Flame of the day (FotD)

Skordopordonikos · Post by **Skordopordonikos** » January 23, 2003, 12:20 pm

It always amazed me that for decades the Russian government was able to effectively keep their own people completely in the dark regarding their activities.

But the more I read, the more I discovered that what I had learned and read in American History books and newspapers regarding the US government's actions was total fiction.

To generalize the difference between the two - heh to the point of being wrong - is that most Russians knew they were being lied to and were resigned to it; whereas most Americans are either oblivious, or don't give a sh-- what their government does, so long as it doesn't effect them, and doesn't alter their belief that America has the moral ground.

The problem is:
Name one madman (Osama included) in the last 50 years that the US hasn't been directly or indirectly responsible in training and arming. Lets pick the wonderful way we've operated in the Mideast: The US sent agents to train the Shah of Iran's secret police on how to interrogate and torture people - they even wrote them a manual; and the Shah's men tortured and killed thousands for decades. When the Shah and the US were eventually thrown out of Iran, Iraq became the US' new best friend, even though it was common knowledge that Saddam butchered people by the thousands and often leads his own torture sessions (apparently he gets off on burning people alive). Where do you think he got the equipment and technological knowledge for his 'weapons of mass destruction'? Freaking aliens?

It's not like these are isolated incidents, the US has done this time and time again. As long as the money's good and we can get a hand in their pocket, what they do to their own people - and to some extent, their neighbor's people - doesn't matter. And then, AMAZINGLY, Americans are stunned when they discover there are actually people in this world that dislike the US.

The blame does not solely lie upon the US, international arms sales are a trillion dollar business, and it would appear that many of the major blunders our government has made regarding arms sales was because the US was afraid our 'allies' Britain, France or Russia would beat them to the deal. Where our own laws have blocked the weapons sale, our government arranges a third party to act as an intermediary.

(have to keep those hands clean...)

So.... let's take a look at Iraq. The US used it's power to block the sale of food and medicine to Iraq over the last ten years. It's not like Saddam was under any compunction to fairly distribute the supplies he did have. Instead he took care of his own, and the embargo effectively murdered thousands of the children whose people we purport to want to help by removing Saddam. How in any way does killing their children endear the US to them?

Ten years ago, it was decided to leave Saddam in office because his removal might cause Iraq to merge with Iran since the vast majority of its people share the same belief and culture of those currently in power in Iran. To see Persia reborn in the modern era was unpalatable to the US - too much foriegn oil in the control of people that could not be bargained with.

So what has changed? The US is now getting about 50% of it's foreign oil from Russia. Soooo, time to clean house.

The hard cold fact is: US foreign policy is about making a buck, and selling destruction makes OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of them. There's no doubt in my mind that the US - this administration in particular - would glass slag anybody - freaking anybody - and need no proof other than claiming it was necessary to protect our way of life, and most Americans would sleep well in their belief in God and country and all was well in the world.

I'm going to stop before I really get on a rant, or am I too late.

flames away,

miir · Post by **miir** » January 23, 2003, 12:23 pm

I don't think anyone can disagree that US Foreign policy is questionable, at best.

Arsecn · Post by **Arsecn** » January 23, 2003, 12:26 pm

JACKASS!

miir · Post by **miir** » January 23, 2003, 12:28 pm

Arsecn wrote:JACKASS!

Shit, I can't believe I missed that one.

Well, I see your JACKASS and raise you a JACKASS!

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » January 23, 2003, 12:36 pm

Yer slipping Miir. I'll toss in my own JackASS.

Pyronius Flamebringer · January 23, 2003, 1:07 pm

Obviously your dont beleive your claims well enough to stake your name behind them with your anon account.

As an American I would agree to the point that this countries dealing are almost always in its best interest...And currently we have a moron for a president.

The problem is we cant feel secure unless we feel the rest of the world is secure. All it takes is one country to launch an ICBM then guess what....Im dead your dead....everybodies dead....Assured Mutual Destruction....

I would think one would be pretty arrogant to claim they know even 25% of the true interactions between leaders of countries....if the government has something they dont want the public to see....its usually pretty easy for them to conceal.

