Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Yeah, that place out 'there'. Anything not really Cambodia related should go here.
Soi Dog
Expatriate
Posts: 2236
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:53 am
Reputation: 5

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by Soi Dog » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:35 pm

StroppyChops wrote:Would this be the same United Nations that fully supported Pol Pot?
Vlad's solution for every world problem....let the UN handle it. :thumb:
Rain Dog
Expatriate
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu May 29, 2014 4:40 pm
Reputation: 29

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by Rain Dog » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:36 pm

@Starkmonster -- Classic --- Except for the UK references, I might have thought I was back in the old USA watching Fox News Promos.

Question (?): Am I the only Yank Here who things USA foreign policy has been a disaster, and most of the talking points "justifyng it" are bullshit?

Oil and Gas Pipelines plaid just as big a role in he decision to attack Afghanistan as "Bin Laden" did.
Taxi, we'd rather walk. Huddle a doorway with the rain dogs
The Rum pours strong and thin. Beat out the dustman with the Rain Dogs;
OrangeDragon
Site Admin
Posts: 4193
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 8:05 pm
Reputation: 15
United States of America

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by OrangeDragon » Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:51 pm

vladimir wrote:
OrangeDragon wrote:
vladimir wrote:Another foreign policy genius-stroke from the people that brought (bought?) you so many fuck-ups.

Jesus, I could do better than these fucking retards for 1/10th pay!
Really? How would you, in your infinite wisdom, deal with 20 or more factions of religious extremist all squabbling for which one gets to control a resource rich region and it's nuclear arms, which once controlled (likely by the most extreme of the bunch if just left alone) would likely then set its sights on expanding out even further?

Seems the "keep them constantly kicking each other's asses" approach they're using is... well... working. With constant infighting they could never really unify to become some formidable force the rest of the world has to worry about.

[Thread moved to The Rest of the World]
1. I would mind my own fucking business. You have enough domestic debts and infrastructure to sort out.
2. I would teach US foreign policy fucktards that supporting dictators (the list is long) and meddling in stable overseas governments regardless of local conditions DOES NOT WORK. GET IT? IT DOES NOT WORK! Seriously, how many times does your government have to FUCK UP bigtime before they wake up?

Tell me, OD, in your infinite wisdom, how is it that the US is now fighting a war against the mujahudeen, the very group that Rambo supported?
Tell me again, in your infinite wisdom, who trained and supplied Osama bin Laden?
Tell me again, in your infinite wisdom, what a great idea the invasion of Iraq was...or Afghanistan
Tell me again how supporting dictators in Cuba worked out...in the Philippines...and in many other locations
I'm not sure your native American Indian ancestors would approve/be proud of your Republican/Tea Party stance, I certainly cannot understand it, it's akin to a Jew supporting Hitler or a black supporting apartheid.
one explanation: guns blind people.
Well, lets move down the list.
1. It is the US's business, and every countries really, when a fanatic group runs the chance of gaining considerable power over multiple nations. As stated... it's Godwins Law... but nearly DIRECTLY applicable. Rather waiting for another Hitler type extremist group to amass major power then have a World War to stop them, they're attacking them before they grow into that.
2. It's actually worked beautifully. You just seem to be confused over "how it works". In those countries as long as your choices are fanatic A or fanatic B, you'll be stuck with fanatics. You can't even use democratic elections to get rid of that because it's a case of who has the most fanatic followers winning. So, you just keep cycling the fanatics so no single one amasses too much power. It's the alternative to nuking the whole lot or just making it an actual colony.

So in essence of those two points your infinite wisdom would result in WW3, or at the very least the use of nuclear weapons (once Iran or Israel came under serious threat) which would produce fallout effecting the whole world. But somehow that's not the whole world's "business" to try and prevent?

