Syria?

Say –

How did you manage to pack so much inanity in to one little ol’ thread? That takes talent my friend.

Anyway, for starters, lets examine the idea that one can violate a U.N. resolution by way of the veto. Not that I’m a huge fan of the U.N., but how exactly is utilizing a procedure baked in to the U.N. charter, and without which there would have been no U.N. at all, violating U.N. resolutions? There is no U.N. resolution if it is vetoed – it never passed. It doesn’t exist. That’s like saying the President is violating Congressional laws by vetoing them. Quite frankly, this takes the cake as your most inane statement ever – or at least the most inane that I’ve seen. I wouldn’t want to sell you short.

On the next subject, the perception, or lack thereof, of the various leaderships of the countries in the mid-east region of Iraq as a threat really does not affect at all whether Iraq was enough of a threat to the safety of U.S. citizens for our government to take action.

As I pointed out in another thread, with the current state of the world, the U.S. is not really worried about an invasion or about an actual country taking us on, because this would amount to regime suicide. Even that crackpot in charge of North Korea has apparently realized that. However, when people who want to hurt you have one avenue cut off, they are very adept at finding another, and you had better adapt your perceptions, planning and defenses to suit the changed situation. In this case, the current security risk is that rogue regimes who possess WMD (of which nukes are currently viewed as the most problematic, but bio and chem weapons could pose very serious risks) would get together with terrorists (or perhaps even do it themselves, but that is more unlikely) and unleash the weapons on a large U.S. population center.

As such, the calculus has changed. The old ideas of MAD and detente with nationstates are only applicable to the extent the nations themselves would act. Without such a national actor, and given that terrorists are mobile and difficult to pin down, the current view is that the best way to keep the such terrorist actors from getting WMD is to stop rogue regimes from obtaining, keeping and/or distributing those weapons.

Given that, the U.S. government’s first and foremost duty as a government is to protect its citizens from attack. To do this, it may need to engage in preemptive actions like the one just completed (at least as far as the removal of Hussein) in Iraq. The perception of other countries in the area of that threat, or the lack thereof, is relevant only in terms of international relations with those countries, but not in terms of whether there is a threat to U.S. security.

Now I’ve forgotten what else you were claiming, so I’ll post this for now and get back later. Cheers.

PS – Say, I apologize for personal attacks I have leveled against you in the past several weeks. I will blame my lack of sleep and apologize. I will continue to criticize your statements, and even use descriptive words to characterize your statements, but personal attacks are unwarranted. Once again, sorry.

NZ, whats your fucking problem?

who said u can compare Israel to non-democratic, terror harboring, totalitaric regimes?

That equation is fucked.

since Israel is in war, some less then desired stuff was done. The only reason its discussed is becaues its a democraric country with high moral standards. it does not even start to measure to what the other side is doing TO ITS OWN PEOPLE! (and to us)

but weve been through 3000 years of that shit, we can take some more, the arabs can be sure of that.

u know it is very easy to criticise some one from 20000 miles away.

What the fuck DO u know about israel to call it a US base? go check your history dude. right now the countries have mutual interests, such as middle east peace, democracy, and stability. but we are not a fucking US base more then your country. (which was built on jenocide and racism of its local people so check yourself before you wreck yourself)

that just pisses me off to see Israel in such a context.

morality check mister.

If u dont know what is going on in the middle east just ask.

obviously you dont.

GluteSpanker-

Don’t give credence to the myopic views of Say.

Ideologues like him don’t have the capacity to include moral equivalency in their view of the world.

It would destroy the foundation of their thought.

As I said previously, it is impossible to rationalize with an irrational person.

Dear Mr Posterior Beater:

I love your idea that Israel has been trying for peace. The only leader in recent history who has tried to make peace was Rabin, and the fanatics killed him; fanatic Israeli’s that is.

Now, the history of Israeli leaders is like a who’s who of right wing hawks: Golda Meier [sp], David ben Gurion [sp]
and Ariel Sharon etc.

Don’t mis-understand, in the situation Israel finds itself in you lead strong leadership, but there is a large difference between strong leadership and an eternal pathological vendetta against everyone on your border.

To say that Israel’s actions are solely reactive is b/s. To say that israel is entirely at fault is also b/s.

The thing is though, Israel has contravened more UN resolutions than Iraq, but the fact that the US has always backed them to the hilt means nothing wasever done.

In terms of terrorism, Mossad is as ruthless as Hizbollah and other terrorist groups [until recently when the bottom fell out of their organsiation].

I have no interest in getting into a did not did too argument; the fact remains that israel is just as dangerous as any other state in the area - it just depends on your definition, and your political point of view.

