VeeshanVault

Aranuil wrote:Not that I really think Iraq is much of a threat...

Neither do I, and thus why I see the use of military force as being a bit overzealous.

kyoukan type-R wrote:

Aranuil wrote: I'll be blunt. As long as my family/friends and the interests of my country and our allies are safe, he can do anything he damn well pleases.

And that line of unthinking is about to kill a couple hundred thousand innocent Iraqi civilians.

But yeah, in times like this we really should be thinking about the livelihood of those Texas billionaires and massive manufacturing corporations with defense department contracts.

The fact is kyoukan, like it or not... the USA, "our" country for the most part of the people here, will in fact KILL as needed... thousands of innocents, IF in the end it means stopping a few of those "innocents" from later on becoming "terrorists" that would kill our own. Collateral damage if you will...

Right or wrong, it IS our nation and we will back it to the end. That is the pledge of an American citizen.

As for the rest of you, just pray the USA's foriegn policy continues to favor you and the county you reside in... or you too may face the end of her barrel, much similar to the terrorist harboring and backing nations such as Iraq. Afghanistan was just the start of things to come... I suggest all the religious to start reading "Revelations".

I'm going to kill myself now.

/wave!

Make sure to clean up the blood when you're done!

what xan said also scares me to the point of losing sleep

You religious folk scare me.

Anyone who thinks "Revelations" is anything but a ghost story needs to have their fucking head examined.

Xanupox wrote:As for the rest of you, just pray the USA's foriegn policy continues to favor you and the county you reside in... or you too may face the end of her barrel, much similar to the terrorist harboring and backing nations such as Iraq. Afghanistan was just the start of things to come... I suggest all the religious to start reading "Revelations".

lollerz go usa lets roll nuke all brown people i speak for my country's foreign policy

puh-fuckin'-leeze.

If you can't look past oil interests you have no right to open your pie hole in matters concerning foreign policy. No offence, but canadian media isn't going to be kind to the U.S. (i sometimes wonder how many half-assed quality imports we have to buy from the great white 1/4th inhabitalbe north before the psuedofrench culture will show some respect). Xanupox is correct. Collateral damage isn't an issue while our president is looking out for the welfare of Americans. Iraq is indisputably involved in terrorism, and the U.S. is the primary overseas target of pussytactics. If wiping out a few million "innocent" citizens is what it takes to save the life of ONE homeless, jobless, retarded American...then so be it.

The fear of U.S. agression is natural when you come from a virtually defenseless and natural resourse-poor country like Canada. God forfuckingbid that your defensive insulation (i.e. the U.S.) realizes what a worthless ally you really make. Lets face it, if dubya decided to annex Canada TODAY as the 51st state, there wouldn't be a goddam fucking thing you could do about it.

Lighten the fuck up and realize what a valuable ally economically, militarilly, and socially that America is.

If I was half as anti-arab as Kyoukan is anti-American, I would be just as pathetic as kyoukan is, amazing when people think they are being superior in their morality while attacking others. Kyoukan sounds just like every KKK joining redneck in the US, the vocabulary is just different.

In all fairness, we're pulling down our old puppet regime because he's not behaving himself. If Saddam would have continued to be a good tyrant, and stuck to opressing the people and keeping the oil flowing, the US wouldn't even be looking his way.

EDIT: Xan, you make teh baby Jebus cry.

Pubin wrote:natural resourse-poor country like Canada.

This pretty much sums up how god damn fucking stupid you are when it comes to other countries. I wonder if you could even find Canada on a map.

Natural resource poor.. Okay.. We'll talk natural resource poor after we cut off half your water supply, practially the entire western and central USA's power, most of your fish, and 75% of your softwood lumber. You people are such arrogant consumerists you don't even know where your fucking stuff comes from.

But yeah, you decide were worthless and invade us or annex us or whatever other jingoistic moronity the Charmin didn't quite catch after you wiped this morning. We'll just take Ho Chi Minh's EZ Way To Defend Your Country From An Incompetent Bunch of Failures.