I understand a lot of the Anti US sentiment....sure it seems to many countries that we try to police the world...and to some degree yes I guess we do try....but in reality...I would have to say it comes from our own feeling of insecurity... What would have the world said if America butted in pre World war 2 and stopped Germany from re arming itself? We would have been seen the same way we are in the current situation....Germany isnt any of our business...it isnt even relativly close to us what are we doing govering its actions?? The industry was probably making a lot of jobs for ppl, those families might have been plunged into poverty if we stopped them from arming. But it would have stopped many many deaths...(Not saying anything bad about Germany now hehe its a great country and would like to visit it some day)

I guess with this example what im trying to say is most of our dealings such with iraq, it seems we are attacking something thats not a threat, when in reality we are trying to prevent it from even becoming to the point of being a threat..

Just my views on the situation...

Midnyte_Ragebringer · January 23, 2003, 1:08 pm

Foreign policy always questionable for sure, yes.

JACKASS to ya!

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » January 23, 2003, 1:09 pm

Another ignorant blizzard cocksucker posting half truths under an anon condition.

FUCK YOU JACKASS!

Half of what you say is true, half is false, half a liar is a full liar.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » January 23, 2003, 1:13 pm

Jackass..

Skordopordonikos · Post by **Skordopordonikos** » January 23, 2003, 1:30 pm

Aaahhh, Pyronius.

People are quite bizarre... They can blithely pass their days totally oblivious to what takes place around them, work and play with those around them in a comradely fashion, but can suddenly become quite perturbed and even - gasp - rude if any of their fundamental beliefs are challenged. I posted anon because I didn't want my post to affect my gameplay. 'Whimper, now no one will play EQ with me'.

Oh, and as for Germany... Hitler was able to seize power and arm Germany because the Treaty of Versaille (WW I) squeezed every drop of cash out of the country. Re-arming in defiance of the Treaty became a symbol of national pride. The German mark was so worthless people were literally wheeling it around in wheelbarrows and using it to plaster their walls. It made the American Depression look like a holiday.

Actually, it helps to reinforce my point about the dichotomy between US Government actions and the American peoples' rather naive view of the world. The American people vociferously resisted any participation in WW II, (typical belief was along the lines of 'It's a European problem, we're not going to bail them out again) even when it was quite evident that Hitler was the grand poobah of all Asshats.

And incidentally we sold arms to both sides in WW I and WW II pretty much up to the day we entered the war.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 23, 2003, 1:49 pm

How about Ho Chi Minh smart guy? Castro? The Somalian warlord....name escapes me at the moment.

For every name you can directly tie to us, there are 4 minor wanna be's that are fucking up their country with no help or ties to the U.S. gubment. It is basically that no one wants to accept any kind of responsibility anymore....the people of the U.S. included.

You tell me how the U.S. has been the main instigation in turmoil and wars in the Middle East for the past 2000 years when it has only been in existence as a country for 200. You come back when you have done your research and inform me asswit. I really am just dying to learn how a country can cause wars before they are created.

Edit: and while I am in a pissy mood, let me educate people on one thing that has been spread as misinformation for the last 500 years. Columbus did not "discover" shit. Neither did Amerigo Vespucci or the Chinese. Those motherfuckers invaded the land now known as the U.S. The American Indians were fully aware that this land existed before those fuckers were sucking their mothers titties. That will be all.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » January 23, 2003, 1:54 pm

You say:

The U.S. claims that WWII was a "European problem" so you hate the U.S. for not sticking its nose in your business.

The U.S. now sticks its nose in the worlds' businss and you hate the U.S. for it....

I suppose the U.S. will always be the evil overlord and root of all problems.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » January 23, 2003, 2:01 pm

Skordopordonikos wrote:I posted anon because I didn't want my post to affect my gameplay. 'Whimper, now no one will play EQ with me'.

I doubt people will avoid you just because of your opinions. I disagree with most of the people here at one point or another, but I'm not going to ignore them in game cause of it. And you'll find that pretty much everyone here is the same way.

You'll find that anon posters get no respect here. You may think you are protecting your in-game relationships, but you won't ever develop any positive ones here being anon. As a matter of principle, I avoid those who hide behind anon names. I figure that if I have the balls to tell everyone who I am, then you should.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 23, 2003, 2:37 pm

Skordopordonikos wrote:I posted anon because I didn't want my post to affect my gameplay. 'Whimper, now no one will play EQ with me'.

lol : ) It doesn't matter what you post here for the most part.

Now post your in-game name you commie!

