Japan vs Iraq

RolandTD20Kdrummer

sponger wrote:

I'm not advocating war. I'm saying that your anti-war stance is not justified by your pro-indigenous people point of view. I guess you see that now. But in case you don't, here it is again:

If you justify anti-war sentiment by saying that the Iraqi/Afghani people are worse off as a result of the war, then you imply that the war would be justified if the Afghani/Iraq people were better off as a result of the war.

In which case, that is not anti-war sentiment. It is actually anti-poorly planned war sentiment. So, when making your case against war, it is pointless to bring up the suffering of the Iraqi/Afghani people.

If you truly justify across the board anti-war sentiment by citing civilian deaths, then you believe that Hitler should have been left in charge of Europe. If that is your opinion, then that's an entirely different argument altogether.

That's all I'm saying.

I see a definite difference in what Hitler did to what the Taliban is doing, namely the planned genocide of a an entire race. The Taliban is essentially old world tradition and does not want to be included in the Americanization of the world, so they exact punishment(s) according to their book of laws to maintain the purity of their society as they see fit.

If the whole new PNAC strategy has turned pre-emptive then were kinda locked into ongoing war for the next 50 years at the very least. Along this course there will be another US draft. Nukes will be acquired and fly towards the west. This is almost a 100% certainty. No man just lies down when a stranger kills his family and starts living in his house. No man...ever.

Bush thinks it will happen somehow eventually. If you monopolize control of a countries assets and commerce this is possible. But several millions of lives probably be lost long before that happens (in this case).

Could you imagine timed nukes going off in a few major downtown US cities? That would be nuts. Can you imagine? Maybe 8-10 million Americans dead?

Then what? we nuke the entire middle east? I don't think so. It's a pretty serious game being played right now. Hold long does the US gov't think they can prevent this scenario by strong arming the enemy?

The wounds are only getting deeper. The phrase in over your head comes to mind. Suddenly some women wearing veils seems laughable in comparison. I'd bet more men beat their wives in America in sheer numbers alone than in all of Afghanistan.

What the heck are we really fighting for again?

Byrnzie

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

What the heck are we really fighting for again?

But...I thought Iraq posed a serious and immediate threat to the survival of the Western world?
That's what Tony Blair told us. Wait! Where's he going? Oy! Come back ya lying fuck! :mad: :eek:

catefrances

Byrnzie wrote:

But...I thought Iraq posed a serious and immediate threat to the survival of the Western world?

plus, they tried to kill his daddy.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Well...after reading the entire Wiki entry top to bottom for Afghanistan, I may have to concede and say military pressure and complete restructuring may be the only way to go here (Afghanistan). There's piss poor alternative aside from leaving them all alone and hope they don't lash back with something really big in a few years. Maybe I'm chomping at the propaganda bit, but I can see why Canada actually got involved with this one.

Basically the US Gov't is trying to clean up it's huge fuck up from the Carter era, where the US essentially up and left the entire country in a undetermined state by training mujahideen forces to boot out the Russians then walked away leaving a huge control vaccum which gave rise to it coming 95% under Taliban warlord control. Doesn't that suck.

It's basically oops we kinda f-ed the place up pretty bad, and paved the way for the Taliban and Al-Queda. Uhm...doh...

Ufortunately the Taliban is like well fuck you man...thanks for the training and guns and all but were here to stay now...so thanks for everything just the same but f off this time and we mean it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

sponger

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I see a definite difference in what Hitler did to what the Taliban is doing, namely the planned genocide of a an entire race. The Taliban is essentially old world tradition and does not want to be included in the Americanization of the world, so they exact punishment(s) according to their book of laws to maintain the purity of their society as they see fit.

If the whole new PNAC strategy has turned pre-emptive then were kinda locked into ongoing war for the next 50 years at the very least. Along this course there will be another US draft. Nukes will be acquired and fly towards the west. This is almost a 100% certainty. No man just lies down when a stranger kills his family and starts living in his house. No man...ever.

Bush thinks it will happen somehow eventually. If you monopolize control of a countries assets and commerce this is possible. But several millions of lives probably be lost long before that happens (in this case).

Could you imagine timed nukes going off in a few major downtown US cities? That would be nuts. Can you imagine? Maybe 8-10 million Americans dead?

Then what? we nuke the entire middle east? I don't think so. It's a pretty serious game being played right now. Hold long does the US gov't think they can prevent this scenario by strong arming the enemy?

The wounds are only getting deeper. The phrase in over your head comes to mind. Suddenly some women wearing veils seems laughable in comparison. I'd bet more men beat their wives in America in sheer numbers alone than in all of Afghanistan.

What the heck are we really fighting for again?

lmao. I didn't say there was a threat to the US in aghanistan. The nazis weren't a threat to the US at the time the US decided to join WWII.

sponger

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Well...after reading the entire Wiki entry top to bottom for Afghanistan, I may have to concede and say military pressure and complete restructuring may be the only way to go here (Afghanistan). There's piss poor alternative aside from leaving them all alone and hope they don't lash back with something really big in a few years. Maybe I'm chomping at the propaganda bit, but I can see why Canada actually got involved with this one.