Not sure where you got anti US from my posts on this thread though, unless the bush administration are the last Americans left on the planet.

Anything else your ass wants to add to this thread?

Pubin you really must have been home schooled in your corrugated tin hut! Shit how stupid can you get? Silver, Nickel, Soft Wood, Hard wood, Oil, Gold hell name a natural resource and Canada has probably 3 to 4 times as much as the USA. The real big one though is fresh potable water dumbass! Not to far in the future the USA will be buying almost all of their water from Canada that is if we are dumb enough to sell it.

Better get those desailination (sp) plants working...

kyoukan type-R wrote:
Natural resource poor.. Okay.. We'll talk natural resource poor after we cut off half your water supply, practially the entire western and central USA's power, most of your fish, and 75% of your softwood lumber. You people are such arrogant consumerists you don't even know where your fucking stuff comes from.

You could cut off those resources for about a day and then you'd get bitch-slapped hard by the US. Don't make us come up there and take care of your French problem. While you may have the resources that the United States needs, you're powerless to stop us from using them.

Not that this would ever happen.

Umm ya ok Minnow... The rest of the world would stand around and let the big bad USA invade Canada? Give me a break. The world has changed and if you think for one second that the US would have an easy time you have less of a brain than I thought.

Keep your BS flag waving we are the best rhetoric on your news stations and in your newspapers cause up here in Canada we don't give a fuck!

I didn't say we'd invade Canada. That's as foolish a notion as Canada cutting off resources to the United States. You can't do that! We love to burn up resources. Unlike you, we use more then one sheet of toilet paper to wipe our asses. It takes a lot of your trees to wipe our asses.

The rest of the world would probably sit around if you cut off our resources except maybe the middle east. They'd be laughing because they know better : )

Now quit trying to hijack this thread and get back to the costumes.

Winnow wrote:I didn't say we'd invade Canada. That's as foolish a notion as Canada cutting off resources to the United States. You can't do that! We love to burn up resources. Unlike you, we use more then one sheet of toilet paper to wipe our asses. It takes a lot of your trees to wipe our asses.

The rest of the world would probably sit around if you cut off our resources except maybe the middle east. They'd be laughing because they know better : )

Now quit trying to hijack this thread and get back to the costumes.

I wasn't talking to you. Shocker, huh?

3 to 4 times as much natural resource as the U.S.? Even you must realize how incorrect that statement is. Energy? Do some research and don't pretend to be an expert about this shit. The U.S. produces roughly 6 times the energy that canada does...if we buy energy from you it's simply a function of promoting trade, not because we are going to be walking to work and reading by candle light without it. Half of the water supply? I feel confident that even you are able-minded enough to read up on that and realize that you aren't even remotely close. Lumber? Ah yes. We do prefer to let you cut down your trees to enable the building of new housing etc. Lord knows Americans want their big beautiful new homes built on land with SOME existing timber. Lets not deplete our land's beautiful forests. You must realize that Americans value their spacious living and bear in mind that we are not forced to cram 91% of our population within 300 kilometers from the border.

Hammerstalker--

Homeschooled in a tin hut or...

Private schooling
College
Law School

Either way the truth of the fact is that Canada is an ally that isn't even worth having. The Bush Admin. is perhaps over-agressive, but their policies aren't irrational. To even pretend that canada could "take the easy hoochy minh" route to defeating the U.S. in an outright war is just silly. Any military technology existing in Canada is a result of American warmonger research. I'm fairly certain the texas teen boy choir could strap on paintball guns and beat canada into submission.

Pubin you really do make me laugh! No one and I mean no one can be that dumb. Yes you produce 6 times the electricity because dumbass you have hrmm more than 6 times our population. However when it comes to any NATURAL resources *note natural* Canada has at the VERY least 3 to 4 times what you have. You know why? Other than the fact that Canada is WAY larger in land mass. Simply you raped your natural resources long ago.