Skordopordonikos wrote:So.... let's take a look at Iraq. The US used it's power to block the sale of food and medicine to Iraq over the last ten years. It's not like Saddam was under any compunction to fairly distribute the supplies he did have.

What a load of shit. There were provisions for food and medicine. Bullshit like that weakens credibility for the post.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » January 23, 2003, 2:42 pm

You say:

The U.S. claims that WWII was a "European problem" so you hate the U.S. for not sticking its nose in your business.

The U.S. now sticks its nose in the worlds' businss and you hate the U.S. for it....

I suppose the U.S. will always be the evil overlord and root of all problems.

I don't hate the US I'm just sick of western democracies dressing up their self-interest as "teh right thing to do!".
Tip: If you do "the right thing" when it suits you and turn a blind eye when it doesn't you are a hypocrit.
I consider my own government just as bad on this point as any but we gave up gunboat diplomacy quite a while back.

Skordopordonikos · Post by **Skordopordonikos** » January 23, 2003, 2:44 pm

Okay.... I'm not US bashing, (well maybe a little), but let's try again...

In the past 50 years weapons have been exported worldwide to people and countries with the full knowledge that they would be used to commit mass murder. Screw Nuclear disarmament, why do the major economic nations of the world still export weapons?

If the US and other nations want to make a buttload of toys for their national defense, fine; but not one freaking peashooter should be exported - then you can talk to me about responsibility and accountability.

I'm thinking it would be nice for the major powers to go into a country and restore normalcy if they knew their own weapons were not going to be used against them.

The fact is a total nutjob like Saddam would not be able to rise and hold power for long if he was not equipped to do so. Last time I checked oil and sand makes a pretty crappy weapon.

As for Kilmoll's post regarding Ho Chi Minh, Castro and Somalia....

We rebuffed Ho because he was a - gasp - nationalist, so he took his business elsewhere.

Castro. Ahhhh. Fucking Castro. He may be an evil bastard but you have to respect his durability. Problem here is I'm actually old enough to remember a good portion of his rise to power and nothing I saw is even remotely mentioned in our history books. He's just suddenly 'there'. My friend, take a good guess where he got the money and arms while in exile to overthrow Batista. Interesting sidenote: When Castro came to power, it was estimated that 80% of the country's GNP was going to the US and/or the mob's pockets. Batista was talking nationalizing American businesses and the casinos, and Castro was our 'golden boy' to restore order. Well he did alright. Once he saw the irreversible corruption in his homeland, he kicked the US out and lined a good portion of the former government - and even a few friends that he thought were controlled by the CIA - up against the wall.

Samalia. Find any, ANY person from Somalia and ask him who hosed up their country. The US and USSR played 'topple the regime' in that place for decades - all so they could control a freaking strategic airbase. Their warlords have enough ammunition to wage war non-stop for years... and that is exactly what they've done.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » January 23, 2003, 2:49 pm

I was sure Ho Chi Minh has the US's bestest pal in the late 50s and took lots of nice US dolla and guns until they parted company.

Castro rattled some cages for 13 days in 63 but was hardly a threat to world peace or a "brutal madman!!". But the USs hands are clean on this one

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » January 23, 2003, 2:50 pm

Bah, Pol Pot was the most evil bastard of any of them. Fucker would have someone killed for wearing glasses. I think from 1975-1979 he slaughtered over 2 million Cambodians.

At the age of 6, you were required to work 15 hours a day and if you could not meet your quota? Executed on the spot. Makes Castro look like Ghandi.

Skordopordonikos · Post by **Skordopordonikos** » January 23, 2003, 2:54 pm

[quote="WinnowWhat a load of shit. There were provisions for food and medicine. Bullshit like that weakens credibility for the post.[/quote]

Actually, aahh, um. that did happen. We eventually allowed some food and medicine into the country... Get this, from the goodness of our hearts, humanitarian reasons? Nopers, for fucking oil.

Amazing. We even called it 'food for oil'.

Sigh. I was an Intel specialist during the Persian Gulf War (PGW). You would not believe the things that occured there, or in OMG the former Yugoslav Republic.... Atrocities of a scale I honestly don't think has been seen since Genghis roamed the steppe. And nothing, I mean absolutely nothing was done to help them. - Not to put too cynical a spin on it, but there was no money in it.

