Irresponsability
-
Bush Warns U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq Would Destabilize Mideast[^]. Of course, the US invasion did not.
Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
Bush Warns U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq Would Destabilize Mideast[^]. Of course, the US invasion did not.
Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
Of course, the US invasion did not.
In case you hadn't noticed, it has been pretty unstable since the late 70's.
-
K(arl) wrote:
Of course, the US invasion did not.
In case you hadn't noticed, it has been pretty unstable since the late 70's.
And the Americans just made things worse.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
K(arl) wrote:
Of course, the US invasion did not.
In case you hadn't noticed, it has been pretty unstable since the late 70's.
-
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Syndicalism is the opposite. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Hussein is not responsible for that many deaths.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
Hussein is not responsible for that many deaths.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Red Stateler wrote:
By what measure?
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
Red Stateler wrote:
Now Iraqis are just killing themselves.
So when SH was in power, they did not?
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
One should ask the opinions of the Iraqis to know. China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
Society is composed of two great classes, those that have more dinners than appetite, and those who have more appetite than dinners Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
In fact, it would be better to ask the inhabitants of those regions. They would tell you.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
Red Stateler wrote:
By what measure?
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
Red Stateler wrote:
Now Iraqis are just killing themselves.
So when SH was in power, they did not?
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
One should ask the opinions of the Iraqis to know. China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
Society is composed of two great classes, those that have more dinners than appetite, and those who have more appetite than dinners Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
I agree that's a major problem that needs to be dealt with. I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
K(arl) wrote:
So when SH was in power, they did not?
It was more a matter of Hussein killing Iraqis than the Iraqi people killing eachother, but you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
China is a different matter altogether. The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war. Whether or not that will work remains to be seen.
-
K(arl) wrote:
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
I agree that's a major problem that needs to be dealt with. I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
K(arl) wrote:
So when SH was in power, they did not?
It was more a matter of Hussein killing Iraqis than the Iraqi people killing eachother, but you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
China is a different matter altogether. The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war. Whether or not that will work remains to be seen.
Red Stateler wrote:
I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
BS.
Red Stateler wrote:
you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
As always, you twist whatever I say to fit your vision. Ask the iraqis, they are the only one they can tell. Neither you or I can't. s Iraq much better off, somewhat better off, somewhat worse off or much worse off than before the U.S. invasion? Much or somewhat better off: 42% About the same: 15% Much or somewhat worse off: 39%[^]
Red Stateler wrote:
China is a different matter altogether
Yeah, tenth of millions of chinese are not worth the money we can make with dealing with China. Business first.[^] -
I prefer the company of peasants because they have not been educated sufficiently to reason incorrectly. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
Red Stateler wrote:
By what measure?
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
Red Stateler wrote:
Now Iraqis are just killing themselves.
So when SH was in power, they did not?
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
One should ask the opinions of the Iraqis to know. China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
Society is composed of two great classes, those that have more dinners than appetite, and those who have more appetite than dinners Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
Bush Warns U.S. Withdrawal From Iraq Would Destabilize Mideast[^]. Of course, the US invasion did not.
Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
Bush
Now there's a credible source. :rolleyes:
Man is a marvelous curiosity ... he thinks he is the Creator's pet ... he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to him and thinks He listens. Isn't it a quaint idea. - Mark Twain
-
K(arl) wrote:
And Bush's policy made the things worse. Except for Iran, of course.
By what measure? Is Afghanistan worse now? Arguably Iraq is "worse", but primarily because the shackles of an oppresive dictatorship were removed. Now Iraqis are just killing themselves. Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
Well, I, for example, do agree that Hussein had to be removed from power. And if the US government had said "Saddam must fall because he is a mass-murderer and its about time someone did something", I'd have supported a war. It is just that (in my opinion) the war was begun for the wrong (read: made-up) reasons. Saddam did NOT have Weapons of Mass Destruction. He was NOT responsible for 9/11. He was NOT involved in 9/11 (other than uttering statements of support AFTER the attacks). The situation in Iraq actually has improved. The terrorists are losing their support in the public, and most of them were fanatic foreigners anyhow. The US troops ARE stabilizing the country, and hopefully long enough for a democratic government with its own army and police to take over. The European media only refuse to accept that. (This basically is a quote from the "Spiegel", a 'lefty(!!)' magazine.) Both countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, basically need all the support they can get, food, funding, schools... Like I said: the war was begun for the wrong reasons is all...
