[Coeloptera]

Well, YankeeSpirit 76, it's true. We don't have to go and play world cop to anyone if we don't want to. We have no obligation to do so.

But it's reprehensible to pretend we actually care about "those poor people" in other countries when really, that's not why we do things.

This is why our global credibility was shot to hell after Iraq. Daring to say, for even an instant, that we're there "to defend freedom" is insipid and fools no one.

Actually, we didn't even have any compelling national interests there at all. Even if we stabilize it we essentially get nothing for our effort.

We went to Afghanistan to destroy a terrorist group that directly attacked our country and kill or capture its leaders. Notice how much support we got for that? A lot.

Sometimes honesty works.

- Coeloptera

[Rambo]

Quote:       Originally Posted by cremley

I think you guys misunderstood me. I know we didn't go into Iraq to save anyone and I know we don't intervene when people around the world are being murdered by the millions. What I was trying to say, was that we should be trying to do something to help those that need a helping hand. It is one thing when people don't want us there to help them (like Iraq) but it is another thing to just turn our backs on people who are actually crying out for help. Personally, if we want to protect our own national interest, we need to go on the offense. Have you ever heard the quote: "a good defense is a good offense"? I think it stands very true for the world, especially the way the global economy is starting to go. Chris

That would be nice if not for the paranoia and political aspirations of our government. Bush is sending $1 Billion to the Republic of Georgia while completely ignoring our next door neighbor, Cuba, that has been devastated by a hurricane. We suck up to the largest communist country of China and ignore tiny Cuba because of politics.
This is why Obama has my support because he's willing to reach out and mend some fences. Why do we have to be at war with everyone?

[YankeeSpirit76]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Coeloptera

Well, YankeeSpirit 76, it's true. We don't have to go and play world cop to anyone if we don't want to. We have no obligation to do so. But it's reprehensible to pretend we actually care about "those poor people" in other countries when really, that's not why we do things. This is why our global credibility was shot to hell after Iraq. Daring to say, for even an instant, that we're there "to defend freedom" is insipid and fools no one. Actually, we didn't even have any compelling national interests there at all. Even if we stabilize it we essentially get nothing for our effort. We went to Afghanistan to destroy a terrorist group that directly attacked our country and kill or capture its leaders. Notice how much support we got for that? A lot. Sometimes honesty works. - Coeloptera

Coel, In the first place ,we can't be in every place there is a problem. There are only so many of us to go around. We are spread way to thin as it is now.
When you say we had no national interest being there, I'm assuming your talking about Iraq.
You think Saddam with WMD's isn't anything to do with our national interest? No, we haven't found any, but I have trouble believing that Saddam used his very last canister of gas on the kurds...his own people. 5000 people died that day. Why is that not as important as Darfur? Personally I think he shipped his WMD's to someone else, the way he sent his Air Force to his arch enemy Iran so we couldn't destroy it.

But it is irrelevant what I think. What is relevant is what the world thought at the time. Every country on Earth, even the Russians believed, and said he had Wmds. Every one's Military intelligence agencies believed it!
That's what I call being guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
We may never know if he gave them to Syria, Iran or anyone else for that matter.There's a lot of desert to bury things in too. But if you were the President at the time, and the entire world, as well as your own CIA told you he had WMD's, what would you have done?

[Klaus F.]

in afgan, the germans and italians are not in the South fighting and killing the thugs, there are just there as a symbol. our chancellor is afraid of letting our soldiers kill the thugs (our meaning the germans since i am sadly german) as to not offend most germans and mainly the german gov. the germans and others who arnt fighting are a hindrance to the US troops there. our soldiers and our generals WANT to fight, but the soldats and generals have the least say when it comes to anything war or defence. if the general dosent kiss the a$$ of the chancellor, he gets FIRED.

as for anti-americanism...it wont go away. it has been with europe since 1492 and will always be there and its getting worse and worse. europe is jealous that in the hundreds and thousands of years europe (or the nations in it) has existed that they have never created a nation so "perfect" as the US in so little time. the euro's themselves are jealous of americans bec the euros dont have the wit, whim, intelligence and knack at things like americans do...and they HATE to admit that americans are a "master race". lol. (americans are a race, the only race that isnt based on color but ideas, i am MUCH more american then german and plan to be a US citizen next year, americans dont have to be a citizen to be american for american ideals and thought is a GIFT given to all ppl, and unless u abuse that gift, you ar not an american...most abuse that gift.)
europe wont really step up and fight, only america has the intelligence to do that.
anti-americanism will only go away when the US becomes very much or exactly like europe...which will NEVER happen, and i am glad it wont. when i see anti-americanism, i see how america is still going in the right path.
europeans that think highly of america are as few and far between as americans who think highly of europe. i have never met an american that did nor will i ever, and its a good thing.