Yes the USA would win a War with Canada but again who gives a shit since the rest of the world wouldn't allow it.

Just remember one year in your history Pubin 1812... Hell we even burned the white house that year so I suppose you might owe us one LOL!

Pubin wrote:3 to 4 times as much natural resource as the U.S.? Even you must realize how incorrect that statement is. Energy? Do some research and don't pretend to be an expert about this shit.

My last job before my current one was a copy editor for the vancouver sun's business and technology section. I am an expert about this shit.

The U.S. produces roughly 6 times the energy that canada does...

And has 10 times the population, and about fifteen times the energy consumption.

if we buy energy from you it's simply a function of promoting trade, not because we are going to be walking to work and reading by candle light without it.

Well yeah of course you do just to promote trade, because the USA is so altruistic and wonderful. Well that and the rolling brownouts in California and South Oregon because Canadian hydro companies can't pump any more power into your country until PG&E (OOPS!) and Enron (UH OH!) pay their fucking bills and upgrade their power infrastructure.

Half of the water supply? I feel confident that even you are able-minded enough to read up on that and realize that you aren't even remotely close.

Poor choice of words on my part. I mean bottled and consumable water. Unsurprisingly the US is #1 for wasting this product as well.

Lumber? Ah yes. We do prefer to let you cut down your trees to enable the building of new housing etc. Lord knows Americans want their big beautiful new homes built on land with SOME existing timber. Lets not deplete our land's beautiful forests. You must realize that Americans value their spacious living and bear in mind that we are not forced to cram 91% of our population within 300 kilometers from the border.

I don't even know what this even means in relation to a coherent argument but okay.

As for the rest of your moronic jingoism, thank you for pretty much proving my entire point. OMFG THE FACT WE CAN NUKE U MEANS WERE BETTER LOLZ GO USA

See what effect your hateful avatar pic has on people, Drustwyn? It turns even loving threads about Halloween into knock-down. drag out flame wars!

This seems appropriate.

the picture has been doctored.

that kid is really a soccer fan for Feyenoord, a dutch team, not the Carolina Hurricanes!!

dont mess with pictures of my son!!

So I am guessing that the question here is,

"Does the End justify the Means"?

That will be a debate that will go on long after we are worm food.

As for Canada, who cares? America's Mini-me really isn't an issue. I am just glad that I live next to Lake Michigan so I don't have to buy water from them. To be honest I really don't much about Canada other than it is north of us and they had Second City TV and Kids in the Hall.

Must say, the 1812 thing is overrated, since Canada proper did not even exist then since it gained independence in 1867. So yes the Brits did pull off a masterful PR stroke, and we beat the hell out of them in New Orleans as a thank you. But Canada did not exist, claiming Canadians burned the White House is like claiming Americans defeated Napoleon.

First of all, the US economy was in a very mild repression up until the point that some religious nuts decided to destroy a major WORLD trade center. The stock markets have yet to recover.

Second, the markets have taken further hits from businesses that were operating illegally under the Clinton administration and have now been caught red handed for Bush to deal with.

Third, Saddam and his buddies in Iraq HAVE had a direct impact on terrorism. They have funded, hosted, trained, and supplied terrorists in the Al Queida organization. However, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and other shitstain countries in that region are guilty of the same thing. If they truly want a "religious" war, then why are they targetting the evil US (whose main religions are basically the same as Islam but in a different language) and not going after China who would be considered "heathens" by those some terrorists? Answer to that question is that China would already have about 3 million soldiers killing every last one of them...and no one would say a word about it. China does not fuck around with dissidents.

Fourth, if the US was ever cornered and had its back against the wall and was about to die off because of the lack of resources, I would be VERY afraid if I was a country rich in resources. I don't care how badly we are down, when you put the people of this country into a spot where they have to fight to survive, then you had better be prepared to get your ass kicked.

