[stalebiscuit]

we shouldnt even have to invade, can we like just, you know, send a cruise missle into that crazy bastards window who runs it? and do the same thing to chavez

i mean it would certainly send a message

and i mean what are they gonna do....invade us

[Brother Bob]

So who's good with foreign relations with the countries of the Middle East? LOL!

[tlarkin]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Brother Bob

So who's good with foreign relations with the countries of the Middle East? LOL!

Not that I have a problem with it, but our own government have sent women over there as ambassadors, and we all know how they think of women over there.

[Brother Bob]

Quote:       Originally Posted by tlarkin

Not that I have a problem with it, but our own government have sent women over there as ambassadors, and we all know how they think of women over there.

Yes Sirrrrrrrrrrr........

[Rave]

Quote:       Originally Posted by GlockMeister

Israel's been busy. They also took out one of Iraq's back when it was being built in the 1981. For your reading pleasure my friend. lol Sources close to the Pentagon said the United States was highly unlikely to give approval for tactical nuclear weapons to be used. One source said Israel would have to seek approval “after the event”, as it did when it crippled Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak with airstrikes in 1981. I took that ^^^ from the article from this link. Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran - Times Online I guess we were both right. Like I said, Israel's been busy.

Israel is always busy,and they keep their big dog busy too.

[Seabeescotty]

We don't have the information to use for decision making, and basically are basing our opinions on assumptions and guesses. It really seems like a bit of a waste, to try to figure a problem out, when you don't have the needed input to formulate the problem!

[TXplt]

Quote:       Originally Posted by KGunner

Lets face it here and now. Nobody here is even close to qualified when it comes to international politics. We can sit here and say what should be done, or what shouldn't have, but it won't change a thing. What happened, happened for some reason. I don't believe those in charge of making those decisions made them by flipping a coin, I'm sure a lot of thought went into the decisions made. It is very easy for us to sit back and say what they should have done, hindsight after all is said and done is 20/20. To understand the intricacies of why things are the way they are is impossible for everyone.

I'll throw the BS flag on this one. Unfortunately, in many cases, alot of us here are more qualified in public policy issues (including int'l politics) than those currently making the decisions (or several of those running for office--"threshhold taxes" "windfall profits taxes" -- "Global warming is caused by man producing CO2" -- we can do something about the price of gas by passing rules and writing stuff on paper (vs. building energy sources) give me a break !!!!!). They're doing things that don't work and make the problem worse. Several people here have ideas that really might work for issues facing the nation vice chasing our tails in Washington. Granted, it's easy to 2nd guess and we don't always get the full picture. But to say those in charge are more "qualified" than many of the average citizens is wrong. Look at energy policy, gun control, fiscal policy, the policies on terrorism which look at citizens more than potential terrorists, the "war" on drugs, weapons "free" zones aka shooting galleries, international trade policy, etc.

Quote:       Originally Posted by tlarkin

Not that I have a problem with it, but our own government have sent women over there as ambassadors, and we all know how they think of women over there.

We also sent John Adams to Britain after they lost the revolutionary war

Maybe we should send ms. klinton there as ambassador after she loses the election. That'd fix 'em. They got it coming

[Windwalker]

Tlarkin, who is going to train the Iraqi Govt. when we pull all our troops out? Also, I would not agree to pulling out of Israel.
I do agree that we need to fix the problems in our own Country but we have no business trying to fix the world. Get the U.S. out of the U.N. then get the U.N. out of the U.S.
If war with Iran becomes inevitable then make it a DECLARED WAR. Warn all other Nations that we will tolerate no interference and that any Nation who does interfere will be declared an unfriendly Nation and all U.S. aid and funding will cease immediately, will remain in effect for a minimum of two years and then require approval of both houses of Congress to be reinstated. Any overt act of War will be answered in kind.
Then carpet bomb every nuclear facility, military facility, oil fields,manufacturing plants, dams, power grids,and troop movements back to the stone age and continue until the leaders or Iran unconditionally surrender. Accept their surrender and agree to rebuild nothing and do not occupy their country.
If our leaders won't fight this kind of war then don't get the U.S. into it.

[tlarkin]

The Iraqi government will get it eventually, we really have no reason to be over there to begin with. No links to terrorists, no WMDs, just some very iffy stretched out evidence. If we stay and try to make peace we will be there for decades, there is too much in fighting over in Iraq to ever make peace out of it.