Some day, ask about what happened to a bunch of our Spec Ops guys in the PGW and we'll start another FotD...

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » January 23, 2003, 2:56 pm

Bah, Pol Pot was the most evil bastard of any of them. Fucker would have someone killed for wearing glasses. I think from 1975-1979 he slaughtered over 2 million Cambodians.

This is peanuts to ole' Joe Stalin though. 10 million he is credited with??
Oh whoops he was an ally while it suited us so I better shush.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 23, 2003, 3:36 pm

When are you going to address my education on the turmoil of the Middle East for the last 200 years?

When did the U.S. start manufacturing AK-47's and other Russian military equipment that is so prevalent throughout that region? Did we start making U.S. military weapons that chamber the 7.62 x 39?

We armed Iraq with Scuds? When did we start making those?

Am I missing some critical information regarding U.S. shoulder fired weapons or did we start making Russian RPGs?

If we supplied so many arms to all these fuckers, why do they use RUSSIAN manufactured (or copies made in other eastern bloc nations)ones instead?

If the U.S. armed Iraq, why does the majority of ther armor appear to be SOVIET????

We arm everyone.....that is why they mostly use Soviet weapons genius.

noel · Post by **noel** » January 23, 2003, 3:45 pm

This flame doesn't even rate. Flame of the day, my ass.

rhyae · Post by **rhyae** » January 23, 2003, 4:05 pm

Edit: Edited out after the realization it added absolutely nothing of value.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 23, 2003, 4:09 pm

Winnow happily wrote:What a load of shit. There were provisions for food and medicine. Bullshit like that weakens credibility for the post.

Skordopordonikos wrote:Actually, aahh, um. that did happen. We eventually allowed some food and medicine into the country... Get this, from the goodness of our hearts, humanitarian reasons? Nopers, for fucking oil. Amazing. We even called it 'food for oil'.

I'm fine with food for oil. It's not like kicking Iraq out of Kuwait was free for us. Medicine and Food for oil isn't wrong. Iraq had the oil to give. This isn't a humanitarian mission to an african country with no means to support itself. It also helps pay to rebuild the oil fields saddam destroyed on his way out of Kuwait.

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » January 23, 2003, 4:10 pm

Those motherfuckers invaded the land now known as the U.S. The American Indians were fully aware that this land existed before those fuckers were sucking their mothers titties. That will be all.

This "we were here first so everyone else here is a fucking thief" shit gets really old. That and the perpetuation of the politically correct myth of the native North American Natives being "Custodians of Nature" (take a look at someplace called Head Smashed In buffalo jump in Southern Alberta, Canada, and tell me how ecologically sensitive they were, driving hundreds of buffalo at a time over a cliff).

What happened in North America is what has happened all through history. Tribe A needs to move or expand. They encounter Tribe B. Stronger tribe wins, weaker tribe is either subjugated or wiped out. Hell, it happened on smaller scales within the "North American Indian" population. The barbarian tribes did it in Europe and Asia for centuries. Tribes did it in North America too. The Europeans who came to North America had a higher tech base and more numbers, thus they won the conflict(s) that arose.

I'm not condoning this or saying it would be allowed with todays moral and ethical perspectives, but I think the people who want to cling to the "Whiteman stole the Native American's land!" song need to get the fuck over it. Its done. Its a history chapter.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 23, 2003, 5:01 pm

I don't think anyone should "get over it". By this reasoning, the U.S. should expand and go kick the shit out of the entire Middle East and claim it as their own lands since we are out of land and/or oil. We are higher in numbers and more technologically advanced right? Bullshit is bullshit no matter when it occurred.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » January 23, 2003, 5:23 pm

Wulfran wrote:I'm not condoning this or saying it would be allowed with todays moral and ethical perspectives

Kilmoll did you even finish reading his post?

just curious.

Pyronius Flamebringer · January 23, 2003, 5:46 pm

Skor you make it sound as if the US is of a hive mind...like every person is on the same page.....just because we have companies that produce weapons and sell them to buyers, doesnt mean that thats our countries intentions as a whole.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 23, 2003, 5:51 pm

Fuck you Truant! I am trying to help the weakest goddamn flame post in the history of this board and you bring your zerging ass to question my reading capacity?!!? If you don't have something mean to say, then don't say anything at all!!!!!