3. How we are fighting wars against people we once supported: Times change, people change, objectives change... we once fought a war against England, but now we're friends. Global politics is an always changing thing... you can't let yesterdays alliances blind you to todays problems. With the middle east, it will be faster as we keep them cycling and keep the power decentralized.
4. The info on this is actually a lot more sketchy than the people who like to use it as a talking point will admit, but the CIA for sure had some hand in his rise to power. And at the time, he wasn't a nutjub and wasn't as extreme. It wasn't until his conflict with, and later expulsion from, Saudi Arabia that he started becoming more and more extreme and gathering other extremist to him. At that point we held to a non intervention approach to him/them and made it Saudi's problem... we saw how that worked out with 9-11.
5. Both good ideas actually. Both caused a power cycle that scattered and weakened one of the more centralized concentrations of fanatics. Saddam Hussein was a monster and his death benefits the world and his people, even with their new infighting it's better than what he had to offer with his slow torture for sport son.
6. Supporting dictatorships, or those who are rebelling against them (and often set up their own dictatorships) is just par for course without invading and making each country a colony... or renouncing them and making each one an enemy. You're not an imbecile, I know you, and I don't believe you can be this naive as to how global politics works. Countries have value, both strategic and resource... if you want access to that sometimes you have to support the lesser of two evils rather than calling them both out for being evil and shunning them. Cuba is a great example of that... with the embargo against Castro instead of working out a handshake we've really only ever hurt ourselves.

You don't think the natives, had they been equipped and had the foresight to see it coming, would have been in support of a pre-emptive strike against the Spanish while they were still just a few families on a beach instead of an invading army? You realize that had they not been friendly with settlers when they first arrived, and had instead just killed them all off in their sleep, people would still think they'd fallen off of the edge of the world and wouldn't have sent any more. They could have prevented a great slaughter that resulted in the complete genocide of several tribal races with a couple of small ones.
Soi Dog
Expatriate
Posts: 2236
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:53 am
Reputation: 5

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by Soi Dog » Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:00 pm

...and bringing up Rambo, a fictional character in a crap movie, and discussing the actions of that fictional character in a series of real world events is the dumbest comment I have ever read on this or any forum. Are you 9 years old? Are you going to bring up Superman vs. the mole people vs. the Taliban now?

I'll give a prime example of Vladyinasia's predictable, fallacious thinking. 800,000 Rwandans died in the 100 day genocide in 1994. The US did nothing to stop this. The world did nothing to stop this.
http://history1900s.about.com/od/rwanda ... nocide.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now let's suppose the US DID militarily and unilaterally intervene in the early days of the slaughter, and acted alone because the French or Chinese voted against any military action in the UN security council. It is still likely that multiple thousands would still have died, maybe even 100,000 killed so. Some of those would have been killed directly due to US military bombing and shooting. Vlad would be foaming at the mouth blaming the US for their "illegal", reckless military adventurism in Rwanda for all those deaths. He could not comprehend the 700,000 saved by that same intervention, because those deaths never happened.

Had Saddam Hussein remained in power during the "Arab spring" (not toppled by the US), and had violent protest/insurrection broken out in Iraq as in the rest of the region, millions of Kurds and Shiites could have been obliterated by Iraqi troops loyal to Saddam. The hypothetical death toll could have dwarfed the US caused death toll by factors of 100.

I did not support any US military action in the region. But history shows that peace is not always the only alternative to war. Life is not always the only alternative to death. Sometimes, more violent death is the alternative to some violent death.
User avatar
vladimir
The Pun-isher
Posts: 6077
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
Reputation: 185
Location: The Kremlin
Russia

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by vladimir » Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:49 am

Soi Dog wrote:
StroppyChops wrote:Would this be the same United Nations that fully supported Pol Pot?
Vlad's solution for every world problem....let the UN handle it. :thumb:
I have no idea where you got that from, my opinion of the UN is that it is a toothless poodle.

My solution for this problem is to shoot the fucking oil-thieving idiots who started the shite.

It's a bit of a bloody joke that the UN is supposed to promote equality, yet only the powerful have veto rights. Joke.To say that it is the lapdog of the west is an understatement, whore is closer.

Happy now?
Jesus loves you...Mexico is great, right? ;)
User avatar
vladimir
The Pun-isher
Posts: 6077
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
Reputation: 185
Location: The Kremlin
Russia

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by vladimir » Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:58 am

Soi Dog wrote:...and bringing up Rambo, a fictional character in a crap movie, and discussing the actions of that fictional character in a series of real world events is the dumbest comment I have ever read on this or any forum. Are you 9 years old? Are you going to bring up Superman vs. the mole people vs. the Taliban now?
God, you're stoopid.