Historical enough for you?

NZ

U dont know what the hell u r talking about.

In one post u made so many “errors” and involved so many fictional data that I just lost all basic respect for yopu and any sense of your credibility. I thought u were just uninformed. beside the fact that Rabin was there wasnt one single piesce of trurh there (I dont know about the UN and dont care). It takes skill of deception and propaganda for that.

I dont want to hear where the fuck u got this info.

As I said, go check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Say: It is so fun to read the crap you post. It is not just the US that states that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks. You use the term propaganda to avoid looking at any facts. Using the same philosophy you used before, where exactly were the terrorists trained? To say that America has a good propaganda system with a media that questions everything it does is ridiculous. Many here have posted links, but obviously you do not read these links. They may interfere with your deluded world.


After 9/11 I thought Iraq was involved, but I waited for more facts to come out. Interestingly people were arguing that Osama was not involved. As far as what people FELT (shows how you think), we were keeping Iraq from being a danger to these countries. If we had left they would have been in trouble.


As far as Regan, another attempt to muddy the waters with bringing up completely separate issues. Why not bring up events in 1842? Or 1238? Although, I don’t remember anyone saying anything about the US being invaded, or anyone trying. Where do you get your information? Who does your thinking for you?


I still don’t understand how such an evil person could be removed from power, with people in the streets of Baghdad cheering, and some people are upset. Do they actually support leaving such a person in such a position of power?


Iscariot: glute-spanker even said, “some less then desired stuff was done.” So you have to realize that he is aware of Israel not being perfect. But when you live in an area where your destruction is part of the school curriculum of almost all of your neighbors, some understanding has to be made.


Some may not understand what is going on, but the US is working for peace.

"I still don’t understand how such an evil person could be removed from power, with people in the streets of Baghdad cheering, and some people are upset. Do they actually support leaving such a person in such a position of power?
"

What upsets me is that Bush friends from Texas were so fucking quick to confirm all our suspicions by taking over the Iraquis oils camps in no time.

Your links about 9/11 are all crap, I can provide links stating that aliens have been about anywere you can think of, and it doesn’t make it true. If the USA had any proof about Iraq involvement in the terrosrist attacks they would have presented to the international court and would have gathered support for your military actions. They didn’t, because all evidence you (the USA) presented would only convince a moron and never anyone with half a brain. I find it amazing that an intelligent person like yourself can rationalize your way around things so efficiently as not to see the obvious.

Nacionalism and patriotism are indeed very dangerous things. Like the once great Roman empire, that had no military match in it’s time, you’ll also come down. And I bet you’ll fall from inside. There’s something very wrong with a nation that finds the killing of innocent people acceptable when there’s no presence of clear evidence of a direct treath to their country.

Before the war with Iraq began Rummy, one of the most hardline administartion officals on the Iraq policy, repeatedly offered saddam and other iraqi leaders one last chance to flee to a foreign country so he could avoid a war with the u.s. as we wanted regime change. My, my how things have just suddenly changed once again. Now our leaders are criticizing Syria for what this administartion would have loved that country to do before the war started. Man, hubris can have such a devastaing effect. so now the u.s. is using it’s invasion of Iraq to begin demonizing other middle east countries that our allies are uncomfortable with. this administartions policy has already had an effect. A major American newspaper has already lumped syria into the famous Axis-of-Evil trifecta. Like Iraq prior to the invasion, syria has an authoritarian government who poses little threat to the u.s. Syria- who lost it’s major military patron, the soviet union, has not modernized it’s military and has therefore been diminished as a threat to Isreal and other u.s. allies in the region.

But that is exactly it. The u.s. isn’t going after countries who pose a real threat - military speaking - it picks on the small fry knowing that the public will not support a pro-longed war. Things have changed since the Vietnam debacle. People didn’t protest during that era until a few years after we invaded that country. Now, the protests begin before an invasion even begins. The people in power are qiute aware of that. This is part of the answer to your question as to, why syria?

zepplin has it sort of right. The USA won’t attack the other Axis of Evil countries because they have a deterrent. Everyone knew Iraq had no deterrent, namely nukes, so it was safe to invade Iraq. Everyone knows Iran & N Korea DOES have nukes, so the USA won’t attack them. What the USA is saying to the world is, “No matter how poor & hepless your country is, we won’t invade you if you have a deterrent, so you better start up a nuclear program & end 50yrs of progress of nuclear non-proliferation.”

