American Thinks.....

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Forum' started by Shwompy, Jan 3, 2005.

  1. kp59583

    kp59583 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Which communist country is good? CHINA! Tienanan square,FALUN GONG, One party System. You protest you go to jail. Yep China the perfect communist country.
     
  2. OldBuzzard

    OldBuzzard DH's oldest Geek

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,777
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    88
    For all of you people that like to whine about the US having WMDs, when at the same time we worry about certain other countries having them, I'd like to remind you that just HAVING them is not the issue.


    The issue is whether or not the countries that posses WMDs have the restraint necessary to not use them. In Iraq's case it was already know that Saddam had used them (against Iran, and even his own people, the Kurds). For us to have allowed him to stay in power and allow him to aquire more, and more dangerous WMDs (nukes come to mind), would have the worst mistake in international relations since the Europeans decided that 'appeasing' Adolph Hitler was a good thing to do.

    How many of you think that allowing Saddam to gain nuke capability, and then using one on Israel (which was a very good possibility) would have been a good thing? If that would have happened, you can be sure that Israel woule have retaliated with their own nukes, and that the rest of the Arab states would have beecome involved, which would have gotten them nuked also. At that point, the entire iddle eastern oil supply to the rest of the world woud have been destroyed. Now, for the Eiropeans, as some Asian nations, that would have been a catastrphy for their ecomomy. For the USA, however, it would have only been an 'inconvience' for awhile. Most people have either forgotten, of don't know, that we have very large oil resourses here that are 'capped off', because it's still cheaper to buy a higher grade of crude oil from abroad than it is to use what we have available here. Should the middleastern oil dissapear overnight, all we would really have to do is un-cap the wells in Texas and Oklahoma, make some adjustments at the refineries, and we would be back in business. A diversion of the Oil from Alaska, that we now sell overseas, back to domestic use would most likely take place, and within a year at most we would be 'business as usual' whilst the rest of you 'better than the USA' types would be crying in your beer, and most likely blaming US for allowing Saddam to do what he did.
     
  3. Pompey

    Pompey New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First of all on the issue of WMD's:

    I don’t like the idea of countries like N Korea having access to a nuclear arsenal either. My issue is no so much with America having WMD's, It’s the fact that America constantly tries to stop other nations from developing them. Like it has a right to them but nobody else does. Unless of course your a country that bows down to Washington.

    Some people can’t work for a reason (disabilities, young children/solo-parents etc). However if there are plenty of jobs and they simply don’t want to work I actually support cutting the plain unemployment benefits. I wasn’t just referring to social security. I was referring to the wider issues such as health and education. Low taxes good for promoting investment, for a short period of time when a country is doing well.
    Dispite the fact that makes no sense I think I know what you mean.

    You’ve just highlighted another key difference between America and many other Western democracy’s. America still wants to be a "supper power". True democratic governments are concerned with the welfare of the people. We invest our money in schools & Hospitals. America invests in landmines and fighter Jets.
    On the Issue of China, I consider it a fascist country. It’s opened up a lot and it’s increasingly economically liberal. Not a communist ideal.

    So, are we seeing some American maths here? 1+1=3?
    The "balls" remark had nothing to do with terrorist organisations. What I was trying to say is that other western governments are quiet happy to let other countries to get away with crimes against humanity, as long as it doesn’t affect them, or their citizens. I agree saddam needed to go. 'Trigger happy' America (yes, that’s how a lot of the world views you) should have NOT country to lead. The reason most Arabs think America invaded Iraq was Oil, and an attack on Islam. Lets not forget who propped up Saddam, along with many other brutal regimes.
    Oh, and if China continues it path, we small countries well have another war to look forward to. But this time, it could be quiet entertaining. A war between the expanding Chinese 'empire of influence' and Americas 'empire of influence'.