In spite of the fact that it was a movie, it is evidence of government/public sentiment. The producers pandered to local sentiment to make cash. Get that? Do you perhaps think they would have made cash if Rambo-moffie was set in Mauritius?

Or perhaps Captain America: Winter Soldier is not propaganda? Nah, that could never happen.

You guys got your butts kicked sooo many times, just admit it, Iraq is a cock up of the worst order.

OD, explain one thing: 911, iirc 19 of the guys involved were from Saudi. Why not invade Saudi?

Oh, and can you explain WHY 911 happened. WHY did they do it? Not that it's relevant in any way, just wondered why it has always been fobbed off as 'Oh they envy our lifestyle".

That's right, they killed themselves and thousands of others cause they wanted your iPods. Duh. :facepalm:

I'm just amazed that you two clowns can be sooo blind/fanatical as to defend every foreign policy action of your idiot government unquestioningly.

Republicans, the new Nazis.Go, guys.
Last edited by vladimir on Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jesus loves you...Mexico is great, right? ;)
Soi Dog
Expatriate
Posts: 2236
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:53 am
Reputation: 5

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by Soi Dog » Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:07 am

vladimir wrote: God, you're stoopid.
Go, guys.
You are a childish ass-clown of the lowest order. Your arguments make no sense and when you are challenged with rebuttals to your stupid posts you ignore them and return to spouting your predictable, inane banter. Well done, Vladimirinasia.
User avatar
vladimir
The Pun-isher
Posts: 6077
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
Reputation: 185
Location: The Kremlin
Russia

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by vladimir » Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:12 am

Hey, thanks, Chuck Norris!

Don't forget to clean your assault rifle and kiss your GI Joe dolly goodnite, now!

PS I think it's 'rebuttals of'

Cheers, Toto.
Jesus loves you...Mexico is great, right? ;)
User avatar
The Add Jay
Expatriate
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:10 pm
Reputation: 4
Location: Nung river
Libya

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by The Add Jay » Tue Jun 24, 2014 9:16 am

vladimir wrote:Hey, thanks, Chuck Norris!

Don't forget to clean your assault rifle and kiss your GI Joe dolly goodnite, now!

PS I think it's 'rebuttals of'

Cheers, Toto.
Hey Vlad....why dont you worry about your own countries problems.

Republicans are the new nazi's? have you ever been to america? Tea party native americans? wtf are you talking about?

I will say both parties have a monopoly on the elections unlike parliamentary systems where you can a vote of confidence and the little guys have more say.

I can justify many US actions easily. Can you defend your countries fucked up treatment of the world the past 300 years? How about how they treated native americans?!! takes a fucking shit on andrew jacksons actions.

Also most native americans today in the U.S are ice heads and drunks. they also get retarded amount of government bounces including major tax breaks and more land easements then God. But they squander it...naturally. And I can say that to a native American or whoever the fuck I want when I want cause I have the right to say what I want. Unlike in your country where you are forced to call Muslims...Asians Peaceloving. http://muslimrapewave.wordpress.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Whats that they have in Australia? The 10 second rule or some shit where you cant look at someone for more then 10 seconds cause it would be stalking? Holy shit. Talk about a mental disorder grasping the world.

The direction of the foreign policy now under this current admin is what has many worried. Joe Bidens son head of Ukrainian gas company...No nothing to see here! Benghazi is clearly a cover up for the so called "arab spring". And Iraq is blow back? Im not sure yet...maybe its part of something bigger. But that puppet government reminds me alot of Lon Nol.


" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looks like fun in England...definitely my next destination. Maybe I can enjoy the fine traditional cuisine of beer and potatoes....oh is that the Irish?
You're a nobody in the gutter with a Smartphone in your a hand.


Ordinem ad Imperium
User avatar
vladimir
The Pun-isher
Posts: 6077
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
Reputation: 185
Location: The Kremlin
Russia

Re: Quite an "about-face" over Iraq

Post by vladimir » Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:26 pm

The Add Jay, are you feeling OK?

Because your whole post is kind of...a rambling definitive example of what a non sequitur should be... :?

You may want to get that looked at.
Jesus loves you...Mexico is great, right? ;)
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Born-Confused, Google Adsense [Bot], Username Taken and 120 guests