Acies · Post by **Acies** » January 23, 2003, 6:16 pm

Wulfran wrote:This "we were here first so everyone else here is a fucking thief" shit gets really old. That and the perpetuation of the politically correct myth of the native North American Natives being "Custodians of Nature" (take a look at someplace called Head Smashed In buffalo jump in Southern Alberta, Canada, and tell me how ecologically sensitive they were, driving hundreds of buffalo at a time over a cliff).

Yeah, we paid em back though for all those Buffalo by walking them across the nation in a death march themselves

Frankly, America is a land of great ideals, but our methods are not matched by even shitbags like Osama (Whom we trained), Castro (Hmm), Kudafi (Bigger hmm). The atrocities that America has commited is buried under placid and annoying high school history books.
Think biological and nuclear weapons testing on our own soldiers.
Think the DEA in it's entirety.
Think of how willing we are to kill a percieved enemy, even if it means going through millions of innocents with the sword first.
Anyone who says that America has a great and noble history is either blind or a liar.

However, anyone who says that America has the capasity to change for the better, even best, is someone I will agree with.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 24, 2003, 1:10 am

I love this isolationist crap.

"Just stay out, it's none of your buisness."

Ok, I guess we stop trading with everyone else then, too. And just to make sure we have no need to protect foreign interests, let's stop foreign companies from investing in American stock.

Now who is in the hurt locker, motherfucker?

The entire Middle East region is one big balls-up. Mostly because the idea of "human rights" is something that simply does not exist in most of the cultures there. We in the west have such an absolute belief in the right of an individual to walk and breathe that it's very hard to make any kind of "pure" ties to a government there.

So, what's to do? Every country in the world relies on the Middle East for oil. Everyone wants to see peace and prosperity and stability in the region. And yet the social and historical dynamics there almost guarantee that no lasting peace is ever going to exist.

It's a fucked-up situation, filled with fucked-up idealists and a huge lack of hope on the part of the common man.

Give it twenty years, then analyze some of your own decisions from today. See how many of them were really, seriously dumb. Now add weapons to the scenario and quit throwing stones.

Acies · Post by **Acies** » January 24, 2003, 5:20 am

Fallanthas wrote:Now who is in the hurt locker, motherfucker?

Is that addressing me Falla?

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 24, 2003, 12:15 pm

It's addressing anyone with their head far enough up their ass to think that "hands-off" has been viable world politics at any point in the last 40 years.

I am sick to death of this particular brand of stupidity.

Mezzmor · Post by **Mezzmor** » January 24, 2003, 12:34 pm

Thomas Jefferson said it best - meddling in the affairs of Europe could only lead to our own undoing (or something like that - not meant to be an exact quote)

Where did our problems start?

World War 1, when the US decided to get involved late in the war, then flex its political muscle in the peace process, that ultimately severely punished Germany and led to the rise of Hitler.

Question - theoretically - would the world be a different place if we would have heeded the founding fathers' words and kept to ourselves over the last 90 years?

The problem is - we keep making the same mistakes over and freaking over again. We either educate, train and finance the madmen or we topple a regime and replace and rebuild...and EVERY time it backfires.

When are we going to learn - it's time to get out of the worlds' affairs period. Bring the boys back home. Shut down the airfields and bases overseas. Stop the sale of arms. Move to a policy of the DEFENSE of the USA at its borders...start encouraging free trade around the world.

At this point - it can't get any worse.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » January 24, 2003, 12:36 pm

Skordopordonikos wrote:It's not like these are isolated incidents, the US has done this time and time again.

People of the left always seem to purposely forget the historical context of situations like Iraq and Iran. You know what? People try to do the best they can with the information they have at the time. Sometimes they fuck up. Like Bush the senior fucked up in 1991 when he didn't go after Saddam. I applaud the fact that Bush the junior is going to take care of unfinished business.

As an added bonus, when we are done in Iraq next month I think we should move those troops on over to the Korean peninsula and remind some communist weenies just who it was that kicked their asses 50 years ago. Then we can bring home all those troops we've paid to sit in Korea for all these years.

Bend over Canada... you're next...

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 24, 2003, 12:42 pm

Move to a policy of the DEFENSE of the USA at its borders...start encouraging free trade around the world.

Now here is a prime example of hasn't-got-a-clue....