My God!!! The good guys (Boston Barrister, Mage, Avoids Roids and the newcomers: J77, and Mr. Glute-Spanker) have made the bad guys (iscariot, restless, zepplin, and say) look very foolish. Great work!!! Keep it up!!
restless, my little portugese rabble-rouser. You said there were no concentration camps in portugal. Here you go: “Portugal had introduced concentration camps and forced labour, thus mobilizing the unemployed in infrastructure projects. Political opponents had been persecuted and maltreated.” You can find this and other very nasty portugese secrets on this website: Zentrale für Unterrichtsmedien im Internet e.V.. I encourage everyone to visit this website so you can gain a better understanding of restless’ political views. restless, the United States has a power differential between itself and it’s nearest competitor the likes of which the world has never seen. Rome had the Germans and the Parthians. We have no rival. God, it’s great to be the best! If we fall, you won’t live to see it. Our greatness will continue to rankle the jealous and the small. We are the arch-enemy of the despot. Our freedoms are a direct threat to the dictator. God Bless America!!!

"You said there were no concentration camps in portugal. Here you go: “Portugal had introduced concentration camps and forced labour, thus mobilizing the unemployed in infrastructure projects. Political opponents had been persecuted and maltreated.” You can find this and other very nasty portugese secrets on this website: Zentrale für Unterrichtsmedien im Internet e.V.. I encourage everyone to visit this website so you can gain a better understanding of restless’ political views. "

It’s crap. My fathers lived half their lifes under the dictatorship and there were no concentration camps in Portugal.

And tell me how do you think this will give anyone a better understanding of my political views? Fuck Salazar and fuck Bush. The real disgusting thing in my country history is the slavery part, way before Salazar. You think I’m in any way troubled by anything you bring up about my country? That’s so ridiculous. There’s so much worst shit and if you do wanna know, just ask and I’ll be happy to put some culture in your poor brain. Please do learn about the past, learn from the mistakes and atrocities done, be them done by the USA or by Portugal.

Your efforts to discredit me with my country past history are a joke and a completely juvenile pointing-the-finger type strategy typical of someone who can’t think of proper arguments to use in a discussion. Grow up my “friend”.

restless,
Your responses are so caustic that I wanted others to understand where your anger comes from. It must be strange to live in a society that has just emerged from facism (1974). You say you don’t support your country. How sad. Again, this gives an insight into your psyche. It also makes one wonder whether to take seriously any argument you make. Just exactly what country do you wish to be a part of? You’ve made it abundantly clear that the United States makes you very uncomfortable. That also is an insight into your personality.
Your reference to your “fathers” stating that there were no concentration camps in portugal also needs to be discussed. For someone with so much “culture” you apparently are a little weak on recent european history. For instance, most germans denied the existence of concentration camps until they were forced to observe them at the end of WWII. Can you acknowledge the possibility that your “fathers”: A. May have been in denial B. Physically unable to travel to every portion of portugal?
I wanted you to know that we Americans are proud that we have done the right thing again. We are pleased that up to 10,000 Iraqis demonstrated against saddam today and demanded their own government. We were pleased that they felt empowered enough to ask us to leave Iraq. That is all the thanks we really need. Oh, since you are so cultured, please tell me if there ever has been another superpower in history who has gone to war, won the war, rebuilt the economies of their former enemies, and then left the country. We have done it many times. Please answer this question because if you don’t, I’m just going to keep asking the same question until you acknowledge our benevolence.

"My God!!! The good guys have made the bad guys look very foolish. Great work!!! Keep it up!!
I encourage everyone to visit this website so you can gain a better understanding of restless’ political views. restless, the United States has a power differential between itself and it’s nearest competitor the likes of which the world has never seen. Rome had the Germans and the Parthians. We have no rival. God, it’s great to be the best! If we fall, you won’t live to see it. Our greatness will continue to rankle the jealous and the small. We are the arch-enemy of the despot. Our freedoms are a direct threat to the dictator. God Bless America!!! "
If you switched the words “America” to “Iraq”, and recorded this with a monotone, buzzy voice, this would sound EXACTLY like one of Saddam’s speechs. Same blind, delerious, rhetoric.

Say: Are you telling America to attack those countries? Again trying to throw other things into the mix to muddy the water. Iraq was a dangerous country. The Wall Street Journal had a expose about the link between Iraq and the Okalahoma bombing. And YES there is very strong evidence of Iraq’s involvement with 911, although you never let facts get in the way of your arguments.


Restless: Yes, those links to PBS, the London Mirror, USA Today, and even the Guardian are obviously crappy links, not like the great hate America links posted by Lumpy. Once again you are living in a deluded world, I assume the same one as Lumpy and Say. The evidence is so obvious, and yet all you can do is attempt to use events 2000 years ago as your “evidence.” I know it is impossible to convince the group of you when any proof is considered propaganda, made up, or just ignored. You have blinders on.