    Yeah and we are not a terrorist state.. Don't compare us with scum like Al Qaeda. Or Murderers like Saddam. The difference is responsibility. So North Korea or Iran should have Nukes? Is that what you are saying? Maybe Al Qaeda deserves them too?
    Open your eyes.
    America...not a terrorist state:D
    America is almost as bad as modern Russia.
    True, america is not AS bad as the USSR or Nazi Germany but it is by no means the liberal democratic capital it claims to be. America is one of the least democratic countries that identify themself as 'democratic'. Where did I compare America with Al-Qaeda? You made that connection all by yourself although you are by no means the first. I don’t like Nuclear weapons, no matter who has them. You forget, America and Saddam are both on a VERY exclusive list, ill leave you to find the connection all by yourself:)

    The good you are trying to do them? They don’t see the 'good' you are trying to do them. They see their run-down concrete houses blown up by the latest weapon systems. They see the murder of civilians and the torture of suspects. It also has to be said that it wasn’t Saddams rule that was hurting the people the most, It was the sanctions.

    I thought officially Israel didn’t have nukes. We all know they do so I wont debate that.
    Saddam wasn’t trying to develop WMD's.

    Its called globalisation. The world economy’s are all linked, particularly the western ones. If Europe and Asia's economys collapse so will America’s.

    Just another Question, Last I heard it would take 83 nuclear warheads to destroy the earth. Why did America and Russia build thousands??!!??

     
  4. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    It must be nice to have a country you can all collectively hate.

    99.9% of American's don't hate any other country. Not even those French bastards. :lol:
    (as the Iraqi people vote, provided by the blood of America's children)
     
  5. Sandok

    Sandok New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wait here... DID we find any damn WMD... Your takin bush's speach. If if if... But that if never happenend and you guys turned up empty handed. Yes he used em and what... He put magic dust and the dissapeared? Please... Anybody who trys to defend this point of view is just crazy. You guys went ON THE MOTIF that this guy had WMDs and you searched FOR MONTHS and found NOTHING except aluminium tubes and stuff.................................................. A few mortars, a few guns but nothing UBER DANGEROUS..................................... No chemicals or anything................................................




    I rest my case. <----------- DOT
     
  6. OldBuzzard

    OldBuzzard DH's oldest Geek

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,777
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    88
  7. Pompey

    Pompey New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That was more than a decade ago. America’s 'reason' for invading Iraq was that Saddam currently had them and/or he was developing them. Iraq got rid of her Chemical weapons years ago. The UN said that Saddam didn't have any. When the UN inspectors failed to find them, America sent their own inspectors in. They didn’t find any either. IRAQ DOES NOT HAVE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

    If America did invade Iraq to "liberate" the country, why did they go after Iraq first? There are far worse regimes around the world. Why couldn’t they have done a good thing and liberated N Korea.

    You seem to be an almost perfect example of the saying:
    There is no one so blind as he who will not see.
    Iraq had no WMD's. Not since the early 90's.
     
  8. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    What's to keep him from doing it again? He kicked inspectors out. I guess if he wanted to maintain his "power" he should have complied and let the inspectors in. He didn't, so we took him out. If he didn't have anything to hide, then why was he kicking inspectors out? Probably because he had something to hide.
     
  9. kp59583

    kp59583 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  10. Pompey

    Pompey New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I never disputed the fact that Saddam had previously used chemical weapons. I’m not defending his use of them. If you know anything about the Iran-Iraq war, America SUPPORTED Saddam. When his actions (the use of chemical weapons and murder of civilians) were condemned by other western governments America stood by his side, providing him with many of the Chemical weapons/ agents he used and the 'tools' he used to deliver them. The US BLOCKED UN Security Council Resolutions against Saddam. Iraq has never used chemical weapons without the knowledge that it would be supported by the US, and ignored by the UK.

    I could say the same about Americas good friend Israel.

    The claim that Iraq sold/ disposed of its weapons before the war is pathetic. You didnt find anything, you were wrong, now your trying to cover your donkey.
    Amnesty International, among other such organisations condemned the War in Iraq.
    I wont even bother ranting on about Vietnam. And I wont talk about other Dictators America has supported.
     
