The fact that America wanted military power in the middle east and oil does not mean it’s not a good thing that Saddam’s out of the picture. What may mean it’s not a good thing is the instability and vast amount of money and resources it’s going to take to create stability and prosperity in that region in the longterm.
[quote]Judas wrote:
our gross population goes down each year with out immagration, we need to for our furture but alot of the immagrants are not assmilating very well, as for refugees you cant let every body in yeah its pretty fucked but we are a really racist country
i have been in mass protests about that issues its fucked up we have sooo much space not to let a extra 1000 in is fucked.
[/quote]
Given the fact that you live there, what is your estimate as to how much of that space is usable, inhabitable land? It’s not so easy to establish cities and towns in unirrigated desert.
[quote]Judas wrote:
…
like saddam was armed by the usa to defeat iran in the iraq vs iran,
…
[/quote]
Saddam was armed by the Soviets and the Europeans. The US provided very few weapons to Saddam. The bulk of US help was satellite info to help himfight his war against the crazy, evil Iranians.
Once the US figured Saddam was truly evil and insane himself the US withdrew all aid.
You appear to have a very slanted point of view.
[quote]Judas wrote:
no we speak broken english like your blacks and hit kangaroos with sticks when where hungry
[/quote]
I see we are dealing with an intellectual.
Everytime you post you make me feel a little better about our education system.
And here is another problem. You are regurgitating what millions are saying without merit. That we went to war for oil.
Yet this is leaving the political discussion and entering the conspiracy theory discussion. If we went to war for oil, why don’t we have the oil? Why is the price of oil higher instead of lower? If we took the oil, it would have been put on the market, lowering the price of crude.
Did the war cause the big price climb recently? No, it was caused by a freaking Hurricane. Although I have heard that was caused by some weather machine run by the government, and we snuck explosives in and blew up some walls to flood out the refineries to boost the prices. Again all conspiracy.
Here is the real facts in this issue. We could work with OPEC to reduce their production. A couple of refineries could be shut down due to some “malfunction” resulting in a bottleneck.
Also why take oil when other countries pump it for the oil companies, sell it to the oil companies, and the oil companies hike the price and sell it to us? I really see no benefit in taking the oil other then flooding the market causing a reduction in price.
[quote]Judas wrote:
I am australian
we are a small rich counrty with not a
lot of worldly problems
the thing that i observe is that america is always the main aggressor like in the middle east they have been going there and bombing and killing people for years like almost 30 years can you imagine if you lived there and how fucking angry you would be
like saddam was armed by the usa to defeat iran in the iraq vs iran, afgahnistan was armed by the usa to defeat the russian invasion
so these people would be thinking ok the usa is good they are helping us but have there own gains from it
then the usa turns on them and invades there countrys under the most insane reasons for somethink like maybe a few people did and organised
it is totally insane, with this logic i could get punched in the face in a pub go by some random guy who runs away and all i could remember is that he was white so i go around and kill every white person and take over there houses and steal there stuff thats the message the USA is sending to the world
we will invade you for no reason kill your children and take your oil money lives whatever we want
if i was not on the usa’s list on buddies i would be arming myself to the teeth with any kinda rock or stick or nuke
it has to stop some where its like who has the right to do the things the usa is doing there like romans or somthing
its disguasting
im no racist i have no problem with any person from the usa or any person who likes them, im fond of there culture but seruoisly some one needs to stand up to them and say NO we wont allow you to bully and attack other countrys its not on and we wont stand for it
[/quote]
This guy’s a laugh-riot! Haven’t read the rest of the thread – the entertainment value should be outstanding!!
Oh sweet, I beat everyone else to it.
Tube Steak Boogie.
Hil- F’n -arious!
What a piece of work.
[quote]The Mage wrote:
Bigotry also applies to hating people for being American.
For example trying to blame America for everything that goes wrong in the world. America is the most successful country, and we are supposed to be ashamed because of it. We are put down because of it, and blamed for every little thing that goes wrong in the world because of it.
Lets say we did arm people in the Mid-East, (and it should be mentioned it is always overstated as to what was actually done here,) yet who was the person who used said weapons? Why are they given a pass, and the terrible American the ones to blame?
Too tell the truth it does not matter what we do, we are going to be put down as being evil. If we take actions, we are doing evil acts, and hurting the innocent, if we do not take action, we are hateful self-absorbed jerks who do not care about the world. Lose lose situation.