Cheers, Sebastian -- "If it was two men, the non-driver would have challenged the driver to simply crash through the gates. The macho image thing, you know." - Marc Clifton
-
Red Stateler wrote:
By what measure?
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
Red Stateler wrote:
Now Iraqis are just killing themselves.
So when SH was in power, they did not?
Red Stateler wrote:
Is it your opinion that a dictator responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own people (if not millions) is preferable?
One should ask the opinions of the Iraqis to know. China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
Society is composed of two great classes, those that have more dinners than appetite, and those who have more appetite than dinners Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
They cannot, China makes 99% of what is consumed in America.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
K(arl) wrote:
Iran is now the major, unchallenged power of the region. Its influence has never been that great.
I agree that's a major problem that needs to be dealt with. I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
K(arl) wrote:
So when SH was in power, they did not?
It was more a matter of Hussein killing Iraqis than the Iraqi people killing eachother, but you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
China is a different matter altogether. The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war. Whether or not that will work remains to be seen.
Red Stateler wrote:
The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war.
Rubbish. The western corporations are only dealing with China because it can manufacture products at a cheaper rate. It absolutely has nothing to do with fighting communism.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
Red Stateler wrote:
I don't know that their rise in the region would have been more or less pronounced had the US not invaded Iraq, however.
BS.
Red Stateler wrote:
you only support my point as to whether or not Iraq is terribly worse now as compared to under Saddam.
As always, you twist whatever I say to fit your vision. Ask the iraqis, they are the only one they can tell. Neither you or I can't. s Iraq much better off, somewhat better off, somewhat worse off or much worse off than before the U.S. invasion? Much or somewhat better off: 42% About the same: 15% Much or somewhat worse off: 39%[^]
Red Stateler wrote:
China is a different matter altogether
Yeah, tenth of millions of chinese are not worth the money we can make with dealing with China. Business first.[^] -
I prefer the company of peasants because they have not been educated sufficiently to reason incorrectly. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
BS
Why?
K(arl) wrote:
s Iraq much better off, somewhat better off, somewhat worse off or much worse off than before the U.S. invasion? Much or somewhat better off: 42% About the same: 15% Much or somewhat worse off: 39%[^]
So 57% believe that Iraq is either as good or better than before? That's a sound majority. Rather unsurprisingly, the "worse off" crowd correspondes exactly to the percentage of Sunnis in Iraq (the people removed from absolute rule).
K(arl) wrote:
Yeah, tenth of millions of chinese are not worth the money we can make with dealing with China. Business first.[^] -
Our dealings with China go back to Nixon, one of out most vehemently anti-Communist presidents. Our policy is largely shaped by the opinions of Milton Friedman, who set forth the idea that capitalism results in freedom. It certainly is profitable for business, but that was not the impetus.
-
K(arl) wrote:
China is a dictatorship responsible for killing tenths of millions of its own people, and it does not seem to disturb that much western powers.
They cannot, China makes 99% of what is consumed in America.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
Le Centriste wrote:
hey cannot, China makes 99% of what is consumed in America.
BS. I challenge you to support that absurd statement with a link to some factual source.
-
Le Centriste wrote:
hey cannot, China makes 99% of what is consumed in America.
BS. I challenge you to support that absurd statement with a link to some factual source.
You don't need a link. Make a survey of what is made where in your house.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
-
Red Stateler wrote:
The West has decided (wisely or not) to battle its communism with capitalism rather than war.
Rubbish. The western corporations are only dealing with China because it can manufacture products at a cheaper rate. It absolutely has nothing to do with fighting communism.
----- If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown God is the only being who, to rule, does not need to exist. -- Charles Baudelaire
Le Centriste wrote:
Rubbish. The western corporations are only dealing with China because it can manufacture products at a cheaper rate. It absolutely has nothing to do with fighting communism.
The only reason US corporations are allowed to do business with China is America's policies. I don't see any corporations manufacturing anything in Cuba...