Zeppelin: Syria is not being attacked, and it seems like they are worried enough that they will capitulate to demands. As far as the offer we made, it was rejected. It is no longer available. He didn’t want the offer when available, so tough. (That should get some responses.) Why don’t you want them brought to justice? If you think that these terrorist countries don’t pose a threat, I can get you a great deal on the Eiffel Tower. Some countries have big weapons, but don’t use them. Others have small weapons, but do use them. It has to be realized that left alone, these countries have the potential of becoming a world power. Iraq was on the brink, if not there. After all they had the fourth most powerful military before the first gulf war. Iraq may have moved to third by now if not for us. And they would have used this force.


Vredstein: Saddam was a liar. United States=Good Guys is combining fact and opinion. Are we the most powerful country in the world? Yes. Is freedom a fear of many dictators? Yes. Is it wrong to have pride in ones own country? No. I am proud to be an American. I am not blinded to believe that everything America does is perfect, or that our past is not littered with mistakes and wrongdoings, but when I compare us to anywhere else, it just does not compare. America is propping up the world. America is trying to make the world a better place. I see plenty that can be better with America. I also see people all over working toward making it a better place, and a few trying to tear it down. America keeps getting better and better, but some just can’t accept it. It is easier to blame America for all the ills of the world, instead of placing the blame where it belongs.

Everyone: While I believe the US has one very powerful military, I don’t think we could have taken Iraq in three weeks if the Iraqi people wanted to win. It would have taken longer, and been a harder battle. These people wanted Saddam out. This has to be understood. The Iraqi people got what they wanted. Freedom. Who here is against freedom for Iraq? I can her it now, “We want them to have freedom, but it should have been done by mailing flowers to Iraq, and asking nicely.”

"Restless: Yes, those links to PBS, the London Mirror, USA Today, and even the Guardian are obviously crappy links, not like the great hate America links posted by Lumpy. "

I don’t think you are understanding what I mean with crap. With crap I don’t mean that it is impossible that Iraq has supported in someway terrorists, of course they did. Most of the Arab world did. Saudi Arabia is known to be one of the biggest financial supporters of them all. Why didn’t you invade Saudi Arabia? Because for now, there’s no reason to, as the oil is still going or way. Of course, when Saudi Arabia regime falls down it might be a different story, but we’ll see.

Tell me the Mage, how do you feel about the Texas companies taking over the oil fields in Iraq? Is it for the well being of the Iraqui people?

And another thing, do you also feel that the denial of the USA to participate in the Kyoto conference refusing to decrease the 25% pollutent gas emmisions in the whole world is also “making the world a better place”? Curious about that. And this wasn’t 2000 years ago. By the way, what arguments did I use that are 2000 years old?

And finally, this question is also specifically for you, do you Americans get to see the thousands of Iraquis manifesting against your presence in Iraq on TV? I’m curious as to whether or not do you have access to both sides of the story.

restless,
Please answer my earlier questions. If you don’t, it means that you are unable to acknowledge the truths that I presented.
Oh, by the way, we have seen the protests against our presence (note earlier post) and we think it is wonderful. We support free speech. Once we have left the Iraqi people firmly in charge of their infrastructure, and supervised a free and open election, we will leave.

“And finally, this question is also specifically for you, do you Americans get to see the thousands of Iraquis manifesting against your presence in Iraq on TV? I’m curious as to whether or not do you have access to both sides of the story.”

Yes, we have seen this and it was shown on the first page in just about every American newspaper. Do you think they could of protested while Saddam was in power?

ah, well…It’ Sunday and I might as well waste some time answering your irrelevant questions.

"restless,
Your responses are so caustic that I wanted others to understand where your anger comes from. It must be strange to live in a society that has just emerged from facism (1974). You say you don’t support your country. How sad. Again, this gives an insight into your psyche. It also makes one wonder whether to take seriously any argument you make. Just exactly what country do you wish to be a part of? "

I don’t think someone with such a nationalistic mentality could ever understand what I’m talking about. I quite like Portugal. I lke the Portuguese, but I owe nothing to this government at all, I didn’t vote for them. Understand?? They don’t have my automatic approvement for anything the do, unlike you seem to give yours. I think, I have my beliefs and ideials and a strong moral code and it’s based on this that I perform my judgements, not on a foolish sense of patriotism that condemns me to some kind of blind devotion like yours. Understand??

“You’ve made it abundantly clear that the United States makes you very uncomfortable. That also is an insight into your personality.”

No, as million others (billions maybe?) are also very unconfortable about the USA foreign policy you could see this as a sign that something might be wrong with you behaviour, not as some kind of personality disturbance on whoever speaks their mind about this. But nevermind, kid.

