noxnoctum Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Good point Affentitten. Oh and about the proxy empire... I guess you're unaware that we've funded various coups and have had brutal right wing dictators installed across the globe through that wonderful organization known as the CIA? Read some history dude. Not to mention the innumerable military bases we have all over the planet. Like I said. Proxy. I guess this quote from Lyndon B. Johnson best sums it up: Fuck your parliament and your constitution. America is an elephant. Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If these two fleas continue itching the elephant, they may just get whacked good ...We pay a lot of good American dollars to the Greeks, Mr. Ambassador. If your Prime Minister gives me talk about democracy, parliament and constitution, he, his parliament and his constitution may not last long... Shortly thereafter the democratic government was overthrown by hard right wing military leaders and before ya know it Greece had themselves a lovely little military junta in charge. All with the support of the CIA of course. They probably couldn't have pulled it off without our support. Look this stuff up if you don't believe me. It gets nastier the closer you look. This BS about us being all about "freedom" now is a joke. I'm sure the Egyptians are laughing their collective arses off when Obama and Hillary talk about "approving" of their revolution while they're picking up tear gas canisters with "Made in the USA" written on them. When I heard the words "Operation Iraqi Freedom" I didn't know whether to laugh or gag. Just a few decades earlier we were giving billions to Saddam to fight Iran. And earlier of course as everyone knows, we were training and funding Bin Laden and co. to fight the Ruskies. Funny how that kind of stuff tends to bite you in the ass? Blowback I believe it's called. Oh and need I mention how much money we gave Mubarak just to keep the area stable? We didn't give a **** about the Egyptian people's "freedom". The single best move for our country right now would be to pull all our military forces out of Saudi Arabia immediately. This is the #1 reason there is so much hate towards America... it's their holy land and infidels are trampling on it. It's not understandable to the western mind... but that's really what's pissing them off; I know first hand having lived in a Muslim country. Along with of course our ridiculous financial support of Israel despite that country's constant refusal to show any leeway whatsoever with the Palestinians. I'd rather see that money go towards somewhere like Haiti then towards building more Merkavas. But hey, that's just me, and I'm a naive, peace loving, wanna-be-hippie. Anyways, I'm done ranting. You can have the last word as O'Reilly would put it . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Actually yet another time your side,noxnoctum, has misinterpreted mine. I am actually in favor of legalizing whatever.. I think it is nothing to do with the government what any person does to themself. If it is truly bad, that person is the one who will suffer. Same with a million of these ideas..could I care less who gays marry? absolutely! Do I believe in abortion? no..do I think government should stick its face in there?not at all.. NPR is also well biased, as are pretty much everyone. The trick is to read both sides, and see what they have in common(the truth) and then see what they gain(which usually will show their lies) and judge in the middle for yourself. And sorry, but if you only listen to one side that agrees with you, you are being spoon fed. And having been to most of the military bases, they hardly qualify as an empire, and the dictators, hardly qualify as "right wing"..at least in all cases, basically have helped put people in power who would look good for US interests(imagine the irony! trying to look out for the interests of the people you are supposed to look out for) That said , I have been partially responsible for letting this thread deteriorate, and I am sorry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 The thread has not been at all acrimonious, well certainly not if you are familiar with all the posters normal style. : ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Will somebody lock this thread? It has become really unsefferable to follow. I mean, WHAT THE FLYING TOSS, people? Even if it's still insult-free, what I see is people swatting the same thing back and forth, only the posts get longer and more articulate in a futile attempt at making one understand the other's point of view. And full of links, I forgot. That's one of the bad things about the internet, I'know? When you meet a person in meatspace, you greet, you small talk, you get through the small things, and after a while that you know that person, you start talking about certain topics: since you have come to appreciate that person, you still get along even if certain views are totally opposite. Here's how it works on the internet: you can sort through certain things. For example, the interest in combat mission unites people of this forum. People here tend to know more about history, interesting trivia and related topics more than average Joe on the street. Here ends the common ground. Then you see a thread, talking about sensitive issues, and you see a post you disagree with. You don't know the person, you don't see the body language, and if a blatant smiley face doesn't accompany the post, you can't be sure about its tone. And you reply. And you say easily misunderstandable things. And a cycle of aggravation begins. Plus, I'm sorry to say it, abneo, but I have to agree with noxnocturnum that the "spoonfed" sounded really bad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 UNITED NATIONS — The United States vetoed a U.N. resolution Friday that would have condemned "illegal" Israeli settlements and demanded an immediate halt to all settlement building, a move certain to anger Arab countries and Palestinian supporters around the world. The 14 other Security Council members voted in favor of the resolution, reflecting the wide support for the Palestinian-backed draft which had over 100 co-sponsors. U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said the United States agrees with the rest of the council and the wider world "about the folly and illegitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity." But she said the U.S. believes "it is unwise" for the U.N.'s most powerful body to attempt to resolve key issues between the Israelis and Palestinians. And yet the US thinks it can support regime changes in a its existing Allies ..... its a tricky one. I have long felt that the US would be better off if the annual billions in aid was spent buying Palestinians homes in Arizona or Australia and giving them a million bucks. At three billion dollars a year I reckon they could have bought most of Jerusalem now , now whether it is given to the Israeli nation or made an international university situated in Jerusalem it would still be a better method than the winkling out process that is being carried out by the Israeli authorities. I think this is a poison that may well mean the US becomes less important in the Middle East where China, and possibly Russia will pick up the slack. The ruling families will depart to Europe to live off their invested wealth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Thanks for returning to topic, diesel! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I agree with that Diesel, such a common sense approach would not be chosen by politicins though..and the funny thing is, the math is all there..so many billions spent trying to solve a problem. I would argue it is not our problem to solve, but if we insist on it, your idea would be cheaper, and work better. The only problem is there are a lot of countries/people in the Islamic world who need this problem to continue, in order to keep their people angry at someone besides them. If this was not so, why not invite their poor Palestinian brothers to live in their countries. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I do think that the concept of inviting poor people suffering from violence into your country has a long pedigree. However the US does seem ambivalent about allowing people in, particularly Mexicans : ) Most countries are happy to take in wealthy immigrants. And to be honest I missed a trick by suggesting only Arizona and Australia. NZ also has a preference for rich people, as has Cnada and Malaysia. To go to other Arab countries with loot might actually be cheaper for the US. Though the view that it was Europe, and particularly the US, for the dispossession of Palestinian Arabs and then shifting the onus to Arab countries to take the refugees is a little hypocritical. I do sometimes wonder if Israel has a vested interest in appearing to be a besieged beacon of democracy in a sea of Arab extremism - that way they get plenty of support and favoured military and trade status with the US. If all is peace and light in the Middle East then the need to subsidise/protect Israel disappears. That might seem far-fetched but then recall if you want to be in power in Israel then the far-right religious groups support is needed so there is some impetus not to negotiate seriously whilst more land is being settled. I am impressed to see that the British Prime Minister is already in Egypt. Perhaps China can be held out! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I also am impressed that the PM visited Egypt already. The whole region really seems to be headed in a bad spiral. As for the hypocrisy of expecting Arab nations to pick up the tab, as it were.. I somewhat agree with where you are going. However, keeping in mind that this land was historically "Israel" I can see their point as well. Heck..I am the first generation of my own family born in the USA, and being essentially German in my blood, and more specifically Prussian, I also have a sense that MY people have been cheated out of most of their homeland, so I am all in favor of Israel actually doing something about their people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 ...this land was historically "Israel" I can see their point as well. Yeah, well, "historically" the land belonged to the Caananites until the Israelites invaded and took it away from them, slaying great numbers in the process. Also, "historically" the land belonged to the Palestinians from about 70 AD until 1948. So it all depends on which years you are counting, but which ever you use, Israel has only occupied it for a fraction of the time it has been inhabited. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Prussian, I also have a sense that MY people have been cheated out of most of their homeland Cheated? Not really. When you behave like global retards, twice in 20 years, and lose, you deserve pretty much everything that comes your way. That's where honour should come in, instead of whining, but as we know honour is a foreign concept to you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noxnoctum Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 How is this thread even up? I thought there was a strict "no politics" rule. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Cheated? Not really. When you behave like global retards, twice in 20 years, and lose, you deserve pretty much everything that comes your way. That's where honour should come in, instead of whining, but as we know honour is a foreign concept to you. And the Palestinians then? suicide bombers, multiple wars with Israel, and lost every one? They fall into your same category then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 How is this thread even up? I thought there was a strict "no politics" rule. I wonder the same, though given a chance without the insults hurled , we have kept it civil, just basically 1 particular poster seems intent upon continuing the clash. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 And the Palestinians then? .. multiple wars with Israel, and lost every one? I don't believe the the Palestinians have had any wars with Israel, have they? Or are we back to using your idiosyncratic definition of 'war'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Ok, good point there..read, instead, the "Arab/Islamic states" in 1949,1967,1973,1982,etc. And your country, also, belongs to people who were there before you were. In the end, ownership of land through all of history has been by conquest, pretty much every European country, the Americas, Asia, etc. So it is a little bit late to develop a conscience, for any of us, I think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 just basically 1 particular poster seems intent upon continuing the clash. Yeah, I hate That Guy well known leftist garbage he has NOT proved the issue of eligibility the hypocrisy comes in, when the same, exact people, agreed with the one, and think the other one is crazy. your side Get your own facts rather than those spoon fed to the masses either are a civilian, or should be one, and like Obama, you have no proof to argue with. I should thank you for reminding me of the famous picture,with it's comment on arguing on the internet I actually have a beautiful wife to snuggle beside on these freezing "global warming" nights, instead of a rubber simulator.