the american-iraq-taliban-thing...
-
Felix Gartsman wrote: 1. supporting creation of Israel against Arab wishes. The beloved UN did that UN is US/Britain/Russia/France/China - No one took the no Israel stand of the Arabs. I am not a great fan of UN and its resolutions and their enforcement (which never takes place, unless there is some other agenda for one of the big five - usually the US). Felix Gartsman wrote: 2. supporting Israel with military equipment. Blame USSR for starting this, USA shipped weapons only in response. I will never blame Israel or Palestine for anything they do. For gods sakes, they are the ones fighting for survival. Others are just making money out of it. But, cant the UN prohibit sale of weapons to Israel and Palestine by its members? But, then how will Russia and US make money out of this? I do not believe this issue will ever be settled. There is some one or the other who will always feel victimized. I BELIEVE that Arabs would take out Israel as a whole, if they could. But, I would expect a mediator to be totally neutral without interest in either side. (like Norway mediating between SriLanka govenment and LTTE). Felix Gartsman wrote: 3. overthrowing a democratic Iranian president and replace him with Shah. When? His name was Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh. He was ELECTED Prime Minister of Iran. He nationalized Iranian oil and wanted foreign oil companies out (which would have been in Iranian interests, though not of US and Britain. but then nationalization is communist). So in a CIA and British intelligence supported coup, Shah of Iran was established as a puppet ruler in 1953. Oil in return for local power. This puppetry made a return of the Islamic regime possible (and all of us would have to live with that). How come the US believes that a democratic country run by a democratically elected communist party is worse than a capitalist autocrat? They did it in Iran in 53; in Chile in 73 (ironically on 11 September) etc. Felix Gartsman wrote: 4. support Saddam to fight Khomeini The arabs mostly supported Saddam since he is suna muslim. I am talking about US and the top five. When the Iran-Iraq war was on, Saddam was using chemical weapons and US (a signatory to the chemical weapons ban treaty) was openly supporting Iraq. Now, when he is no longer a friend, the chemical and biological weapons gain significance. US and other members of the UN is party to a treaty (from 1971, I guess
Thomas George wrote: How come the US believes that a democratic country run by a democratically elected communist party is worse than a capitalist autocrat? They did it in Iran in 53; in Chile in 73 (ironically on 11 September) etc. Off Topic. But thats something that I always wonder about. Most people don't seem to believe democracy and communism can co-exist for some reason as well. :confused: Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
-
Thomas George wrote: How come the US believes that a democratic country run by a democratically elected communist party is worse than a capitalist autocrat? They did it in Iran in 53; in Chile in 73 (ironically on 11 September) etc. Off Topic. But thats something that I always wonder about. Most people don't seem to believe democracy and communism can co-exist for some reason as well. :confused: Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
-
Actually, it can. Democracy means that people choose, right. What if people chose communists in an election? Seems to have happened many times around the world.
-
Thomas George wrote: Seems to have happened many times around the world. I know it's happened but... many times?
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
lauren wrote: if you play soldier boy with the americans you will lose and get f**ked up in the process I think I'll change my sig to that. It's very true though lauren. lauren wrote: besides if you do play with guns and bombs you deserve whatever you get in return Poor Dave W and his air guns... we better warn him :-) Regards, Brian Dela :-)
Brian Delahunty wrote: Poor Dave W and his air guns... we better warn him Send 'em over and I'll send 'em back with a stiff upper lip and a limp in both legs... :rolleyes:
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
Pro wrestling is entertainment for the unentertained unentertainable.
-
Brian Delahunty wrote: Poor Dave W and his air guns... we better warn him Send 'em over and I'll send 'em back with a stiff upper lip and a limp in both legs... :rolleyes:
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
Pro wrestling is entertainment for the unentertained unentertainable.
David Wulff wrote: Send 'em over and I'll send 'em back with a stiff upper lip and a limp in both legs... :-D.. remind me not to cross you... :cool: Regards, Brian Dela :-)
-
I am from India. There are many states in India, which are ruled by democratically elected communist parties.
Thomas George wrote: There are many states in India, which are ruled by democratically elected communist parties. Your original statement was "many times around the world". :confused:
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
Thomas George wrote: There are many states in India, which are ruled by democratically elected communist parties. Your original statement was "many times around the world". :confused:
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
RodLima wrote: people just remember the bad ones. Most arabs in middle-east never saw the [good] americans (i mean, americans who were good to them)! They just see US policies. 1. supporting creation of Israel against Arab wishes. 2. supporting Israel with military equipment. 3. overthrowing a democratic Iranian president and replace him with Shah. 4. support Saddam to fight Khomeini 5. supporting Saudis for oil, even though most 9/11 guys were Saudi (no option, I guess) - other than get a fovaouable govt. in Iraq. etc ..... These are the things that remain in memory, because they change lives. The good deeds most often are not in the same league. I can think of Russians probably loving Gorbachev for freeing them from the communist party autocracy.