I often hear people say we need to worry how the rest of the world thinks about us, and I keep thinking how shallow. Lets try to do what is right regardless of what others think. Do I think the actions in Iraq were good? Hell yeah. Saddam is out of power, and I can guarantee less people in the world will die as a result.
We have the biggest military, and as a result seem to be the worlds police whether we like it or not, and whether or not anyone else likes it or not. Yet the same people who complain about us would complain even more if we just suddenly pulled our military back to the US, and only defended ourselves, taking no action in the world.
Now for some logic on this issue, it is nice to call us the main aggressor, but what exactly does that mean? Were we an aggressor when we pushed Iraq out of Kuwait? As an aggressor, are we ever in the right with said aggression? If we are in the wrong, how exactly are we in the wrong?
Back to two of the issues you pointed out, the USA backing Iraq against Iran, and backing Afghanistan against the USSR. Look at history, and look at who was seen as the greater threat at the time. Not this Monday night quarterbacking. (Or morning if you prefer.)
It is so easy to complain about things after the fact, yet what would have happened if America did not take action? What if Afghanistan fell to the Russians? What if Iran won the war, and as a result took over Iraq and their oil fields? At the time it looked like Iran was our big enemy, not Iraq.
Sometimes it is hard to see why events occur, and why actions are taken. For example Regan?s military buildup. He was called the biggest fool in the world, and a nut job. I remember the time very well. History has opened up and shown part of why this happened. Intelligence showed that the USSR had a much lower military capability then what they were trying to portray, and they were on much weaker financial footing being that they were a socialist country of sorts. By building up, it forced them to attempt to compete, which bankrupted them, ended the cold war, and also resulted in the Berlin Wall coming down.
Are these not good things?
There is a worldwide chess game going on, and we either play or we do not. Whether we play or not, the other sides are playing. They do not care if we make any moves, they prefer we do not.
I would love it if the whole world could live in peace and harmony. If all wars could end, and we could all hold hands and sing koombayah. This is not reality. Expecting this makes as much sense as walking up to a mountain lion, and giving him a flower, and expecting him to give you a big hug. (He will hug you in a sort of way, but expect a few scratches and bites too.)
I understand being against war, and wanting peace. I want these things too. Just be careful of just blaming America because everyone else is. Look deeper and think for yourself.
[/quote]
Damn straight.
[quote]FlyingEmuOfDoom wrote:
The Mage wrote:
Bigotry also applies to hating people for being American.
For example trying to blame America for everything that goes wrong in the world. America is the most successful country, and we are supposed to be ashamed because of it. We are put down because of it, and blamed for every little thing that goes wrong in the world because of it.
Lets say we did arm people in the Mid-East, (and it should be mentioned it is always overstated as to what was actually done here,) yet who was the person who used said weapons? Why are they given a pass, and the terrible American the ones to blame?
Too tell the truth it does not matter what we do, we are going to be put down as being evil. If we take actions, we are doing evil acts, and hurting the innocent, if we do not take action, we are hateful self-absorbed jerks who do not care about the world. Lose lose situation.
I often hear people say we need to worry how the rest of the world thinks about us, and I keep thinking how shallow. Lets try to do what is right regardless of what others think. Do I think the actions in Iraq were good? Hell yeah. Saddam is out of power, and I can guarantee less people in the world will die as a result.
We have the biggest military, and as a result seem to be the worlds police whether we like it or not, and whether or not anyone else likes it or not. Yet the same people who complain about us would complain even more if we just suddenly pulled our military back to the US, and only defended ourselves, taking no action in the world.
[/quote]
I agree with some of what you said. The people who are predisposed to hating America will emphasize the “bad” things that we have done, while neglecting the good that we do. And there are always temporary allies when presented with a common greater enemy - bin Laden actually praised America at one point in the 80’s for helping the Afghan rebels.
You said that we should do what is right, regardless of what others think. Sometimes, to do what is right, we need to consider what is good for other countries. When you appoint someone like John Bolton, a man who has stated that America should only adhere to international treaties when it is in our best interest to do so, it sends a message to the rest of the world.
We are the richest nation in the world, and while we contribute a lot of international aid, it is actually a very small percentage of our GDP (much lower than many other industrial countries).
I really question whether the war in Iraq has resulted in a net gain of life - Saddam committed violence against his own people, but much of that was in the 80s and early 90s.