Do you really think buisnesses thrive in unstable political environments? Your choices are:

1. Bring home the troops and to hell with trade.

2. Provide what stability you can and continue trade.

Take your pick.

Mezzmor · Post by **Mezzmor** » January 24, 2003, 2:13 pm

So what you are saying is that we should invade Russia so McDonalds can continue their expansion in Russia in a politically stable environment.

China isn't exactly stable either. US businesses have complained repeatedly about the government graft system that is set up there and how impossible it is to get started. For that matter, they illegally copy and distribute most everything we produce in america with intelluctual property rights. Lets invade China!

I sir, have a clue, having majored in history and a study of the constitution of the U.S. Please, point out to me where it say in the constitution that when necessary for US business interests we should impose our will on other countries. Please point out to me in the writings of Jefferson and Hamilton and the federalist papers where the founders of this country were firmly of the belief that imposing the will of the United States in the conflicts of other countries around the world was a productive measure.

Free trade and proprty ownership are what made America great. Consider for a brief moment that with the trade of our products - the trade of ideas flourishes. Free trade and staying out of the political affaris of every other country in the world just might make more friends and enlighten more people about what freedom means than the presence of US troops in any given country around the world.

Am I a liberal peacenik? Far from it. Had we never meddled in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar, Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, and some goofball ran 2 airplanes into the WTC, my reaction is to fry him.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 24, 2003, 2:25 pm

Mezzmor,

Nice try.

Follow trade back as far as the silk road caravans. Tell me what one constant was/is required by every merchant. This shouldn't take long if you are the student of history you claim to be.

Buisness requires stability. That does not mean favorable political regime. The two are not the same.

You seem to think that politics and trade are somehow two seperate things. I honestly can't imagine what books you read that gave you that idea. Foreign politics are based, grounded and begat by trade. Not just for the U.S. , but for every nation.

Barain Melangell · Post by **Barain Melangell** » January 24, 2003, 2:52 pm

You are WRONG ...JACKASS

The US uses as its main infantry weapon the M16A2...Name for me any Country other then the US that has started any shit with anyone that uses the M16A2, or older M16A1. Every single country out there that you have named uses the AR47 or AK47 both made buy former USSR Countries. So so much for the US makes and exports weapons of murder to the World.

And about Iraq.....The US blocked humanitarian aid to that country when it was found out that they were not using the money to buy food and meds but weapons. So no the US did not kill thousands of people buy bloaking money to buy food and meds because the money never bought food or meds.

Currently the United States represents less then 10% of the World population but yet we feed 75% of the World.

The United States provides 90% of all the Meds that are used in the World.

There are currently 119 Countries that are default on $793,000,000,000,000 in loans. And if the US was any other Bank any where in the world there would be 119 few countries to Worry about because they would have been repossesed(And yes this includes almost every Europian Counrty)...To date only one country has ever repaids its loans from the US and that is Japan.

The US currently has a stock pile of Oil and Fuel that would last us for 75 years. We buy forien oil only because to stop doing so would colaps the econemies of every forien oil country out there.

The United States is the ONLY country that is self suffcient and if we were to do as you seem to think we should sir and go back to the United States view of world affairs cira 1890 we would set back and watch the world self destruct and every country out there would start genicidial wars just so that they could feed there people. So I agree if people like you think that we should just say FOOK the World and let them do what they want and not help any, will have no more peroblems because there will be no one left to bother us.

miir · Post by **miir** » January 24, 2003, 2:59 pm

So so much for the US makes and exports weapons of murder to the World

Currently the United States represents less then 10% of the World population but yet we feed 75% of the World

The US currently has a stock pile of Oil and Fuel that would last us for 75 years.

The United States is the ONLY country that is self suffcient

I doubt you intended that post to be humorous but it was, by far, the most hillarious thing I have read all week.

Pure fucking comedic genious.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » January 24, 2003, 3:34 pm

Mezzmor's Point #1:

World War 1, when the US decided to get involved late in the war, then flex its political muscle in the peace process, that ultimately severely punished Germany and led to the rise of Hitler.

Point #2:

The problem is - we keep making the same mistakes over and freaking over again. We either educate, train and finance the madmen or we topple a regime and replace and rebuild...and EVERY time it backfires.

1. Are you saying that it is the United States' fault that Hitler was born? and that it is the U.S.' fault that he wanted to rule the world, etc, etc??