[White Rook]

I agree that the U.S. should not be the World Police. That is what the so called United Nations should be doing.
I don't think any child in our world should have to watch their father shot and their mother raped and killed and have no hope that anyone will ever come to help them just because their country doesn't have any resources that the rest of the world needs.

[YankeeSpirit76]

Klaus F, it is nice to hear that the German military would like to do more to help if they could. Of course without the governments permission they can not.

Though we are far from being "perfect", we are quite proud of the fact that we have done more in the last 232 years for the good of the world than all of Europe combined. 232 years...we're just babies..lol.
So thank you for your kind words,( it's something we don't hear often) and glad to hear you are becoming a citizen! Good luck.

[cremley]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Klaus F.

in afgan, the germans and italians are not in the South fighting and killing the thugs, there are just there as a symbol. our chancellor is afraid of letting our soldiers kill the thugs (our meaning the germans since i am sadly german) as to not offend most germans and mainly the german gov. the germans and others who arnt fighting are a hindrance to the US troops there. our soldiers and our generals WANT to fight, but the soldats and generals have the least say when it comes to anything war or defence. if the general dosent kiss the a$$ of the chancellor, he gets FIRED. as for anti-americanism...it wont go away. it has been with europe since 1492 and will always be there and its getting worse and worse. europe is jealous that in the hundreds and thousands of years europe (or the nations in it) has existed that they have never created a nation so "perfect" as the US in so little time. the euro's themselves are jealous of americans bec the euros dont have the wit, whim, intelligence and knack at things like americans do...and they HATE to admit that americans are a "master race". lol. (americans are a race, the only race that isnt based on color but ideas, i am MUCH more american then german and plan to be a US citizen next year, americans dont have to be a citizen to be american for american ideals and thought is a GIFT given to all ppl, and unless u abuse that gift, you ar not an american...most abuse that gift.) europe wont really step up and fight, only america has the intelligence to do that. anti-americanism will only go away when the US becomes very much or exactly like europe...which will NEVER happen, and i am glad it wont. when i see anti-americanism, i see how america is still going in the right path. europeans that think highly of america are as few and far between as americans who think highly of europe. i have never met an american that did nor will i ever, and its a good thing.

That sounds like something that a radical American would say! lol!
I am glad that you think so highly of America and want to become a citizen. I hope that you will be able to get citizenship here. I think this is the most pro-American thing that I have heard in a long time. I wish more of us Americans would think like you do. Most of the people here on Gun and Game do but if you live in a liberal city like I do, sometime you would think that you were in Dresden. there are a lot of Americans who follow their savior "Obama", and think that the US should be like Europe and think that socialism is the greatest thing in the world. Personally, I think they should trade places with the Pro Americans and move to Europe.

Thank you for your comment, I am having a better day already

Chris

[Klaus F.]

thank you all for your complements, i dont get very many of them myself mainly bec i am mostly around liberals/ppl who dont give a d**n about anything (BOTH american and european ones) and they cant stand the facts, as usuall.
i see myself more as an american then a german and theres a few germans like me out there. Before i got into being an officer in NATO i was a poli sci teacher for 5 years..i taught in some of the most lberal universities in the US (including coloumbia) and some of the most liberal in europe (like berlin) and was kicked out of each one for being "too conservative" or "radical" well, maby i am a radical and its not always a bad thing to be one! lol But what i found interesting were most of the students, they actually wanted to listen to what i taught bec it made "sence to them".
As a commanding officer on a vessel in NATO, it isnt as bad as it is in the universities. most of the other officers here are conservative and many of the swabbies are also. (its a muntinational crew here, most are germans).
most of the german soldats in afgan want to fight, and just today one of our top generals wanted to send 4k over to afgan, and as usuall he cant.
a few years back one general wanted to send 2 MILLION troops there, which can be done over a period of years and bec we have the worlds largest reserves, but wont be done bec our chancellor is a coward.
i have met quite a few soldats and they are very much like yours.lol

most of those soldats are from Bavaria, the MOST conservative state in germany (also the most wealthy and most productive, no suprize). I am also from a small town there. the small villages in south bavaria are very much like small towns in your heartland, they hold fast to conservative values, and their own unique customs and traditions. and are VERY pro-US. u wont find any far left loons there.
without bavaria, germany wouldnt be on the map.

btw, dont ship ur leftover liberals to europe, we have enough of them libtards already.lol

[nathangdad]

I truly wrestle with the question of "World Policeman".