"Your reference to your “fathers” stating that there were no concentration camps in portugal also needs to be discussed. For someone with so much “culture” you apparently are a little weak on recent european history. For instance, most germans denied the existence of concentration camps until they were forced to observe them at the end of WWII. Can you acknowledge the possibility that your “fathers”: A. May have been in denial B. Physically unable to travel to every portion of portugal? "

My “friend”, Portugal is a rectamgle with 800 km per 300 km, so it’s smaller than the New York State, for example, So you don’t just hide concentartion camps from the whole population like that. If you tell me that the prisons at the time were filled with political prisioners, and that P.I.D.E (the fascist secret police) tortured and even killed whoever spoke out openly against the regime, now that would be true.

Are these your questions? How about you ansewring mine? Kyoto, for example. Or are you just conviniently going to ignore me and keep childishly trying to bring up my country rotten past. Uh?? Just get to the slavery part, that’s were the stinky shit is.

The Kyoto Protocol calls for 55 countries to ACCOUNT for 55% of total CO2 emission. As of this year, 100 countries have only accounted for 44% of the CO2 emissions. This is because most of the countries are small, third world countries with little pollution in the first place. Until 55 and 55 is fulfilled, the US does not have to comply with the Protocol. Russia hasn’t joined yet, why not attack them? They are thinking about joining this year, and that will put the % above 55%, so the US will have to account for their part too.

Besides, if you look at a CO2 cycle, we are trying to decrease CO2 into the atmosophere by 0.3 gigatons/year. Currently there are 3.2 gigatons/year going into the atmosphere, so the 0.3 gigatons will only make a dent in the amount per year. Also, this has to be done by 2012 anyways.

Also, only developed countries (Tier I by the Kyoto Protocol standards) have to adhere. Developing countries don’t have to do anything yet.

This somehow ended up on the wrong thread. I am reposting it here.


Restless: Which specific Texas oil company took over the Iraqi oil fields? We are not jut going in there, pumping out the oil, and taking it home. It will be sold on the market, and the money will go to the Iraqi people. If we only went to war for oil, we could have bombed Baghdad into oblivion very easily. Iraq invaded Kuwait because they wanted the oil, but you keep saying that America is doing this for oil. We didn’t take it after the Gulf War did we? Why not? Everyone said it was about oil then.

You stated that the links I posted were crap, and that you could post links to weird shit. When I pointed out that the links posted by myself and others were to reputable sources, (you obviously got me mixed up with Lumpy,) you then changed the argument. Those links were to reputable sources with articles pointing out direct links between the 9/11 attacks, and interviews with high-ranking Iraqi defectors discussing the training in Iraq, which matched the 9/11 terrorist methods.

Many terrorists are from Saudi Arabia, and many of those were trained in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq specifically wanted America attacked, Saddam has stated so repeatedly. Iraq was specifically supporting terrorism, and didn’t hide the fact. The Saudi Arabian government’s links to terrorism is weaker, especially since the leaders are specifically hated by Bin Laden. Regardless this idea of bringing up a different country in every argument is crap. This “Moral Equivalency” argument is not a good one. Again as I said before when people used Syria as their moral equivalency, are you saying you want us to attack Saudi Arabia? Each problem has to be dealt with differently. And more countries are willing to help rid the world of terrorism, even if just for fear.

Kyoto? Why so off subject? (Ok, I’ll bite.) Was the purpose of kyoto to improve the environment, or try to hurt America? I just switched seven of my light bulbs from incandescent to compact florescent. I estimate that it will save me at least $3.50 a month, and each bulb only uses 23.3% as much energy. I believe in trying to prevent environmental damage, but it does not need to be strong-armed into law. The world will not be exploding tomorrow. The environment is better then some want people to think. A gradual improvement in emissions is the best way to go. Done correctly it can have a very positive effect on the worlds economy, but done wrong can have devastating effects. We don’t have to destroy ourselves to protect the world. And if you have been paying attention to any of the technology coming out, then you should be proud of the “multinational corporations” that are creating all of this environmentally friendly technology.

As far as the 2000 year old argument, you mentioned " Like the once great Roman empire, that had no military match in it’s time, you’ll also come down." Wow, you say America will be powerful for over a thousand years. Interesting.

And as far as some Iraqi people protesting, it would be a mistake to leave. That would be the wrong thing to do. Not all of them understand that, and some want the last government back because they were part of the “superior” class. We have to help them to get back on their feet. If not then some powerful group will seize power, and that could be just as bad as Saddam, if not many of the same people, and we still need to find and get rid of their WMD.