  11. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Saddam might have thought he had more than he had too. His own people were lying to him.
     
  12. Pompey

    Pompey New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He probably did. It happens in most dictatorships, his advisers don't want to tell him anything that might annoy him. For fear of being shot.

    Bush recent 'warned' Iran and Syria. America is already a MASSIVE target for terrorists, how does he thing the Muslim world will react to a fundamentalist Muslim State under attack?. N Korea wasn’t on the list and we KNOW they have WMD's.
     
  13. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73

    Yeah but they aren't a threat as much, yet. They are more China's problem. They know better not to nuke their neighbors- they know they would be instantly vaporized.

    Saddam was a loose cannon, who knows what he would do if he actually got Nukes or chemicals or whatever.

    I think it is better off not to wait and find out. Yeah it was a HUGE political and diplomatic risk to go in there. But just think if in 5 years he got a nuke. You know it would be to late to go in there then because he was crazy enough to use it at the slightest provocation. The guy was a nutcase.

    Maybe the US will have a black eye for a while, I guess that is the sacrifice we accept for potentially preventing Armageddon

    (or at least putting it off for a few more decades) :sigh:
     
  14. Pompey

    Pompey New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How was Iraq a threat to America.
    Your reason for America not invading N Korea’s is that its Chinas problem, because China is its neighbour. Unless you count Afghanistan America is no where near Iraq. So by that reasoning, America should never have gone to Iraq.
    So, your reason for invasion is that sometime down the line, however many years he had left in his reign, he might possibly, have capability to make these weapons and also have the required systems to fire them half-way around the world and hit the USA? Ah, thats not how an independent judicial system in a democracy (which America claims to have) works. If he had plans to build them and fire them at America, or had them and was planning to use them, the war would be justified. But he didn’t. If he had fired them at America, i would expect a war at the least. If he had attempted to fire one in the future, Wouldn’t that shield your guys are building protect you?

    Exactly "potentially".
    This is another tactic often employed by Bush, trying to create an atmosphere of fear. The likelihood that Saddam would have EVER had the capability of unleashing "Armageddon" on the world was at the best remote, if not non-existent.
    His army (if you could call it an army) collapsed when Iraq was invaded, what threat could he have posed?
     
  15. Pluvious

    Pluvious Elisha = hottie

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,318
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    0
    -=-=-
    I apologize for coming to the discussion late, but I wanted to say that OldBuzzards comments really hit home with me. I couldn't have wrote it as well, but that's exactly my view as well. And yes, our oil resources are pretty well forgotten by most and its a nice ace in the hole. Great thread.. I've never seen an actual discussion like this one not deteriorate into a flame war or name calling. Quite refreshing. Great to see the 'rest' of the worlds opinion of us. Carry on. :)
     
  16. violat3

    violat3 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    348
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    eh couldnae care less for a country that has supported more terrorist organisations and Dictators than any other nation on this planet eh gie you teh USA , now remind us min how many thousands die in Veitnam every year in regards to teh chemical weapons you used when you realised teh Veitcong were kicking your white @sses out of their country :confused:



    meh ... well i'll stick to being a good ole Jock from a country , rich in culture and strong in spirit :cool:


    Alba Gu Brath
     
  17. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    So you live in the US?
     
  18. violat3

    violat3 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    348
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    America has nae Culture or Spirit min , eh was actually referin tae caledonia or Scotland tae the nae sae weil educated oan here ;)
     
  19. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Whatever :rolleyes:


    Anyway I take it they don't teach English there.
     
  20. OldBuzzard

    OldBuzzard DH's oldest Geek

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,777
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Shucks, BMX, it's not that violet can't use English properly. I've seen a number of his posts the are perfectly readable. It's just that when he is out of arguments or in an indefensable position that he retreats into that gibberish, in hopes that if no one can understant it that they might think that he actually had a point.
     

Share This Page

visited