Funny thing about our enemies...

[240 is Back]

but why worry about Chavez when the Koreans are crazy as f**k and have nukes

there's the million dollar question!!!

WHy aren't we surrounding and nuking NKorea?  They have SET OFF nukes.  They have FIRED MISSILES toward the US.  They have made these weapons SOLELY for the usa.

Shit, i'd support attacking them in a minute.  Why won't we talk to them, and why aren't we making moves to defend ourselves?  They are a way more advanced than Iran, who just started the nuke program.

[Hugo Chavez]

lol.  You don't hang around this board much do you?     Not uncommon at all.  If you keep posting here you'll not only be labeled a "necon" (whatever that means), you'll be someone who only gets his information from Fox News; nothing but a Bush crony.   

That's funny, it was 240 and I that pushed home the point that being conservative does not necessarily mean you're a neoconservative so if anyone tried to say it is a catch all label for the right, it was you beach...  Go back and look it up, we corrected that line as being incorrect and you seem to be conveniently ignoring that fact.  Even worse you claim to not know what neocon means after we just had a very direct conversation on it...   Cut this shit ok....

[Dos Equis]

That's funny, it was 240 and I that pushed home the point that being conservative does not necessarily mean you're a neoconservative so if anyone tried to say it is a catch all label for the right, it was you beach...  Go back and look it up, we corrected that line as being incorrect and you seem to be conveniently ignoring that fact.  Even worse you claim to not know what neocon means after we just had a very direct conversation on it...   Cut this shit ok....

Oh be quiet already.     Ask Ozmo what his definition of a "necon" is.     You don't know what the heck you're talking about.  Again. 

[Hugo Chavez]

Oh be quiet already.     Ask Ozmo what his definition of a "necon" is.     You don't know what the heck you're talking about.  Again. 

Oh you be quiet already... He said it was "Extreme conservative views" That is an extreme oversimplification that does not do justice to what a neocon is... That makes guys like Pat Buccanan a neocon and I'll bet he and conserviatives like him would not agree for one second... It would have taken you all but 5 minutes to review the material provided... Amazing that you would glom onto a 3 word definition instead of actually read the material provided in that thread. Oh brother...

[240 is Back]

Oh be quiet already.     Ask Ozmo what his definition of a "necon" is.     You don't know what the heck you're talking about.  Again. 

I recall the thread Berserker mentioned.  He and I gave very detailed account of the difference between neo and traditional conservatism.  They are very different beasts.  Many conservatives are currently unhappy at the direction the neocon element has led us in the last 5 years.  There is definitely a split in the Repub party.  Facts is facts is facts.

[GroinkTropin]

there's the million dollar question!!!

WHy aren't we surrounding and nuking NKorea?  They have SET OFF nukes.  They have FIRED MISSILES toward the US.  They have made these weapons SOLELY for the usa.

Shit, i'd support attacking them in a minute.  Why won't we talk to them, and why aren't we making moves to defend ourselves?  They are a way more advanced than Iran, who just started the nuke program.

The N korea situation is WAYYYY more complex than iran. For starters, they border china, and trust me china does not, and will not allow a massive US troop buildup in their backyard. Also, N korea and china are close allies, both are communist nations, and china gives n korea lots of aid. Lastly, N korea is starving to death due to un sanctions, it's well known that kim jong cannot hold his country together for too much longer. He was a HUGE army, and if we invaded, it would cost so many american lives it absurd. We are either MOABing them to death, nuking them, or starving them, but certainly not invading them. Iran is not a direct threat to us, but they ARE a VERY direct threat to our servicemen over seas, and isreal, and they have strategic positioning along our oil routes. They are a tremendous threat, and money seems to be the only thing preventing all out war.

[Dos Equis]

Oh you be quiet already... He said it was "Extreme conservative views" That is an extreme oversimplification that does not do justice to what a neocon is... That makes guys like Pat Buccanan a neocon and I'll bet he and conserviatives like him would not agree for one second... It would have taken you all but 5 minutes to review the material provided... Amazing that you would glom onto a 3 word definition instead of actually read the material provided in that thread. Oh brother...

Actually, I look at how people use the word, which is more important than some Wiki link on the internet.  Try looking up the words "denotation" and "connotation."     And I won't even charge you for that. 

[240 is Back]

The N korea situation is WAYYYY more complex than iran. For starters, they border china, and trust me china does not, and will not allow a massive US troop buildup in their backyard. Also, N korea and china are close allies, both are communist nations, and china gives n korea lots of aid. Lastly, N korea is starving to death due to un sanctions, it's well known that kim jong cannot hold his country together for too much longer. He was a HUGE army, and if we invaded, it would cost so many american lives it absurd. We are either MOABing them to death, nuking them, or starving them, but certainly not invading them. Iran is not a direct threat to us, but they ARE a VERY direct threat to our servicemen over seas, and isreal, and they have strategic positioning along our oil routes. They are a tremendous threat, and money seems to be the only thing preventing all out war.

Weird that the US essentially told Pakistan to "let us fire missiles from your nation or we'll bomb you too" but we don't haev the balls to even fck with China's neighbor.

I guess it has nothing to do with the fact Iran has sexy oil and N Korea has zilch, eh?

[GroinkTropin]

Weird that the US essentially told Pakistan to "let us fire missiles from your nation or we'll bomb you too" but we don't haev the balls to even fck with China's neighbor.

I guess it has nothing to do with the fact Iran has sexy oil and N Korea has zilch, eh?