Fifth, I would hope to Christ that Raistin would be smart enough to never stick his dick into something that spews what comes out of your mouth. It is definitely not a mystery as to why your ass is not married.

Sixth, the Israel/Palestine fighting reks of Revelations. It is just a matter of time before all hell breaks loose.

Seven, hockey sucks.

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: Second, the markets have taken further hits from businesses that were operating illegally under the Clinton administration and have now been caught red handed for Bush to deal with.

easy to blame it on one party.

fact is thought that while the democrats controlled the executive branch for those 8 years, it was the Republicans who controlled the House and Senate.

And while they campaigned on reforms for accounting practices and improved corporate responsibility as part of their "Contract for America", they did nothing about it upon being elected.

i don't recall Clinton vetoing any corporate reform legislation that Newt Gingrich and his pals sent out from the Hill. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

Third, Saddam and his buddies in Iraq HAVE had a direct impact on terrorism. They have funded, hosted, trained, and supplied terrorists in the Al Queida organization.

my understanding is that Al Queda is not a big fan of the secular government in Iraq. While i think that Iraq certainly has ties to some major terrorist organizations, i don't think Bin Laden's is one of them. Don't confuse the crazy dictator that is Saddam with some sort of widespread Jihad. His motives have little to do with religion, beyond the limited amount of use he gets out of it for political purposes.

Sixth, the Israel/Palestine fighting reks of Revelations. It is just a matter of time before all hell breaks loose.

no it doesnt.

moreover; the book of revelations was a coded commincation regarding the Roman empires persecution of Christians at the time of its writing (~120 AD). It was not something that was initially supposed to be interpretted as prophesy for future generations. That it got included in the Bible is probably more of a fluke than anything, and it is unfortunate since it is so widely misinterpretted by people today to achieve whatever political aims they may have.

But specifically to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, that is a fucking mess. Basically, these two archaic groups engaging in race war using their religion as a means to further polarize their ethnic differences. After all, that is all religion is, means for people to satisfy their biological need for social affiliation.

like wolves are to a pack, we are the same. We have some peculiar neural circuitry that allows us to be influenced emotionally (aka religious epiphany, etc) to further that end.

It is more adaptive for an individual to be a member of a solid social group than to accurately interpret all of their sensory data all of the time .


just doing my part to really throw a curve ball into this thread.

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:First of all, the US economy was in a very mild repression up until the point that some religious nuts decided to destroy a major WORLD trade center.

True it was in a very mild repression, that was showing only signs of growing worse.

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Second, the markets have taken further hits from businesses that were operating illegally under the Clinton administration and have now been caught red handed for Bush to deal with.

Don't assume that they were acting illegaly because Clinton was in office. Association-Causation is just as wrong as being flat out wrong. You can bet your ass businesses were operating illegally prior to any of us even thinking about the possibility.

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Fourth, if the US was ever cornered and had its back against the wall and was about to die off because of the lack of resources, I would be VERY afraid if I was a country rich in resources. I don't care how badly we are down, when you put the people of this country into a spot where they have to fight to survive, then you had better be prepared to get your ass kicked.

That really isn't the point. Just because I could (hypothetically) kick Voronwe's ass doesn't mean it's right to do so. In fact, your example, if taken to an individual level, is known as assaulted robbery, which is illegal.

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: Sixth, the Israel/Palestine fighting reks of Revelations. It is just a matter of time before all hell breaks loose.

I can't tell you the vast number of people who tell me on a weekly basis how much situation x parallels the prophecies of Revelations. And everytime situation x is something different. If you try hard enough, you can believe anything, even when you know it's not true. Be careful.



Finally, I don't want to hear a counterargument of "all's fair in war" because that's a fucking piece of shit write off excuse.

You don't bomb thousands of innocent civilians just to make one person step down.

You don't bomb thousands of innocent civilians just to make one person step down.

As soon as the terrorists agree with this we can all start debating our problems and compromising to come up with solutions.

Aranuil wrote:

You don't bomb thousands of innocent civilians just to make one person step down.

