Home› A Moving Train

It takes a whole war?

Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
edited October 2006 in A Moving Train
I'm not condoning this what so ever because it would mean even MORE secrets that the public would be unaware about but....why does it take a whole war to take out the people the U.S leaders want gone? They can't send in a high trained black ops team and just assassinate the guy? I know it's not a movie but you can't say they can't be capable of this.


Wouldn't it be easier? Heh? I dunno. Point and counterpoint biotches!
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:
    I'm not condoning this what so ever because it would mean even MORE secrets that the public would be unaware about but....why does it take a whole war to take out the people the U.S leaders want gone? They can't send in a high trained black ops team and just assassinate the guy? I know it's not a movie but you can't say they can't be capable of this.


    Wouldn't it be easier? Heh? I dunno. Point and counterpoint biotches!

    Well, Iraq is a good example.. I don't think that would work because just like the other explanations for the war - removing Saddam wasn't the true reason either.
  • crittablescrittables Posts: 342
    well i really don't know, but i think it's not that simple. you can take out saddam, but the people below him would still be in power. their former gov't still in place. you have to overtake their government and military as a whole to bring about the change you want in their country.
  • AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    crittables wrote:
    well i really don't know, but i think it's not that simple. you can take out saddam, but the people below him would still be in power. their former gov't still in place. you have to overtake their government and military as a whole to bring about the change you want in their country.

    and everyone that voted for them
  • Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    crittables wrote:
    well i really don't know, but i think it's not that simple. you can take out saddam, but the people below him would still be in power. their former gov't still in place. you have to overtake their government and military as a whole to bring about the change you want in their country.


    Good point. I thought about that for a second but still decided to post it. Figured what the hell...I'm tired of hearing about who won WW2.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    I argue it's better to manipulate the people in charge, then expect someone better to rise to power. It's mainly cultural differences that produce different leaders.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I argue it's better to manipulate the people in charge, then expect someone better to rise to power. It's mainly cultural differences that produce different leaders.


    Yea! That way you don't even need to worry about the others waiting in line...just gotta make em think like you do...I guess that doesn't work for people who actually have something that we need (oil) but I guess that would be the way to go
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:
    Yea! That way you don't even need to worry about the others waiting in line...just gotta make em think like you do...I guess that doesn't work for people who actually have something that we need (oil) but I guess that would be the way to go

    I'm just not sure that killing Pyongyang will make N. Korea any better. There will be a new one, perhaps it's best to not give him the attention he wants.

    I don't know.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I'm just not sure that killing Pyongyang will make N. Korea any better. There will be a new one, perhaps it's best to not give him the attention he wants.

    I don't know.


    Do you think killing Kim would make him a martyr? Or that his people would celebrate?
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:
    Do you think killing Kim would make him a martyr? Or that his people would celebrate?

    I don't think it would change much really. His people celebrate now that he has nuclear weaponry.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I don't think it would change much really. His people celebrate now that he has nuclear weaponry.


    That's what years of brainwashing will get ya.

    Anyone that celebrates nuclear weaponry has to be brainwashed.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:
    That's what years of brainwashing will get ya.

    Anyone that celebrates nuclear weaponry has to be brainwashed.

    Yup, it's like that everywhere. We are brainwashed into a western culture as well.

    Some people argue that we are born with inherent qualities. I ask those people to study Farel Children and try to make sense of that.

    Children raised by dogs, act just like dogs and can't tell that they are actually not dogs.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • yosi1yosi1 Posts: 3,272
    Abuskedti wrote:
    and everyone that voted for them

    Saddam Hussein wasn't voted for.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane.
  • Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    yosi wrote:
    Saddam Hussein was voted for.


    There's been other cases where the U.S. has taken action against leaders they didnt like that were voted democratically into office.


    (Was Saddam Hussein voted for year after year or was he voted and then just stayed in office)
  • AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    yosi wrote:
    Saddam Hussein wasn't voted for.

    true.. supported in other ways.
  • Vedderlution_BabyVedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    Oh sorry. I saw "wasn't" as "was". sorry about that yosi!
Sign In or Register to comment.