Mmmm, from some perspectives you could make that argument, but first you would need credible evidence that a war with Iran will truly benefit us in some way tied to oil. Are we going to set up an extended govenment out there, and just take over the country? I highly doubt it. We CAN mess with iran because we don't need to revamp the whole country, we need to destroy their ability to produce nuclear weapons. Iran has a shit military, this won't be all that difficult, PLUS Iran WILL use nukes if they get them AS LONG AS ahmadinejad is president. I say this because although he doesn't hold all the power, in actuallity he does speak for those in power. North Korea is simply in a position where they are pissed off at the UN sanctions, so they are making nuclear bombs and will probably threaten to sell them to terrorists, in which case we will probably buy their nukes just to make sure that doesn't happen. You can be sure that will be profitable for kim jong, hence his developing them. He has no plans to use them, shit if he was going to, china might actually stop him as we are chinas biggest ally economically, and china probably wouldn't want to deal with the US shooting nukes at their neigbor, and possibly striking them.

[240 is Back]

we set up puppet regimes in EVERY nation we topple.  It's the people we can't fking control.  we manage resources underground, but not the cities above.

It's where all the $ is!

[a_joker10]

So Japan, Germany, and Italy have puppet regimes?

How about all of the new democracies across Europe that happened to spring up because of the end of the Cold War?

Other then them though right?

So even though Iraq voted for a leader the US didn't want. They have a puppet regime to?
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050725fa_fact

[240 is Back]

So Japan, Germany, and Italy have puppet regimes?

How about all of the new democracies across Europe that happened to spring up because of the end of the Cold War?

Other then them though right?

So even though Iraq voted for a leader the US didn't want. They have a puppet regime to?
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050725fa_fact

Nah, the axis powers signed treaties.  we won't play the treaty game anymore (or we'd be negotiating deals with Iran and Syria.

Iraq chose from a group of people we approved.  Is there any doubt al Sadr would have won, if he had been allowed on the ballot?  We defined anyone who wouldn't work with us as a bad apple and locked them outta the political process.


If Iraq was trily independent, they'd more than likely choose contractors from various nations to manage their functions.  Instead, our generals are choosing.

The title is naught - it's who controls the flow of resources with the power.

[Camel Jockey]

So Japan, Germany, and Italy have puppet regimes?

How about all of the new democracies across Europe that happened to spring up because of the end of the Cold War?

Other then them though right?

So even though Iraq voted for a leader the US didn't want. They have a puppet regime to?
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050725fa_fact

It is a puppet regime because the US is there against the will of the Iraqi people.

[a_joker10]

It is a puppet regime because the US is there against the will of the Iraqi people.

So Japan and South Korea are puppet regimes then to, Since Okinawa doesn't want Americans there and neither does South Korea.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/20/AR2006052001051_pf.html

[Camel Jockey]

So Japan and South Korea are puppet regimes then to, Since Okinawa doesn't want Americans there and neither does South Korea.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/20/AR2006052001051_pf.html

Do we meddle in affairs of those nations? Have we recently toppled the regimes in those countries? Have we paved the way for insurgents? Don't compares apples and oranges.

[mightymouse72]

It is a puppet regime because the US is there against the will of the Iraqi people.

let the iraqi people speak for themselves



http://www.theotheriraq.com/

[240 is Back]

let the iraqi people speak for themselves

http://www.theotheriraq.com/

That is a Kurdish propaganda page, no?

[a_joker10]

That is a Kurdish propaganda page, no?

Kurdistan is relatively peaceful. So are some other areas of Iraq.
But Baghdad is another story.

[mightymouse72]

propaganda

 

[240 is Back]

hell, we should let them split the place up.  I know a lot of the regions would lose any oil revenues though.


With the $200 million we're spending a DAY in there... shit... we should just GIVE them the money to get along.  Would save lives and help them to rebuild the infrastructure.

Of course, the military contractors don't make a profit then, so...

[240 is Back]

My point is that the Kurds aren't the ones killing our troops.

Every time someone says "it's not that bad there, look!" they are representing the views of a minority as a majority.

[Camel Jockey]

Of course, the military contractors don't make a profit then, so...

There's gonna be a show on National Geographic about Iraq's guns for hire.

[Hugo Chavez]

Actually, I look at how people use the word, which is more important than some Wiki link on the internet.  Try looking up the words "denotation" and "connation."     And I won't even charge you for that. 

Yea, Oh brother, who are you accusing of applying a different connotation to the word then    240 and I are quite surgical with our use of the term and we know exactly what we're saying when using it... So who are you talking about then Beach?


Thanks Beach, I actually never heard of the word connation so I did look it up:
Directory > Words > Webster 1913 Con·na·tion
n.
Connection by birth; natural union.
 

[Dos Equis]

Yea, Oh brother, who are you accusing of applying a different connotation to the word then    240 and I are quite surgical with our use of the term and we know exactly what we're saying when using it... So who are you talking about then Beach?


Thanks Beach, I actually never heard of the word connation so I did look it up:
Directory > Words > Webster 1913 Con·na·tion
n.
Connection by birth; natural union.
 

CONNOTATION.  Obviously a typo.   Grammar Nazi.     Good thing I didn't send you a bill.
 
"240 and I are quite surgical with our use of the term . . ."  Bwahahahaha!!!  Now that is the funniest thing I've heard all day.   

[240 is Back]

Beach Bum,

How do you define a 'neoconservative'?