Basically the US Gov't is trying to clean up it's huge fuck up from the Carter era, where the US essentially up and left the entire country in a undetermined state by training mujahideen forces to boot out the Russians then walked away leaving a huge control vaccum which gave rise to it coming 95% under Taliban warlord control. Doesn't that suck.

It's basically oops we kinda f-ed the place up pretty bad, and paved the way for the Taliban and Al-Queda. Uhm...doh...

Ufortunately the Taliban is like well fuck you man...thanks for the training and guns and all but were here to stay now...so thanks for everything just the same but f off this time and we mean it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

How is that any different from Iraq? Wouldn't pulling the troops out leave a huge power vacuum?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

sponger wrote:

lmao. that's exactly the kind of response I was expecting. No, really, I was expecting that from you because I know that you don't have your own opinion. What you have is a collage of anti-war & anti-gov opinions that, in your mind, make you righteous on every side of the issue. You just want to be right, and the above response proves that, deep down, you don't really know how to feel the issues at hand. Of course you don't believe me, but...

Your first reaction to the issue at hand is that you just think the US is being a bully...

but then you wanted to use the "worsened" state of the afghani people as further justification.....meaning that your concern was for the people rather than the US going beyond its boundaries.

You added that "there are less severe ways of promoting change afghanistan". This implies that you believe there is a cause that needs attention in afghanistan, but that you just don't believe war is ever the answer.

Now, with the post above, you go on about how the whole war isn't really necessary because there is no threat to the US. So, in essence, you're playing the "we were duped" angle.

And such an angle implies that you believe the war would be justified if there was really a good cause. Yet, you spent the whole time acting as though war is not the solution.

You're confused.

Interesting It's great that it all makes sense for you and you have everything all figured out.

Maybe you would like share out this sacred information on foreign agenda that seems to elude, and hopelessly confuse, as you put it billions of other people around the world as well?

sponger

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Interesting It's great that it all makes sense for you and you have everything all figured out.

Maybe you would share out this sacred information on foreign agenda that seems to elude, and hopelessly confuse, as you put it billions of people around the world as well?

It's as simple as believing in what you're saying. No secret to it. I deleted all that stuff anyway so you wouldn't get discouraged from continuing on in this discussion.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

sponger wrote:

It's as simple as believing in what you're saying. No secret to it. I deleted all that stuff anyway so you wouldn't get discouraged from continuing on in this discussion.

So the right thing to do is........

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

lmao. I didn't say there was a threat to the US in aghanistan. The nazis weren't a threat to the US at the time the US decided to join WWII.

FDR didn't send any troops over there until after the Nazi's declared war on the US.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

sponger wrote:

How is that any different from Iraq? Wouldn't pulling the troops out leave a huge power vacuum?

That was known going in. Yes it would ...catch 22. Clusterfuck again...

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

FDR didn't send any troops over there until after the Nazi's declared war on the US.

So what you're saying is that if the Taliban declared war on the US, the invasion would've been justified?

sponger

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

That was known going in. Yes it would ...catch 22. Clusterfuck again...

OK, so you support troops staying in afghanistan and Iraq. I didn't know this.

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

So what you're saying is that if the Taliban declared war on the US, the invasion would've been justified?

That would of course be crazy... but I do believe in self defense.

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

That would of course be crazy... but I do believe in self defense.

that's what i mean about your not really having an opinion. you think it's crazy, but then again not crazy. which is it?

If the taliban had declared war on the US, you think that would've justified the invasion. yes or no

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

that's what i mean about your not really having an opinion. you think it's crazy, but then again not crazy. which is it?

If the taliban had declared war on the US, you think that would've justified the invasion. yes or no

I meant it would have been crazy for the Taliban to declare war on the US. I thought that was obvious, my bad.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

I guess we all need to think really hard and draw our lines on what justifies humanitarian relief via a full scale military intervention and occupation these days.

Also, exit strategy is not a new concept in military and political circles afaik.

The US gov't trying to fix Afghanistan is a lot like painting over peeling paint. The paint job they did last time.

Why the military tangent suddenly zoomed off to Iraq in lieu of is interesting to say the least.

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I meant it would have been crazy for the Taliban to declare war on the US. I thought that was obvious, my bad.

bin laden and his al qaeda captains declared war on the US, and they were fully supported by the taliban. You don't consider that the same thing as the taliban declaring war on the US? And, heh, I thought I was talking to Roland when I typed that.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

sponger wrote:

OK, so you support troops staying in afghanistan and Iraq. I didn't know this.

There's precious little else we can do at this point aside from creating Taliban part 2 bigger badder stronger more hateful. History repeating itself.

Lesson learned? I sure hope so....but I'm not optimistic in seeing it that way at all.

It's a lot like being in quicksand. Sit still ...sink....move...sink faster...

sponger

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

There's precious little else we can do at this point aside from creating Taliban part 2 bigger badder stronger more hateful. History repeating itself.

Lesson learned? I sure hope so....but I'm not optimistic in seeing it that way at all.

It's a lot like being in quicksand. Sit still sink....move...sink faster...

so why do so many americans and europeand disagree with you on that stance i wonder.