If we wanted to prevent a current genocide, then we could go into Darfur, or Rwanda, or someplace where people are being massacred. Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but the world is full of them, and what criteria does the US use when deciding it is time for “regime change”?
what i didnt grow up in nimbin lol thats funny. you know about it but alot of Australia isnt desert there is sooooo much land that isnt being used an insane amount of lush live able areas we just dont have the population to fill it. We only have 20 million and somthing like 80% of our totally population lives in big citys, you could make a town just for refugees no body would even notice
This is all we need - another fucking hippie from Nimbin that can’t spell, can’t use grammar, is a professional demonstrator, and basically regurgiates what his smelly-ass, art-major collegues babble about when they are high.
You are a fucking clown. Have you ever had a thought that wasn’t fed to you in your entire life? Your limited view on life and the world in general would be fucking funny if it wasn’t so tragic.
Drop one of your art subjects and take English 101. It covers fullstops and capital letters.
i totally agree with your post, i think its a joke that people cant see its about the flow of oil and where it is sold and dirceted if those countrys in africa you mentioned had oil dont you think the big brave US would be there stright away shit yes they would and it would be a beautiful effort to save lies in the eyes of the people, its some scary shit the media brain washing they pull on there people s.c.a.r.y stuff
its all pretty text book stuff as well do you read noam chomksy ??? his teachings about controll and propaganda in the US are pretty dam interesting
[quote]Judas wrote:
what i didnt grow up in nimbin lol thats funny. you know about it but alot of Australia isnt desert there is sooooo much land that isnt being used an insane amount of lush live able areas we just dont have the population to fill it. We only have 20 million and somthing like 80% of our totally population lives in big citys, you could make a town just for refugees no body would even notice [/quote]
And wouldn’t that be a fantastic place to live? Are you just going to through all new refugees in a brand new town in the middle of say, central NSW? Then what? How would that help anybody?
You sounds like an 18 year idealist who really hasn’t thought anything through. At least you used a couple of fullstops in this post. You’re getting better.
Noam Chomsky is a fool. He is intelligent but extremely misguided. He has sided (ideologically) with most of the authoritarian regimes that the US has opposed in the past.
By the way, I’ve been reading a lot about Australian race riots, so apparently it’s not just the US that is having problems with the 3rd world.
Maybe you guys should stop importing tons of unemployed Lebanese men who rape your women, blockade roads, and beat up locals. Or do you not know how to read the newspaper?
Hey dermo,
Not sure why you were quoting flamingEmuOfDoom (great fucking name by the way,) when it was a quote of me. Just thought it was weird.
Anyway,
[quote]dermo wrote:
I agree with some of what you said. The people who are predisposed to hating America will emphasize the “bad” things that we have done, while neglecting the good that we do. And there are always temporary allies when presented with a common greater enemy - bin Laden actually praised America at one point in the 80’s for helping the Afghan rebels. [/quote]
Wait, what, huh, when? Seriously when did this happen? I will require a quote from a reputable source to prove this to me.
The reason for my skepticism is because there is a big misconception about Bin Laden and the Afghan war with the USSR. People keep making the mistake that since we financed a big force against the USSR, that we financed Bin Laden, when in fact he was with a separate group that was not only fighting against the old Soviet Union, but was very upset at America getting involved, and the idea of these “infidels” from America corrupting their soil. His group refused any support from America.
Also there was a reporter who was interviewing this group of people, during the war, and before passing Bin Laden’s tent was told not to talk because if Bin Laden heard anyone speaking English, or with an American accent, he would come out and kill that person on the spot.
I think he was chosen to be an aggressive voice for America in the face of a highly corrupted UN.
Anyway, when did he say this? I know he has talked about, and actually defined what a treaty truly is, but when searching, I could not find the quote you made about Bolton.
Also do you understand what a treaty actually is? If I remember right there was either one country that was actually succeeded at the Kyoto treaty goals. (And I could be wrong about one country succeeding.) What exactly is supposed to happen to all those other countries?
Ah, the GDP comparison. I am already familiar with this, and it only compares government giving, and completely disregards personal donations. Yes our government gives less then other governments, when compared to the GDP, but when you take personal donations into account, our position changes.
[quote]I really question whether the war in Iraq has resulted in a net gain of life - Saddam committed violence against his own people, but much of that was in the 80s and early 90s.
If we wanted to prevent a current genocide, then we could go into Darfur, or Rwanda, or someplace where people are being massacred. Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but the world is full of them, and what criteria does the US use when deciding it is time for “regime change”?