As soon as the terrorists agree with this we can all start debating our problems and compromising to come up with solutions.

So you're saying it's ok to do what terrorists do?

I'm saying if we stop doing what we're doing... they won't. We weren't at war with anyone nor were we considering it one year and 14 days ago.

Bombing Iraq (Bush's proposed plan) will not cause Saddam to step down, it doesn't matter how many Iraqi you kill, he won't step down.
Also, bombing Iraq, is only going to anger more radical Islamic organizations and prompt more action.
bloodshed only begats more bloodshed.

And, this is only speculation, but i'd wager pretty heavily that Bush wanted to play toy soldiers with Saddam a year and fourteen days ago, but now he has an excuse.

edit, is it begat? or begats? i'm not familiar enough with this ancient term, but it's an alteration of a quote.
edit 2, i guess I could've gone the yoda route. Hate leads to suffering, yadda...but that would be pretty retarded in a serious debate. That said, if you use the Chewbacca defense, I will unleash aquaman on you.

You should unleash aquaman anyway. Aquaman was the shit. The Flash is pretty cool too.

Bombing Iraq (Bush's proposed plan) will not cause Saddam to step down...

I don't know that that's the plan, and I also don't know that the ultimate goal is to have Sadaam step down. I believe that having Sadaam comply with the UN declarations is the plan. That includes allowing weapons inspectors to do their job, and prevention of Iraq creating/acquiring weapons of mass destruction. I don't have a problem with this.

And, this is only speculation, but i'd wager pretty heavily that Bush wanted to play toy soldiers with Saddam a year and fourteen days ago, but now he has an excuse.

Like you said, only speculation. I think he'd trade the excuse for not being able to go after Sadaam any day of the week.

Here's the real problem. Lets say we're concerned he's making nuclear weapons. Maybe he is maybe he isn't, but lets say we don't want him to. If that's the case, we go in and we destroy what our intelligence says is nuclear production facility_01. Then 10 seconds later, Voronwe's on camera on CNN saying that it was a children's hospital. But our government says it was a legitimate target. Who the hell do we believe?

Again, I think the key difference here is that we (the US) do everything humanly possible to prevent the loss of innocent life whereas terrorists, and a leader who's used chemical weapons in the past (on his own people) doesn't.

Look at the gulf war in the early 90s. Sadaam sent SCUD missiles at Israel. How many innocent people died here? These weren't even legitimate military targets (mostly because the SCUDs weren't targettable), but he didn't give a shit.

Do I have sympathy for the Iraqui people? You bet I do. Do I care what happens to Sadaam or his regime or the legitimate military targets we'll be hitting? NFW.

if saddam is in reality pursuing nuclear weapons, it is naive to think he is pursueing them without considering using them.

there has been lots of hype about nuclear weapons making it into the hands of terrorists since the breakup of the USSR, but there seems to be no real occurances of this happening yet.

that being said, you can't put your head in the sand either, and hope that nothing will ever happen.

the manner in which the US government is pursuing this though seems a bit reckless.

i think the govt is putting itself in a position that does not maximize our opportunities.

also, it seems like Iraq is handling our diplomatic efforts like they can read Defense Dept email. What i mean is that they are anticipating the US government's actions, and are quickly replying to them with actions that they have already prepared for.

the manner in which Cheney started coming on the Sunday morning news shows and pushing this ball down the hill struck me as somewhat odd. i can't really put a word on the way the White House is pursuing this, but they do honestly seem to be doing it in a slightly reckless fashion.

that being said, who knows what sorts of political endorsements the US is getting in confidence on this issue, but i think the rhetoric is probably too far in advance of the actual process at this point.

for instance, Vladimir Putin is trying to get the US to put the breaks on. about 8 months ago, Bush and Putin were about 1 glass of cognac away from spooning in front of the fireplace, so this seems to be a bit odd to me. Now of coure he has his own political issues, and a lot of muslim central asians live in Russia.

i'm not sure we can count on the Iraqui's to wave flags as we march through Baghdad on the way to ouster the dictator. This won't be like liberating the Netherlands.

