we would still be in Afghanistan and Iraq on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, would they have still supported it..
-
Not at all, and of we hadn't gone into Iraq we would have finished with afganistan in 1-4 years.
-
Not worth it at all. Would have been worth it if we hadn't been lied to about WMD's in Iraq.
Afghanistan is not worth it. It brought the Soviets to there knees, will do the same to us. If there truly is an imminent terrorist threat in Afghanistan, the CIA, with their black budget, has more than enough resources to fight a covert war to take out al queda in that region. Oh, wait, al queda is a CIA creation from back in the 80s.
Even with WMDs in Iraq we didn't need to go in there. I believe what we did with Afghanistan was appropriate but executed poorly.