Israel can handle them self, we have no business butting into their problems with the middle east either. I could care less about the Middle East right now because our country is going to hell in a hand basket. I no longer want Americans to die for the middle east, I want them back here on our soil bettering America.

Hey remember though, mission accomplished, 5 years ago, you want to stay there 5 more years?

I guess we could send Hillary over there, at least she would know what to do if she came under sniper fire.

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by tlarkin

The Iraqi government will get it eventually, we really have no reason to be over there to begin with. No links to terrorists, no WMDs, just some very iffy stretched out evidence. If we stay and try to make peace we will be there for decades, there is too much in fighting over in Iraq to ever make peace out of it. Israel can handle them self, we have no business butting into their problems with the middle east either. I could care less about the Middle East right now because our country is going to hell in a hand basket. I no longer want Americans to die for the middle east, I want them back here on our soil bettering America. Hey remember though, mission accomplished, 5 years ago, you want to stay there 5 more years? I guess we could send Hillary over there, at least she would know what to do if she came under sniper fire.

We have been in Germany and Japan for 63 years. Fighting Moslems will take longer at this rate. We are way too far behind in enemy body count. We need to kill off the radicals until we get them down to manageable levels.

You can expect your grandchildren to be fighting Moslems. Hopefully, they will not be such whiny wimps, wanting to retreat in the face of the enemy.

[troy2000]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

We have been in Germany and Japan for 63 years. Fighting Moslems will take longer at this rate. We are way too far behind in enemy body count. We need to kill off the radicals until we get them down to manageable levels. You can expect your grandchildren to be fighting Moslems. Hopefully, they will not be such whiny wimps, wanting to retreat in the face of the enemy.

Not a good comparison. Not a good one at all. We sure as @#$% haven't been fighting in Germany and Japan for 63 years. Been a long, long time since we were there as occupiers, instead of as allies.

Somehow, I don't think "kill more of them faster" is the simple answer to our problems and our prayers, appealing as it may sound. Has it occurred to you that every time you kill someone you tee off his family, his relatives, his friends, his neighbors, his tribe, etc? That solution might just create radicals faster than it gets rid of them, as the Soviets eventually noticed in Afghanistan.

And hopefully, your grandchildren won't be nearly as fast to call people names for disagreeing with them about politics, wars, etc...

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by troy2000

Not a good comparison. Not a good one at all. We sure as @#$% haven't been fighting in Germany and Japan for 63 years. Been a long, long time since we were there as occupiers, instead of as allies. Somehow, I don't think "kill more of them faster" is the simple answer to our problems and our prayers, appealing as it may sound. Has it occurred to you that every time you kill someone you tee off his family, his relatives, his friends, his neighbors, his tribe, etc? That solution might just create radicals faster than it gets rid of them, as the Soviets eventually noticed in Afghanistan. And hopefully, your grandchildren won't be nearly as fast to call people names for disagreeing with them about politics, wars, etc...

Then kill their families, their tribe, whatever. There is no negotiating with religous radicals willing to convert by the sword. Moslem fundies are stuck in the 9th century and will NEVER back off until death.

Hopefully, the current crop of leftwing idiots will off themselves with overdoses of tofu and French wine and not be an issue to my grandchildren. In addition, I hope my grands are just as capable of calling it like they see it.

If a million people say a stupid thing, you are likely in California - Me

[HARDERTR]

Quote:       Originally Posted by troy2000

Has it occurred to you that every time you kill someone you tee off his family, his relatives, his friends, his neighbors, his tribe, etc? That solution might just create radicals faster than it gets rid of them, as the Soviets eventually noticed in Afghanistan.

I see this first hand EVERYDAY! The majority of the casualties in Iraq now are civilians. Plain-old-everday-civilians who want to go to the market to buy some groceries for their family. Because they DON'T hate "the occupier", and actually help us at times, they are fair game in the war.

Imagine being targeted because all you want is for the fighting to stop.

THEN, because you realize your mother, father, sister, brother, or even YOUR OWN CHILD was killed because your family went against the word of "GOD/ALLAH", you start to realize siding with "the occupiers" might not be such a great idea. After all, you were able to live in peace before "they" came.

I know FOR A FACT, I would choose my family over some foreign country (who doesn't even respect my religion) every time.

If they "harbor the enemy" the US will take them in, give them a few good meals, then let them go in 2 weeks. If they support "the infidel", they are targeted and killed. Which would you choose??

I hate this "war" as much as many of you do, but I'm in the middle of it. I don't want us to "retreat", but we are making enemies faster than allies. Once we pull out, Iran and Syria will be there to pick up the peices and make Iraq a "better" place to live. A place in which you can go to the market....and not fear being killed by a suicide bomber at any moment.