Wall Street Journal says analysts predict that if war did break out between the US and Iraq, S&P 500 could be expected to lose 10% of its value.

that is a lot of money to a lot of Americans if the markets take that kind of hit.

it is a very complex issue, because no amount of money is too much to protect the US from a real nuclear threat.

but what amount of money is worth protecting the US from a contrived nuclear threat?

and why do all the former generals from the first war there oppose a groundwar in Iraq?

"That don't make no sense!"

Bush and friends know enough not to blast the general population of Iraq. They made it very clear that Saddam and his thugs are the target.

We didn't mindlessly blast away at anyt turban that moved during the Gulf War and won't this time either. Sure, you'll see a few dead civilians sprawled around an Iraqi milk factory but Saddam has cried wolf so many times that no one would believe him even if the US actually was targeting civilians at milk factories...and as for the rest of the fanatics in that region, they'll believe anything anti american so there's no reason to stress over it.

...were about 1 glass of cognac away from spooning in front of the fireplace...

Best. Quote. EVAR!

Xanupox has gotten better at trolling (152).
*Hugs*
Varia

Hammerstalker, stick to "PHARMING" posts on the retard forum. Your commets are pathetic (at best). Kyoukan, I'm willing to argue with you about the merits and shortcomings of canada or the U.S. Understand that I am not insulting your intellectual capicty. If I am incorrect I will gladly submit to your claims. That said..please request the <50 IQ canadians abstain from trying to support your arguements. Insulting my will to resist drugs/alcohol may be valid, and perhaps my addiction to EQ is a shortcomming. My education unfortunately isn't one of my weaknesses. I do now and always have respected your opinion as a member of this community. I in no way intend to challenge your ability to uphold your claims.

That said, lets pretend for a minute that anyone cares what you or I say, and even remotely represent our respective countries. Just as you would like to uphold your arguements with knowledge and logic, I would like to do the same. In other words if some drooling retard wheeled up and started to back me up, the support would not be welcome. The thread has degenerated into more of a you vs. me discussion than a U.S. vs canada discussion...with the occasional retard chiming in making a futile attempt to hate (hammerstalker).

Given this disclaimer if you would like to carry this forward in private discussion then I would more than welcome the idea. I honestly think the animosity between canadians and Americans isn't warranted and would like to gain some insight as to why such a division exists. The additional offerings in regard to my position (winnow--no offence) and those attempting to hang glide on your labia (hammerstalker -- laugh) are generally not conducive to a conclusion of any sort.

If I see a pop up indicating a private message from you the next time I check the forum then I feel sure that we can hate on one another's countries in private and perhaps find some sort of common ground. Just as you don't like to brag about yoru l33t martial arts skills, I don't like to pretend to be the voice of all american posters on flamevault. Inevitably any point i bring up will be clouded by a fresh squirt of diaharea from an American mental equivalent of Hammerstalker thus making me look incompetent. We can play like adults or children. Either way I would venture to say that the discussion could be valuable to educate both you and I.

Later,
Hasslehoff

Edit: please do NOT equate anything that I claim with comments that Killmoll makes. Commiting my opinions as such would be the equivalent of huffing gasoline and hoping to score better on the MCAT.

Actually if war is what this clusterfuck comes to, innocent civilians of Iraq will be slaughtered in the masses. The reason that Iraq lost the first war is from fighting out in the desert without cover, according to Saddam. So if war comes this time, they already have their strategy. Fight in the cities, thats right all troops, artillery, etc. will be stationed in the cities of Iraq rather than in the wide open desert. Which will do a few major things in Iraqs defense, 1) Better strategic location 2) Causes a lot of civilian casualties 3) In killing civilians this will make a case for Iraq to have people come to their defense. And im sure there are countless other plus's for Iraq.

to the republic, for which it stands

Hmmm, doesn't say didly about supporting a political parties agenda there, does it. Some of you need to go back and read what Ben Franklin and company had in mind when they created our nation.