2. The U.S. financed and helped rebuild Japan after they destroyed a large portion of it. Last time I checked, Japan is not a "backfired" solution to a problem the U.S. helped with.

I would even go as far to say that South Korea and North Korea, with the help of other great countries, was a good solution AT THE TIME of its conception. I don't see that as a "backfire" either. But hey, next time we won't help...and the U.S. should just let genocide happen.

rhyae · Post by **rhyae** » January 24, 2003, 4:03 pm

Hey Canada, are you ready to be invaded?

The following article which was posted in Toronto, Canada's leading newspaper, the Globe & Mail:
Canada could have an answer to U.S. oil woes

By MATHEW INGRAM
Globe and Mail Update

Why does the United States have to tiptoe so carefully in the Middle East, trying to play one country off against another, careful not to upset certain countries? Why does it even have to get involved in Middle Eastern politics in the first place? One word: Oil. Without the supply of oil that countries such as Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran and others produce, the United States would be in deep trouble. And so, the U.S. government repeatedly finds itself drawn into a volatile morass of shifting allegiances.
But where else could the U.S. come up with the oil to satisfy its needs?

The U.S. government itself mentioned one possible solution in Vice-President Dick Cheney's energy report: Alberta's oil sands, a vast ocean of tar-like goo in the northern part of the province. By most estimates, there is more oil in the so-called "tar sands" than there is in all of Saudi Arabia, or about 300 billion barrels that is recoverable using existing technology. That's enough to supply the United States for more than 40 years - plus there's another 1.5 trillion to two trillion barrels on top of that, which would be harder to extract. That's 10 times what Saudi Arabia has.

Here we come...

Skordopordonikos · Post by **Skordopordonikos** » January 24, 2003, 4:04 pm

Fallanthas wrote:Mezzmor,

Nice try.

Follow trade back as far as the silk road caravans. Tell me what one constant was/is required by every merchant. This shouldn't take long if you are the student of history you claim to be.

Buisness requires stability.... Not just for the U.S. , but for every nation.

O M G .... You REALLY don't mean that do you? The 'great peace' that ensured a merchant could ride untouched from what was left of Kiev to points East was created by Genghis and his descendants. Conservative estimates are Genghis alone was responsible for killing a quarter of all the people living at that time. He had defeated the two armies waiting for him in Europe, there was absolutely no real military force between him and the English Channel. (One of the MAJOR turning points of history)

But as luck would have it, the bastard died, and the Mongols returned home to decide who would lead the Horde. The descendants decided to just control roughly everything from the south western steppe region of the Ukraine - east.

For over 300 years they brutally kept the peace; and in large part are most responsible for that particular Russian persona of protecting the Rodina/'Motherland' at ALL costs. That is why they seized half of Europe, because they did not trust the US and in particular England. (Probably rightly so, I'm afraid to say).

But back to your great period of trade. One of the major crossroads on the Silk Road where goods were traded was Samarkand. Sigh, in quite possibly one of the major underestimations of an opponent ever, the city leaders decided to skimp on the 'tribute' (sort of like a 1/3 of all your goods tax) that was owed to the Mongols. Not a good idea. They put every man, woman, and child - probably around 250,000 - to the sword. They cut off their heads and made a pyramid of them as a reminder of what happens when you don't pay tribute. You know, it was several generations before anyone, ANY ONE tried to stand up to the Mongols...

(Sidenote: Samarkand was eventually rebuilt, but it's down the road a ways. People still don't like to go to where the old city was....)

Is that the price you think the US needs to pay just to ensure we can sell stuff? Because that is EXACTLY the kind of death and destruction the US (AND Britain, France, Russia, etc.) have condoned by selling weapons to every asshat that has a buck. Hell, we even give them fucking credit lines.

As regards the founding fathers... that particularly applies here I think. They were very good Capitalists, in fact the first draft of the Declaration of Independance had 'pursuit of property' instead of happiness.

Ahh, but their disdain of some outside (foreign really isn't the word because they were um British) presence making decisions that controlled their ability to make both political and economic decisions was total anathema to them.

