American invasions
-
You can't save the world from tyranny without breaking a few eggs. Much of that history may have been a mistake, but none of it happened in a geo-political vacume. Would you and your girlfriend prefer to be living in a Nazi or communist totalitarian utopia? Or, how about a nuclear wasteland? Whatever it was the US did, our leadership saved both of you from all of that. Which is the only reason either of you are now free to bitch about it on the internet. Most Americans would prefer to live in our quaint little Jeffersonian republic with no need to interact at all with the rest of you ungrateful assholes. Unfortunantly you are unable to do it for yourselves.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Funny that you never have a problem breaking other peoples eggs.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Only if the US is to defend and expand it's global empire.
Christian Graus No longer a Microsoft MVP, but still happy to answer your questions.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Whatever it was the US did, our leadership saved both of you from all of that. Which is the only reason either of you are now free to bith about it on the internet.
Although America's role in WW2 was vital, and everyone is grateful that it eventually joined the fight, I'd like to add: "It's because of the men and women of many European and Pacific countries, who were dieing in the treches long before the American's joined the war that us ungrateful assholes can get on the internet and moan about it."
Stan Shannon wrote:
Would you and your girlfriend prefer to be living in a Nazi or communist totalitarian utopia? Or, how about a nuclear wasteland? Whatever it was the US did, our leadership saved both of you from all of that.
I can see a lot of irony in the words "good leadership", and "nuclear wasteland" here. The Nazi's (or communists) would never have prevailed, invading and occuping a country is one thing, keeping control of it is another.
Mark Brock Click here to view my blog
MarkBrock wrote:
"It's because of the men and women of many European and Pacific countries, who were dieing in the treches long before the American's joined the war that us ungrateful assholes can get on the internet and moan about it."
Actually, war isn't about dying in the trenches or anywhere else. (Not a lot of trench warfare in WWII.) War is about making the other poor sunuvabitch die. Maybe that's why the Americans were successful?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Yep, we're definitely responsible for East Timor
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Well, to be fair, congress did authorize weapons that were used offensively by the Indonesian govt in East Timor. We enabled it.
I've heard more said about less.
-
Well, to be fair, congress did authorize weapons that were used offensively by the Indonesian govt in East Timor. We enabled it.
I've heard more said about less.
-
I'm not saying the USSR did not have nukes. I am saying they had no plan for global domination.
Christian Graus No longer a Microsoft MVP, but still happy to answer your questions.
Christian Graus wrote:
I'm not saying the USSR did not have nukes. I am saying they had no plan for global domination.
"We will bury you."[^]
-
Quick Google netted:[^] "In the mid-1990s, the Indonesian government's use of military force to deal with internal political dissension in East Timor, a province it took over by force from Portugal in the mid-1970s, led to criticism in the Congress of Indonesia's human rights practices. This led to inclusion of a restriction in the Foreign Operations Appropriation Act for FY1995 (P.L, 103-306, signed August 23, 1994) against the sale or licensing of "small or light arms and crowd control items" by the U.S. for Indonesia, pending a report to the Appropriations Committees of Congress by the Secretary of State that there had been significant progress made on human rights practices in East Timor and elsewhere in Indonesia. Funding for grant military assistance training of the Indonesian military was also denied in this legislation. The restriction on funding for participation in grant military funding for the Indonesian military has also been placed in recent appropriations acts. 57" I didn't allege that it was illegal, only that we were enablers, albeit indirectly and potentially without direct knowledge, but I doubt that.
I've heard more said about less.
-
Not to mention...[^] "US President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger meet with Indonesian president Suharto in Jakarta and give him tacit approval to invade and annex East Timor. Suharto complains that the integration of East Timor into Indonesia is being resisted by Communist sympathizers. According to declassified US Government documents, Suharto tells Ford and Kissinger, “We want your understanding if we deem it necessary to take rapid or drastic action.” Ford responds, “We will understand and will not press you on the issue.” Kissinger then advises Suharto not to take action until he and the president have returned to Washington. “It is important that whatever you do succeeds quickly.” Kissinger explains. “We would be able to influence the reaction in America if whatever happens, happens after we return.” [Republic of Indonesia, 12/6/1975 pdf file; John Pilger, 1994; CNN, 12/7/2001; BBC, 12/7/2001] The following day, Indonesia invades East Timor (see December 7, 1976). " That we in fact supported the regime from the outset. There's debate whether this qualifies as offensive weapons sales, which is illegal, but I think the results speak for themselves.
I've heard more said about less.