[/quote]
This is not a simple answer. If a person commits terrible acts in their own country, yet never in another country, it is different then a person willing to freely attack other countries, as Saddam was willing to do. Then there is the military capability, and Saddam was well armed. After the last war we found a stockpile of weapons equivalent to a quarter of what America has. That is significant, especially with the small size of the country.
And do not forget he not only had 550 tons of uranium, but there was enough processed to the point that he could have build one nuclear bomb. (We received condemnation for “stealing” it after the war so it wouldn’t get into terrorist hands.)
Then there is the potential effect on the world, and on America. If politics can be taken out of the equation, you had a president who actually believed that Iraq did in fact have WMD’s. You also had a leader who was supporting terrorists, (yes this is a fact,) including one who just escaped, unfortunately. This guy blew out the side of one of our ships, and I believe he was also tied to some American embassy bombings too.
Now I answered your question, but you need to realize this is like the 13 year old daughter asking why she has an earlier curfew then the 17 year old son. Really it is like comparing apples and Bob. (From accounting.) Or it is like asking why you don’t kiss your mother the same way you kiss your girlfriend. (May not make sense in Arkansas.)
[quote]CloseGrip wrote:
Maybe you guys should stop importing tons of unemployed Lebanese men who rape your women, blockade roads, and beat up locals. Or do you not know how to read the newspaper?[/quote]
Do your research. Most of the people involved are 2nd generation Australian-Lebanese who feel ostracised due to religion/culture etc, not ‘imports.’ Many Western countries have a similar problem with an certain group that do not assimilate and form gangs.
Also, everyone should know that most Australians are not like the original poster. We can use punctuation, and we kill our kangaroos with rocks, not sticks.
Dear Lord, Judas, you want to compose your writing a little, you’re embaressing us.
USA into Iraq for oil longterm, but honestly, I think it was for the war contracts short term. $60 billion to start, cash in hand of Halliburton. Screw the oil. WAR CONTRACTS. Just approved heaps more today.
I don’t actually have that much against the USA or any country going into any other country, conquering it and taking the resources. That’s nature. It might not be noble, but at least it is honest. What bugs me is making up some half assed story about “weapons of mass destruction” and trying to sneak in. FFS, just say “we are going into the country, we are taking out the leadership, we are restructuring everything, we are letting it be a democracy, we are ramping up oil production and we plan to get out again. If you don’t like it, tough. And by the way you can all stay muslim, just don’t blow each other up all the time.”
Don’t make up some stupid half assed story.
I wish USA would do something similar in many countries that are wrecked by constant, horrific wars with tens of thousands of casualties. Saddam killed 10,000 - so what - that was ages ago - there are tends of thousands getting killed RIGHT NOW AS YOU READ THIS POST. If you want to act all noble, go where the real action is. Don’t use it as some excuse.
Also, for all the criticism of the US, really, they could have gone into Iraq far more aggressively, killed / enslaved everyone and taken all the oil. But they didn’t. This is 2006, not 1006, not 1706, mankind has evolved more compassion, consideration. For all the ass-stupid mistakes USA has made, and all the corrupt sneaky deals in foreign lands, they are nowhere near as bad as countries were behaving even 50 years ago.
Besides that, probably half the Americans don’t agree with the (insert debatable forgien policy here) so you can’t be mad at all of them.
And the ones that do agree with, say, attacking Iraq - I doubt that their intention was go in and cause a big mess, kill civilians and steal the oil.
I would say 98% of USA would absolutely love complete peace to happen across the entire middle east overnight.
I think there may be 2% who just want to either wipe out everyone and / or profit from it somehow.
Unfortunately I suspect some of that 2% might be in office and had some say in things. But even so, I think the motivations were greed for money, and fear of attack, not hate of a foreign people.
In Australia, we recently had riots where people were attacking anyone foreign on the beach. What the news doesn’t stress enough is that there were 150 REGISTERED NEO-NAZIS there who were deliberately stirring up trouble. 150 is a lot of people. The 30-50 people you see bashing someone on the news, 25 of them might be neo-nazis and 5-15 caught up in it all. Many people were very drunk, and told a bunch of lies e.g “there are 50 lebanese coming in on a train to rumble”. The carefully manipulated behaviour that day is not an indication of this country. Just in case any of you foreigners didn’t get that. Because the media loves to portray things one way, when in fact it is another.
[quote]CloseGrip wrote:
Noam Chomsky is a fool. He is intelligent but extremely misguided. He has sided (ideologically) with most of the authoritarian regimes that the US has opposed in the past.
…[/quote]
Chomsky is no fool. He has made millions selling his half truths and outright lies to fools.