It always amazes me that our good politicians like to quote from the Declaration - at least up to the 'life, liberty.... ' part, but it's the next section that shows how far we've strayed: (my Bold)

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Notice it doesn't say instead of 'People' or 'them'... ummm a rich large democratic nation who has only 'their' (please) best interests at heart. I'm not saying the US is the only one with dirty hands - far from it compared to others. But supposedly the US strives to promote certain ideals that not only is an important step toward free trade, but that also provides for a pretty non-government participation in their life. (Although with the Homeland Security Act, you can kiss that goodbye, at least until people wake up and put a stop to it).

Believe it or not - doesn't really matter to me - I am an American Patriot. Served my country with distinction and honor, carried the highest security clearance that this nation has. And I would personally like to stick my foot up George's ass for the incredibly stupid decisions he's made.

But to be fair, it's not his fault, and really not the fault of the bastards he's surrounded by. This generation - and the next several generations - are going to pay for the sins of their fathers. I wish you all luck.

Oh, and almost forgot... I'm not saying the US or any other developed nation should crawl into it's shell and write off the world.

What I am saying is: Stop Exporting Weapons.
If it affects the bottom line, oh fucking well. Make a new product.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » January 24, 2003, 4:30 pm

Mezzmor wrote:World War 1, when the US decided to get involved late in the war, then flex its political muscle in the peace process, that ultimately severely punished Germany and led to the rise of Hitler.

You actually posted this, then later say you majored in history?

1. The US didn't get actively involved in WWI until after they were brought into the war.
2. The US backed out of the peace process in Europe because the leaders did not like the idea of the League of Nations. The League of Nations was responsible for restructuring the new country of Germany after the war. It was not the US's responsibility.

Mezzmor wrote:Question - theoretically - would the world be a different place if we would have heeded the founding fathers' words and kept to ourselves over the last 90 years?

Yes, it would be very different. Nazis would be ruling the planet and the US would be part of Mexico.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 24, 2003, 4:40 pm

Is that the price you think the US needs to pay just to ensure we can sell stuff? Because that is EXACTLY the kind of death and destruction the US (AND Britain, France, Russia, etc.) have condoned by selling weapons to every asshat that has a buck. Hell, we even give them fucking credit lines.

Bullshit, sir.

Now, tell me the last time you saw any photograph of a terrorist holding an M-16.....

What's that? Silence? Crickets chirping?

Note it has already been said that we do quite well in trade with China. We do not require a docile regime to trade, we require a somewhat stable one.

The mongols were ruthless, yes. The benefit to trade was in the relative stability over a long period of time. The merchant could care less whether that stability is provided by a despot, a communistic council or a picture of the Virgin Mary two hundred feet tall. All that is needed is reasonable regional stability.

So, someone else step up to the plate and play policeman for a while. Christ knows we Americans would be glad to let someone else man the guns for a while.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » January 24, 2003, 4:49 pm

some people would argue the Kalashnikov is a better rifle than the M-16, and cheaper too probably. that is one reason you see more 'bad guys' using them

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » January 24, 2003, 4:59 pm

One thing I always read about Kalashnikovs vs M-16s or the FN's from Belgium (and they are ALL Estrosiath's Fault!!!) is that they were less complex and thus easier to maintain for less well equipped/trained forces.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » January 24, 2003, 5:03 pm

Also, in all fairness, I don't think I read anyone stating this yet:

Just because the "enemy" is not using american made weapons, does not mean we did not supply the means or the actual weapons themselves. Funding is funding...and if that funding is used to buy AK-47's, then we supplied them.

Since I live in America, I cannot say I was there to see who got the funding and what it was meant to be for and what it eventually did buy. I can only speculate, and believe what media information I want to....just like the other 99% of you here.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 24, 2003, 5:05 pm

One would also argue that we armed Iraq when they were at war with Iran. Show me the U.S. armor that made Iraq one of the "top" armies in the world. With yoru resources at CNN you surely can disprove that Iraq uses Soviet tanks and APCs almost exclusively (as an interesting side note, the rest of their armor is British).

Pubin · Post by **Pubin** » January 24, 2003, 5:07 pm

I had this wild and crazy dream that people actually took the time to read posts from anonymous downs syndrome children on this forum.

see? dreams do come true

VeeshanVault

Flame of the day (FotD)

Flame of the day (FotD)

Re: Pyronius

Re: Pyronius

Re: Pyronius

Let's try again. The short version with smaller words...

Re: Pyronius

..

Re: Pyronius

Re: Flame of the day (FotD)

...

The Silk Road - DOH.