Although we see it differently, I feel we are all too anxious to assume the role rather than having it forced upon us.

We have jumped into situations such as Korea and Vietnam wherein we had no real interest either politically or economically. The same goes for the Balkans. The Koreas are inching toward some type unification which will make them at some point in the future a competitor for us upon the world economic stage. We have given most favored nation trading status to Vietnam which is unified North and South under a Communist Party control.


It might have been better for us to respond to situations such as Korea and Vietnam by assaulting the greater enemy elsewhere thus incurring fewer human losses. The Balkans represent a European problem.

However, we all do have differing points of view and I respect the views of others.

[Coeloptera]

Quote:       Originally Posted by YankeeSpirit76

Coel, In the first place ,we can't be in every place there is a problem. There are only so many of us to go around. We are spread way to thin as it is now. When you say we had no national interest being there, I'm assuming your talking about Iraq. You think Saddam with WMD's isn't anything to do with our national interest? No, we haven't found any, but I have trouble believing that Saddam used his very last canister of gas on the kurds...his own people. 5000 people died that day. Why is that not as important as Darfur? Personally I think he shipped his WMD's to someone else, the way he sent his Air Force to his arch enemy Iran so we couldn't destroy it. But it is irrelevant what I think. What is relevant is what the world thought at the time. Every country on Earth, even the Russians believed, and said he had Wmds. Every one's Military intelligence agencies believed it!

Okay...I'm going to ask...so what?

The jerk can have all the WMDs he wants so long as he doesn't lob them our way, and he wasn't an imbecile. He had no intention of doing it even if he had anything. He knew what happened the last time we had to go over there.

Don't start with "the kurds". Again, if we cared at all about terrible acts done inside other countries you couldn't keep us out of Africa right now. We don't care, we don't have to. It's very nice and generous of us to give as much aid as we do in case of disasters, but we, as a nation, do not care about atrocities going on in other countries. We do not make policy based on that.

And really...if owning WMDs was some sort of grounds for military action...well...we can practically depopulate the planet if we hauled everything we have out for use. Well past the nuclear arsenal, heck, we have full NBC capability.

I never said or even suggested we go everywhere there's a problem. In fact, I pointed out there's nothing wrong with only protecting our national interests. It's when we lie and pretend we do anything for "humanitarian" reasons or for "freedom" that's repulsive.

As to why 5000 dead Kurds isn't as important as Darfur, sheer numbers argue otherwise, if we cared to use that as a standard. The types of atrocities matter, too. Gassed Kurds are dead. Thousands of rapes and mutilations linger in a society for generations.

Not our business. Doesn't have to be. Al Qaida was one thing, this was something else entirely. The doctrine of premptive, unilateral action is foolish because it makes the rest of the world not trust us. Putin is consolidating Russian power now, suddenly we'll have to play with them again and I doubt anyone's willing to back us against them if it isn't absolutely vital.

- Coeloptera

[LarryO1970]

Darfur is about natural minerals and oil, no more, no less. So, why is the U.N. and Europe not doing anything in Darfur?

Why is it up to us, yet again?

Why don't the other African nations do anything about it?

Why hasn't the Darfur Govt. (or lack thereof) been toppled by the people revolting?

[Coeloptera]

Quote:       Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Darfur is about natural minerals and oil, no more, no less. So, why is the U.N. and Europe not doing anything in Darfur? Why is it up to us, yet again? Why don't the other African nations do anything about it? Why hasn't the Darfur Govt. (or lack thereof) been toppled by the people revolting?

All excellent questions...

- Coeloptera

[Rave]

Quote:       Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Darfur is about natural minerals and oil, no more, no less. So, why is the U.N. and Europe not doing anything in Darfur? Why is it up to us, yet again? Why don't the other African nations do anything about it? Why hasn't the Darfur Govt. (or lack thereof) been toppled by the people revolting?

Speaking of Darfur,I saw yesterday that they are building the tallest building in the world,like about 2,000 ft. tall,if I remember correctly.