* Oh, and only 1 'g' in reneged. I believe hypcrisy is usually spelled hypocracy. Regards Jon *That's actually pretty funny, because it's essentially the exact words she uses whenever That Guy is on deployment or exercise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Back on (slightly) topic... it looks like Libya is tottering now, also. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 And your country, also, belongs to people who were there before you were. As it still does. You know, using ignorance as a basis for your butterfly kisses ... it's not really all that convincing. So it is a little bit late to develop a conscience, for any of us, I think. Think whatever you like. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you aren't entitled to your own facts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Back on (slightly) topic... it looks like Libya is tottering now, also. They (he!) have been for a couple days. Yesterday, especially, was pretty significant, with some Army units swapping sides, and bits of the airforce lighting out for Malta. I'd be surprised if he's still in charge this weekend. Amazing, really. It's like the entire top of Africa had a collective WTF!? moment. It gives me a happy feeling in my heart. I think Libya will really struggle though. All these countries are going to have to sort out want they want, and after so many years under the same ruler it's going to be hard, but AFAICT Libya hasn't had anything remotely resembling an elected governing body, or multi party debates. That vital piece of intellectual capital isn't just fragile - as it is in say Egypt - it's totally absent. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 You actually aren't a bad guy JonS, you obviously enjoy good wargames, or you would not be here, but you continue, all through these posts, trying to pick a fight. Anyone reading can see that in every case, I have held back, usually awhile, before firing back. Yet even saying that, I AM sorry for the times I have fired back. It is incredibly clear to me that you won't ever agree with me in some areas, and I hope it is as clear to yourself, that the same goes for me. Can we agree to disagree? truce? Ron 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 They (he!) have been for a couple days. Yesterday, especially, was pretty significant, with some Army units swapping sides, and bits of the airforce lighting out for Malta. I'd be surprised if he's still in charge this weekend. Amazing, really. It's like the entire top of Africa had a collective WTF!? moment. It gives me a happy feeling in my heart. I think Libya will really struggle though. All these countries are going to have to sort out want they want, and after so many years under the same ruler it's going to be hard, but AFAICT Libya hasn't had anything remotely resembling an elected governing body, or multi party debates. That vital piece of intellectual capital isn't just fragile - as it is in say Egypt - it's totally absent. I think that you are correct. The whole northern half..really makes for some worrisome scenarios. I really thought Bahrain would fall first, but Libya is just literally melting. I feel good for them also, but I hope they can hold it together...Libyan revolution may be closer to the French style of just killing everyone...and as you said, they have absolutely no history even to fall back on...really wish them the best...we saw today about the Libyan Air Force strafing the crowd...just awful. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Have to disagree that "the Arabs" (or whoever) have lost every time they've fought Israel lately (whether it's "war" or not, and "lately" being since Israel was formed...) I'm pretty sure "The Arabs" didn't actually lose 1973...maybe they didn't win either...but suer as heck Israel didn't win. The various invasions of Lebanon have never resulted in anything positive for Israel after the initial military sucess in 1982 got them all the way to Beirut and kicked the PLO out....so now the have Hezbollah and 1 million potential christian allies have emigrated from Lebanon - long term screw up there by someone......1993 was a waste of effort, 1996 provided some more motivation for AQ and otehrwise was a waste of effort, 2006 was a total screw up where the IDF couldn't manage to get a clear cut military victory and subsequently was another PR/political disaster. the 2009 invasion of Gaza sems a prety clear cut Israeli "win" - both politically and militarily, but has been subsequently undone by the fiasco over the "blockade runners". So Israel had a string of wins from 1948-1966 (18 years), and a string of failures or near failures from 1973-2006 (33 years), with 1 win in 2009 that they gave up the advantage from. Not that I think it's relevant in the least - just wanted to say..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Yes..actually I totally forgot about the 2006 fiasco, that was an absolute disaster. Pretty much could claim the others as wins, even if it does require stretching the definition of "wins" lol...but 2006 SHOULD have been a rout, and it almost was, in the other direction. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The phone's been ringing hot today with media wanting to talk about Libya. Sadly it had to take the NZ quake to bump it off the agenda. I'm not so sure that Gadaffi will be ousted, at least without a bloodbath. If he does go, I think it will be more likely that a key defence force strongman will step in to take his own chance. But Gadaffi has been pretty active over the decades in purging anyone in the military with an ounce of ambition. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.