Thomas George wrote: I can think of Russians probably loving Gorbachev for freeing them from the communist party autocracy. Actually the russians are not very happy about Gorbatchov - he broke their empire apart. (At least that's the common attitude towards him)
Auch den Schatten will ich lieben weil ich manchmal lieber frier' Rosenstolz [sighist]
-
i had this discussion with a guy recently where he was bleating on at how badly the poor taliban fighters were being treated in cuba by the americans ... having to wear hoods and being handcuffed etc ... like duh! whether its fair or not its a simple fact that everyone should know by now ... if you play soldier boy with the americans you will lose and get f**ked up in the process ... if you cant figure that out by now you really shouldnt be playing with guns and bombs and besides if you do play with guns and bombs you deserve whatever you get in return
"... and so i said to him ... if it don't dance (or code) and you can't eat it either f**k it or throw it away"
biz stuff about meDoes this equally apply when an American soldier gets captured by the other side. There is something called the Geneva convention that prescribes how prisoners of war should be treated. There are less than 300 million Americans compared with more than 5 bilion of the rest of the world. That is something the average American needs to keep in mind as they push around american-style wisdom on the rest of the world. In your own case, just keep in mind that an american soldier will eventually get captured by somebody somewhere, and how you will like to have them treated. Empires come and go, and American is only the most recent of the empires in history. Britain was one not too long ago, as was the Soviet Union, China, Japan, Greece, Roman, Egyptian, Mali, Timboku. The American military might today does not come anything close to that of the Egyptians at the time they built the great pyramids, or that of the Romans at the height of their power.
-
lauren wrote: i had this discussion with a guy recently where he was bleating on at how badly the poor taliban fighters were being treated in cuba by the americans ... having to wear hoods and being handcuffed etc ... like duh! I think that your friend is right to some respect... The treatment that Taliban fighters received is far from the standards they are used to. I guess a bullet in the head (preferably at some sports stadium) would have been much closer to the traditional way they might consider much more apropriate.
/* I C++, therefore I am... */
Have you ever visited Afghanistan? Did you ever go there during the Taliban era. Is this another one of those American media inspired views about the rest of the world. No, I am not making a case for the Taliban fighters. But someone fighting for his government or a cause they believe in considers themselves in the same manner that an American soldier or marine views himself/herself. If we invested only $10 billion out of the more than $25+ billion so far spent bombing Afganistan on education, even during the Taliban, we would have achieved a more lasting and sustainable peace, and there would probably have been no Al Queda in Afghanistan.
-
Have you ever visited Afghanistan? Did you ever go there during the Taliban era. Is this another one of those American media inspired views about the rest of the world. No, I am not making a case for the Taliban fighters. But someone fighting for his government or a cause they believe in considers themselves in the same manner that an American soldier or marine views himself/herself. If we invested only $10 billion out of the more than $25+ billion so far spent bombing Afganistan on education, even during the Taliban, we would have achieved a more lasting and sustainable peace, and there would probably have been no Al Queda in Afghanistan.
Gaul wrote: If we invested only $10 billion out of the more than $25+ billion so far spent bombing Afganistan on education, even during the Taliban, we would have achieved a more lasting and sustainable peace, and there would probably have been no Al Queda in Afghanistan. *If* is an awfully big word. If the Taliban government hadn't supported a group that attacked civilians in the US and instead spent it's resources on it's own people none of this would have happened.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
i had this discussion with a guy recently where he was bleating on at how badly the poor taliban fighters were being treated in cuba by the americans ... having to wear hoods and being handcuffed etc ... like duh! whether its fair or not its a simple fact that everyone should know by now ... if you play soldier boy with the americans you will lose and get f**ked up in the process ... if you cant figure that out by now you really shouldnt be playing with guns and bombs and besides if you do play with guns and bombs you deserve whatever you get in return
"... and so i said to him ... if it don't dance (or code) and you can't eat it either f**k it or throw it away"
biz stuff about melauren wrote: if you play soldier boy with the americans you will lose and get f**ked up in the process If also human right get f**ked in the process, everybody lose something, not only those talibans. lauren wrote: and besides if you do play with guns and bombs you deserve whatever you get in return And innocent people will be killed on both sides... it's what they deserve? Today's wars are a bit different from action movies with only bad and good guys involved and good side always winning... -- Looking for a new screen-saver? Try FOYD: http://digilander.iol.it/FOYD