As far as the government/Army/police force we are training..... they are a joke. Many of them take the training and weapons we give them, then stab us in the back. I see THAT everday too. The government is there for the money, but has little power over the people, primarily because the people are more focused on the "here and now" rather than 50 years down the road.

[troy2000]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

Then kill their families, their tribe, whatever. There is no negotiating with religous radicals willing to convert by the sword. Moslem fundies are stuck in the 9th century and will NEVER back off until death. Hopefully, the current crop of leftwing idiots will off themselves with overdoses of tofu and French wine and not be an issue to my grandchildren. In addition, I hope my grands are just as capable of calling it like they see it. If a million people say a stupid thing, you are likely in California - Me

I refer you and your attitude to the gentleman above, who's actually over there and experiencing the situation first-hand. Be my guest...go ahead and call him a leftwing idiot, and tell him you hope he overdoses on tofu and French wine.

That's a vain hope, by the way. All us California hippies drink California wine; it's better and cheaper than the French stuff.

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by troy2000

I refer you and your attitude to the gentleman above, who's actually over there and experiencing the situation first-hand. Be my guest...go ahead and call him a leftwing idiot, and tell him you hope he overdoses on tofu and French wine. That's a vain hope, by the way. All us California hippies drink California wine; it's better and cheaper than the French stuff.

I respect the attitude of the gentleman above but he is just one more guy with an opinion. It's not all that difficult to find soldiers against a war. Even General Patton hated the war, but he won it anyway. I suggest that the gentleman in Iraq adopt that attitude.

I suspect that more disagree with him than not. We NEED to win that war. "That War" being the global war on terror. Iraq is a part. Always was. It is a strategically important location, dividing the Mid East in two and making the terrorist's job more difficult.

As for you, Troy, likely you hated Bush from day one and there is nothing possible to have made you happy. Go ahead and blame the President for not making people that hated us for generations not like up.

If you and your gang have any way to win the war besides giving up in disgrace, lets hear it. If not, quit your whining, griping and carping and get with the program.

[troy2000]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

I respect the attitude of the gentleman above but he is just one more guy with an opinion. It's not all that difficult to find soldiers against a war. Even General Patton hated the war, but he won it anyway. I suggest that the gentleman in Iraq adopt that attitude. I suspect that more disagree with him than not. We NEED to win that war. "That War" being the global war on terror. Iraq is a part. Always was. It is a strategically important location, dividing the Mid East in two and making the terrorist's job more difficult. As for you, Troy, likely you hated Bush from day one and there is nothing possible to have made you happy. Go ahead and blame the President for not making people that hated us for generations not like up. If you and your gang have any way to win the war besides giving up in disgrace, lets hear it. If not, quit your whining, griping and carping and get with the program.

You're a little obsessed with Bush, aren't you? I didn't say a damned word about him, but you dragged him into the conversation just so you could accuse me one more time of hating him.

Kiss me where the sun don't shine, boy. You just became the only person on my 'ignore' list.

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by troy2000

You're a little obsessed with Bush, aren't you? I didn't say a damned word about him, but you dragged him into the conversation just so you could accuse me one more time of hating him. Kiss me where the sun don't shine, boy. You just became the only person on my 'ignore' list.

Gosh, I've offended a liberal. I just don't know if I can live with the shame.

[tlarkin]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

Then kill their families, their tribe, whatever. There is no negotiating with religous radicals willing to convert by the sword. Moslem fundies are stuck in the 9th century and will NEVER back off until death. Hopefully, the current crop of leftwing idiots will off themselves with overdoses of tofu and French wine and not be an issue to my grandchildren. In addition, I hope my grands are just as capable of calling it like they see it. If a million people say a stupid thing, you are likely in California - Me

Kill them all, complete genocide, yeah good one Hitler.

[mitch_mckee]

Quote:       Originally Posted by tlarkin

Kill them all, complete genocide, yeah good one Hitler.

You lose.

Godwin's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:[2][3]

"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a caution against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons, and is often conflated with fallacious arguments of the reductio ad Hitlerum form.
The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[5] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.

[tlarkin]

Quote:       Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

You lose. Godwin's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:[2][3] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a caution against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons, and is often conflated with fallacious arguments of the reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[5] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.

LOL

Fine, no Hitler comment

I'll just use someone else who has committed genocide


Mengistu Haile Mariam