Anyway,

A question I keep seeing come up is:

What do we do the day after Saddam is removed?

Until we have a valid answer for that, any action is premature and will result in chaos among the factions within Iraq. If we're going to play mommy to the world, we have to be ready to deal with the consequences. If we don't have UN support(or even if we do), where are those troops going to come from? How long will they be there? Years most likely.

The US has yet to impose a succesful government on another country. Look at the long list of folks we've put in power for political/econimic reasons. Every one I can think of has failed, and/or matured and atttempted to throw off US control. Then they are vilified by the US press.

Watch the major network news, you can see the spin in action. Leaders of countries titles change from President, Prime Minister and such for the (current) "good" guys to dictator, premier, etc for the "bad" guys.

"Yes the USA would win a War with Canada but again who gives a shit since the rest of the world wouldn't allow it."

Like the rest of the world could stop it if they wanted too. Not since the Roman Empire has there been a more dominate military power then the U.S

It all boils down to this last time I looked Canada was our allied so why all this crazy talk.

"It all boils down to this last time I looked Canada was our allied so why all this crazy talk."

Mostly because one ignorant Canadian spouts as much anti-American rhetoric as your typical Allah screaming, towel wearing, suicide bomber.

I still wish the United States would pack up and leave every country that does not have the GNP of an Albany, Georgia drive-through pawn shop. Let these bastards starve, let the diseases wipe them out, let them kill each other. It has only been happening in these places for 5000 years and we are not going to change it. Let them all sort it out on their own or die.

Institute a fair trade agreement and and deal with countries that can uphold them in a fair way. Find alternatives to fossil fuels, then laugh as the OPEC countries kill each other off in some idiotic war that none of them could spell. The more I see how China has approached things for the last 1000 years, the more convinced I am that Capitalism and Democracy need some Realism thrown in to balance it all out.

Kilmoll wrote:

The more I see how China has approached things for the last 1000 years, the more convinced I am that Capitalism and Democracy need some Realism thrown in to balance it all out.


You are kidding here, right? What has China done that has made it such a model for us all? Communism is not something that has worked for any country. The Westernization of China is still going on. The strict control of speech, religion, etc, is not something you should wish on anyone. Let's not even talk about their one child per family rule which leads to infanticide in record numbers. What exactly has China done that makes them such a pillar of political virtue?

Adelrune

What exactly has China done that makes them such a pillar of political virtue?

Adelrune[/quote]


There getting EQ!!!

First of all in the last 6 months Sadam has killed over 90 General grade officers in the Iraqi armed forces based on a prospected Coup. He replaced these officers with others of lesser rank and experience and told them they had best follow Sadam to the bloody end of they will end up the same as thier predesessors.

The Iraqi popuplace is a thriving society which has one of the greatest "western driven" cultures in the acceptable middle eastern, Arab League states. This means that the people of Iraq would be very likely to flee if able to, and would greatly welcome a new leader, be it puppet regime or not, if it meant they could return to HALF of what they had before the 1990 change in status of thier nation.

The threats of high civilian losses and the like are all overdone. The Iraqi civilians will flee the cities and there will be only shells left remaining for the battles to be fought under... unless Sadam does what he did 10 years ago, that is FORCING civilians to remain in thier homes, or be shot if they try to leave the area.

This man is an oppressor not only to the world, but to his own people. There was a mistake made 10 years ago when we stopped short of Bagdhad, this time we will not make that mistake again.

There are only around 500 key Iraqi persons that need to be disposed of, then the natural order of balance will return and rapid changes will take place.

Why are we hesitating now? It is not because of civilian Casualties, it is not because we are not sure how to kill this man. There are several key issues at hand, that go back beyond the life spans of anyone here.

