the new war in the gulf

Status
Not open for further replies.

Preacher

Swabbie
Banned
Originally posted by Chris Mungo
...
The US ignore international law and you legitimate terrorism. thats realy paradox if i think about the 11th september.
Not EVEN, dude....

"International law" is personified by the UN. We do not ignore international law; we bypass the others (read: everyone at the UN) when THEY ignore it. If the UN are too wussily impotent and gutless, and they don't have the giblets to enforce this "International law", then WE will. It's like I said last time.

There's a saying from the WWII era, I think (wish I could remember who said it--?Bonhoeffer, maybe): "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing".

I'm not sure anymore how "good" the UN is, but they are, in any event, doing nothing (unless empty words constitute "something", and where I come from, they don't). Therefore, the US had to step up to the plate and take on this evil. Who's always the first to respond with massive aid to any international crisis (Earthquakes/famines/etc.), to UN peacekeeping missions, and the like?... That's right, its the US. Who foots most of the UN's bills, and provides most of its other resources (like, say, manpower) as well? Same answer. Who is it that the world looks to to be its (pretty much *only*) "International policeman"; in short, "Who Da Man"?... Same answer again. Do you see a pattern here?... :rolleyes:

I'm not blind to my country's faults; I have watched w/ considerable sadness as my nation has descended down the slippery slope of corruption, greed, and moral relativism just over the few decades I've been planetside. Nonetheless, for all our faults, we are still the greatest nation on earth, and to quote DeToquville (a frenchman, BTW): "America is great because America is good; When they cease to be good, they will cease to be great". We may not be as "good" as we once were, but we have still enough good left in us that all the things I said above are true. When we no longer do the sorts of things I touched on above, then you may freely lampoon us to your hearts content. Until then though, just get outta the way and let us do our job (unless of course you feel up to *joining* alongside us in the work, which so far only the Aussies and Brits --and a few other smaller nations, have seen fit to do. Shame on the rest of y'all)...
Originally posted by Bobbo1701
...Politics is perception. That is why I make a big deal on how we look. Also, if we pulled out, we look weak. Thus we are an easy target.
::knocks head against brick wall a few times, then composes himself::

Again, "looks" don't make a rat's ass worth of difference (politics or not) if the basic question is what's right vs. what's wrong. If you are willing to let appearances govern your response, then you are playing situational ethics, and you become part of the problem, not part of the solution.

And so what if we "look" weak? everybody knows we are the only remaining superpower, and thus are anything BUT weak... The main reason we are any kind of target is not weakness, but the opposite: Everyone is somewhat jealous of the biggest kid on the playground, and all the other kids fantasize about taking him down. Ironically, when we are targeted (as on 9-11), it only makes us stronger. Bin Ladin thought he would cripple America with his tactics, but he only succeeded in making us stronger, and drawing us together as a people (not to mention pissing us off)... :p
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Originally posted by Quarto
Redwolf, read the rules. Phillip, you too - telling people what they did wrong is in itself a violation of the rules.
Is it? I wasn't aware of it. Redwolf wanted to know, so I told him. If that was in violation of the rules then I apologise, but I didn't feel it was violating the rules.
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
Originally posted by Chris Mungo
The US ignore international law and you legitimate terrorism. thats realy paradox if i think about the 11th september.
Ignoring international law is a big trend today. Besides, the UN didn't back-up ANY of their BS for 11 years, someone had to do something even if it meant stepping on your, er, their toes.

Terrorism is a form of warfare where one strikes to create instability and fear. What we're doing is bombing their entire goddamned city with cruise missiles. One is more subtle and economical, the other is loud, noisy and too big to miss.

Not to mention, since we're a represented and accepted political body by the rest of the world we are unable to comit an act of terrorism.
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Besides which, you remember how that man from Jordan kidnapped his daughter? And how Delta Force soldiers went in to get her out of Jordan? No death or serious injury was incurred. But it was done without any mandate or autherisation. Would this, then, be classed as terrorism as well?
 