[YankeeSpirit76]

"The jerk can have all the WMD's he wants, as long as he dosen't lob them at us." "He had no intention of doing it even if he had anything". Well, I for one am greatly relieved (and I'm sure the rest of the world is) that we all have your assurance that Saddam wouldn't have nuked us or had a third party do it. Why didn't you just tell us this before all this happened? Coel, "Don't start with the Kurds again"? The 5000 Kurds killed in that one day were just a fraction of the people that Saddam murdered, tortured, raped, brutalized.
"Gassed kurds are dead". Oh. I guess because they died quicker than say, starving them in a concentration camp makes it acceptable?

How can you even compare us to Saddam when it comes to having nukes? Did you even think that one over? That's like saying, why shouldn't felons and convicted murderers be allowed to have guns, the police have them?.... Huh?

You keep insisting that Iraq is "not our business". Then please explain to me why Darfur or anyplace else is. You can't have it both ways Coel.

"Unilateral action is foolish because it makes the rest of the world not trust us".
I don't know about the United States you grew up in, but the one I grew up in does things because we think it's right or necessary, not to make anyone "like" us.

We have plenty of people around the world who hate us, and enough of our own citizens who hate us that we don't need to kick ourselves in the teeth and bash ourselves everytime we get the chance, and say how terrible we are.

No, we are not perfect, yes we have made mistakes and I'm sure we will again, but my point is that at least we try to do what is good and honorable while the rest of the world sits back, does nothing, and then hates us for doing what had to be done.

[YankeeSpirit76]

Quote:       Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Darfur is about natural minerals and oil, no more, no less. So, why is the U.N. and Europe not doing anything in Darfur? Why is it up to us, yet again? Why don't the other African nations do anything about it? Why hasn't the Darfur Govt. (or lack thereof) been toppled by the people revolting?

That's an easy one Larry. They're all waiting for us to do it.

[YankeeSpirit76]

Quote:       Originally Posted by nathangdad

I truly wrestle with the question of "World Policeman". Although we see it differently, I feel we are all too anxious to assume the role rather than having it forced upon us. We have jumped into situations such as Korea and Vietnam wherein we had no real interest either politically or economically. The same goes for the Balkans. The Koreas are inching toward some type unification which will make them at some point in the future a competitor for us upon the world economic stage. We have given most favored nation trading status to Vietnam which is unified North and South under a Communist Party control. It might have been better for us to respond to situations such as Korea and Vietnam by assaulting the greater enemy elsewhere thus incurring fewer human losses. The Balkans represent a European problem. However, we all do have differing points of view and I respect the views of others.

Nathan, I too respect the opinions of others. If I said something to make you feel that I didn't respect yours, forgive me, that certainly was not my intention. Steve

[LarryO1970]

Quote:       Originally Posted by YankeeSpirit76

That's an easy one Larry. They're all waiting for us to do it.

... well, they'd better become nomadic or grow a pair... because frankly, they're on their own IF the whiners in Europe or their African brethren will do nothing more than wait until they kill themselves off to pillage their lands' resources.

It is what it is.

[cremley]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Rave

Speaking of Darfur,I saw yesterday that they are building the tallest building in the world,like about 2,000 ft. tall,if I remember correctly.

I think you mean Dubai. there would be nothing of the sort in Darfur.

[LarryO1970]

You would be correct cremley... it is Dubai.

[Coeloptera]

Quote:       Originally Posted by YankeeSpirit76

You keep insisting that Iraq is "not our business". Then please explain to me why Darfur or anyplace else is. You can't have it both ways Coel.

Read my posts more carefully.

I am arguing otherwise.

I stated that they are not our business and we are under no obligation to interfere at all, but that when we do act against another country a little more truth about our reasons would go a long way towards greater international goodwill.

And no, Saddam wouldn't have "nuked us". One: he didn't have nuclear weapons. Where do you get these ideas?

Two, look what we did when Iraq didn't even do anything to us. No sane person (and make no mistake, Hussein was quite sane) would dare risk their nation being literally scoured off the globe with such an action.

And yes...dead Kurds are dead Kurds. Explain to me why we, as a nation, needed to care? Any answer except "we are invested in the region due to oil and political alliances" immediately begs the reply "So why do we care more about fewer dead Kurds than the sheer horrors in Darfur, Burma, or the Congo?".

Obviously, we do not. We do not, as a nation, care about dead Kurds any more than we do dead Africans.

- Coeloptera