The Ottoman Empire once ruled the entire region, this rule was broken up and the countries that we recognize today are there, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Etc.. There was ONE nation who did not recieve any land or nation, that was Kurdistan. There are hundreds of thousands of Kurdistanians living in isolation from Eastern Turkey to Northern Iraq.

A NATO member nation, Turkey hates these Kurds with the utmost passion and will NOT ever recognize a soveriegn nation named Kurdistan anywhere along its borders.

A Arab League member nation, Iraq also does not see a Kurdistan ever forming along its borders.

A NATO nation, Germany DOES recognize the Kurdistan party and backs it. Germany as a member of the European Union and NATO, backing a nation and party that no one else acknowledges, causes SEVERAL key issues to arise that have not been worked out as of yet.

Several solutions have been offered, as far as annexing a portion of northern Iraq and giving this land to the Kurds, with a Demilitarized zone north of that between itself and Turkey. Iraqing citizens will most likely apose this issue, and it is the Iraqing government that will be very unstable and critical when this building stage occcurs.

So.. if any of you out there have say a few hundred thousand square miles of agricultural rich realestate to donate to the Kurdistan refugees currently living in northern Iraq and eastern Turkey, then I think we can get this war started. Until then, too many question arise of... what happens when Sadam is ousted and the borderd need to be drawn.

Mainly what China did was engage in isolationism for many of those years. Granted it would never truly happen as we have gotten too soft and dependent on goods produced outside the US. If we were shut off completely from the outside world we would still thrive though...I have no doubts. This would only force us to make changes that we are resistant too because we have it so good. It is just a matter of a decade before vehicles will be reliable enough to run from batteries and can eliminate a huge amount of fossil fules that we require. All that it would take would be for people to give up all the excess power under the hod for it to happen....but I don't think anyone will unless forced.

As for the one child rule, I would happen to agree with it. We actually pay welfare mothers to breed more children that they cannot support. Is it so outrageous to limit the growth of a population that is becoming too overcrowded to survive? The only natural predator humans have to keep them from becoming over-populated is themselves.

And that line of unthinking is about to kill a couple hundred thousand innocent Iraqi civilians.

Only because the pile of goat shit that is Saddam will continue to hide in the center of the largest city he can find, shielding himself with as many of the 'innocent people of Iraq' as he can throw in front of the advancing tank line.

Of course, his biologicals will ONLY affect millitary troops, and present no threat at all to civilians.


When you grow the fuck up and get tired of singing Kumbayaa at the top of your lungs to drown out the voices of the zealots in the world, come back and play some more.

interesting post xan.

i was not aware the Kurdish issue was such a sticking point.

Xanupox wrote:The threats of high civilian losses and the like are all overdone. The Iraqi civilians will flee the cities and there will be only shells left remaining for the battles to be fought under...

Uhh, the only thing around Baghdad is 100s of miles of desert. Fleeing it in a rush is just a slower death sentence. Use your brain.

This man is an oppressor not only to the world, but to his own people. There was a mistake made 10 years ago when we stopped short of Bagdhad, this time we will not make that mistake again.

You didn't stop at Baghdad. You shelled the fucking christ out of it with artillery and bombed a good portion of it's infrastructure. Don't you remember Peter Arnette and Wolf Blitzer hiding under a bed on CNN blubbering for their mommies?

The kurds have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this conflict. Maybe if they had oil teh US would give a shit about their future, but they don't, so they are fucked.

Kilmoll, why do you even speak? You're such a god damn fool. China and isolationism have nothing to do with each other. China trades with almost every single democracy in the world and has embassies in every country.

kyoukan type-R wrote:The kurds have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this conflict. Maybe if they had oil teh US would give a shit about their future, but they don't, so they are fucked.

Actually, the last i heard about this was that congress had a bill for $40 million (this was two months ago) that if passed, would go to the Kurds. Or as they put it the "Northern Iraq Alliance". But I haven't heard anything more on it. Even so, they are our allies if needed.