Bobbo1701

Spaceman
Originally posted by Preacher

::knocks head against brick wall a few times, then composes himself::

Again, "looks" don't make a rat's ass worth of difference (politics or not) if the basic question is what's right vs. what's wrong. If you are willing to let appearances govern your response, then you are playing situational ethics, and you become part of the problem, not part of the solution.

And so what if we "look" weak? everybody knows we are the only remaining superpower, and thus are anything BUT weak... The main reason we are any kind of target is not weakness, but the opposite: Everyone is somewhat jealous of the biggest kid on the playground, and all the other kids fantasize about taking him down. Ironically, when we are targeted (as on 9-11), it only makes us stronger. Bin Ladin thought he would cripple America with his tactics, but he only succeeded in making us stronger, and drawing us together as a people (not to mention pissing us off)... :p
I'm going to try to explain this one more time. To quote one of the greatest characters of science fiction, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." IN other words i am putting my personal beliefs aside and rather then trying to stop the war all tog3ether, i am trying to get it to stop as soon as possible. I don't waqnt the troops pulled out after doing a half assed job and then someone with a nuke thinks that he can kick us in the balls and get away with it. I'm sorry but 9/11 withstanding, if fwe were to pull out now after staqrting the job, that is what it would look like. I say again, wars are politics, politics is perception.
 

redwolf

Spaceman
Originally posted by Phillip Tanaka
Is it? I wasn't aware of it. Redwolf wanted to know, so I told him. If that was in violation of the rules then I apologise, but I didn't feel it was violating the rules.

I don't know what you are going on about rules, Quarto. Also Phillip, what did I want to know? I'm confused!

Either way, the saying "bombing for peace is like f***ing for virginity" is funny in anyones language. If not, you need to learn to laugh!
 

Preacher

Swabbie
Banned
Originally posted by Bobbo1701
I'm going to try to explain this one more time. To quote one of the greatest characters of science fiction, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."...(etc. etc. etc. ). I say again, wars are politics, politics is perception.
Illogical.

Also, please get the "q" key on your kb fixed. :D
 

T8H3X11

Spaceman
Originally posted by Chris Mungo
Attacking a country without mandate.
Our mandate: When we were attacked on September 11, 2001, Bush said that we will do everything we can to stop terrorism against the U.S., root out all links to Al-Qaeda. He also said you're either with us or against us. We have found that Hussein has links with Al-Qaeda and bin Laden. With plenty of evidence of his WMD's and his links, Bush is just following up on his word. He's doing this so there is one less country who doesn't pose a threat. That there is our mandate. I'm all for it.

Originally posted by Bobbo1701 To quote one of the greatest characters of science fiction, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Actually that was his mother that said it first in Star Trek IV, not Spock.
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Originally posted by redwolf
I don't know what you are going on about rules, Quarto. Also Phillip, what did I want to know? I'm confused!

Either way, the saying "bombing for peace is like f***ing for virginity" is funny in anyones language. If not, you need to learn to laugh!
You wanted to know what Starkey did to get himself banned. Quarto edited the posts, so I can't quote directly. You mustn't have checked in before he did. I'm not saying it wasn't funny. But his comments in another thread got him banned.
 

Bobbo1701

Spaceman
Let's all try these facts on for size. Does anyone know what VX poisen gas does to you? Imagine your skin melting off and you convulsing so much that you break your own spine. Your lungs explode in your chest. Now why would we teach a man like Saddam Hussein how to make something like that? And who were sthe men in charge when we didi this. Reasgan was president, Bush Sr. was head of the CIA. And people wonder why i'm not to keen on a mostly Republican governemnt.
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
Oh good. Some people might like to head there for a message board where they say the American government has been taken over by evil aliens and they are going to...wait, that's already being done. Never mind.
 

Ghost

Emperor
Behold Free and Naive world there are many links linking Hussein,Al Qaeda and Bin laden.
I have the Proof!

 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Uh, right. Well, if you say so, Phillip. I'm not particularly interested in trying that, so I guess I'll take your word for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top