-
Quick Google netted:[^] "In the mid-1990s, the Indonesian government's use of military force to deal with internal political dissension in East Timor, a province it took over by force from Portugal in the mid-1970s, led to criticism in the Congress of Indonesia's human rights practices. This led to inclusion of a restriction in the Foreign Operations Appropriation Act for FY1995 (P.L, 103-306, signed August 23, 1994) against the sale or licensing of "small or light arms and crowd control items" by the U.S. for Indonesia, pending a report to the Appropriations Committees of Congress by the Secretary of State that there had been significant progress made on human rights practices in East Timor and elsewhere in Indonesia. Funding for grant military assistance training of the Indonesian military was also denied in this legislation. The restriction on funding for participation in grant military funding for the Indonesian military has also been placed in recent appropriations acts. 57" I didn't allege that it was illegal, only that we were enablers, albeit indirectly and potentially without direct knowledge, but I doubt that.
I've heard more said about less.
shiftedbitmonkey wrote:
I didn't allege that it was illegal, only that we were enablers, albeit indirectly and potentially without direct knowledge, but I doubt that.
Agreed. And it was wonderfully brave of Australia to volunteer to lead a force that freed East Timor from the cruel Indonesians. Anyone who noticed that Australia then claimed that they owned all of East Timor's substantial oil reserves, was told they were not being a dinkum cobber. ;)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Not to mention...[^] "US President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger meet with Indonesian president Suharto in Jakarta and give him tacit approval to invade and annex East Timor. Suharto complains that the integration of East Timor into Indonesia is being resisted by Communist sympathizers. According to declassified US Government documents, Suharto tells Ford and Kissinger, “We want your understanding if we deem it necessary to take rapid or drastic action.” Ford responds, “We will understand and will not press you on the issue.” Kissinger then advises Suharto not to take action until he and the president have returned to Washington. “It is important that whatever you do succeeds quickly.” Kissinger explains. “We would be able to influence the reaction in America if whatever happens, happens after we return.” [Republic of Indonesia, 12/6/1975 pdf file; John Pilger, 1994; CNN, 12/7/2001; BBC, 12/7/2001] The following day, Indonesia invades East Timor (see December 7, 1976). " That we in fact supported the regime from the outset. There's debate whether this qualifies as offensive weapons sales, which is illegal, but I think the results speak for themselves.
I've heard more said about less.
-
shiftedbitmonkey wrote:
I didn't allege that it was illegal, only that we were enablers, albeit indirectly and potentially without direct knowledge, but I doubt that.
Agreed. And it was wonderfully brave of Australia to volunteer to lead a force that freed East Timor from the cruel Indonesians. Anyone who noticed that Australia then claimed that they owned all of East Timor's substantial oil reserves, was told they were not being a dinkum cobber. ;)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Yep. Everyone is the epitome of altruism!
I've heard more said about less.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I am saying they had no plan for global domination.
First, global domination was the central point of communism from its very inception. Second, the Soviet Union was the heir apparent of European imperialism. The notion that they had 'no plan' for global domination is too absurd to even debate. It would have been an historic inevitability, and only a deluded, gullible, poorly read fool would contend otherwise.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Are you talking about "Communism" or the USSR? The Communist Manifesto doesn't really have anything about global domination...
But as Marx himself said – and Marxists are often fond of repeating it – "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is, however, to change it."[^] Karl Marx's agenda was class struggle across the entire planet. That was one of his central themes.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
But as Marx himself said – and Marxists are often fond of repeating it – "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is, however, to change it."[^] Karl Marx's agenda was class struggle across the entire planet. That was one of his central themes.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Yes but Communism seems to be moving towards anarchy instead of global domination (unless I suppose you could count them the same...) so that we can all be one giant commune, well that's how I interpreted it anyways. Either way I don't care for it. :)
Scorch wrote:
Yes but Communism seems to be moving towards anarchy
There has always been an expectation that the state would wither away in true communism. Doesn't that lead to anarchy, or at least a very libertarian system?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Scorch wrote:
Yes but Communism seems to be moving towards anarchy
There has always been an expectation that the state would wither away in true communism. Doesn't that lead to anarchy, or at least a very libertarian system?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
That was my thinking exactly. Also why places like the USSR and China aren't really "communist" cause their government seems to be the integral part. Then most people say "it just hasn't been tried in the right place!" but I doubt there will ever be a place in which it actually works.
-
No it was a smart a** reply to Stan's misguided comment about religious extremism.
Beauty is only a light switch away.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Our fight against communism
Was largely in your own minds and of your own invention.
Christian Graus No longer a Microsoft MVP, but still happy to answer your questions.
Christian Graus wrote:
Stan: Our fight against communism Ignorant Ass: Was largely in your own minds and of your own invention.
And it's deliberate, it's a *refusal* to admit the truth: ergo, not only an ignorant ass, not only an anti-American knee-jerk, but a liar.
-
I guess you're right. No point in arguing with morons.
Christian Graus No longer a Microsoft MVP, but still happy to answer your questions.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I am saying they had no plan for global domination.
You cannot even imagine how wrong you are.