Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. What happens with the next Axis Of Evil target?

What happens with the next Axis Of Evil target?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
questionphpcomjson
110 Posts 24 Posters 16 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Lost User

    There is one problem. Bush doesn't have the guts to count the bodies of US soldiers as they clear Bhagdad street by street. It was other troops like Syrians that did a lot of it last time in Kuwait except the Iraqis has somewhere to retreat from so expect 1000+ US casualties. The worst thing would be for Bush to start the war and not complete it. Which is what happened last time :suss: The tigress is here :-D

    E Offline
    E Offline
    Emcee Lam
    wrote on last edited by
    #99

    Perhaps not. Bush is not so foolish. He knows that casualties must be low. Bush has not worked this hard to see his plans upset so easily. I don't see Saddam getting away this time. In the first Gulf War, America relied too much on internal rebellion to unseat Saddam. Bush will not repeat that mistake. When it comes to war, America relies heavily on overwhelming victory to demoralize enemies. Marginal and partial victories are unacceptable. Only by gaining overwhelming victory, can America attain an aura of invincibility. Such an appearance of invincibility will convince many enemies of certain failure if they challenge the US. Nothing less than a repeating pattern of overwhelming victories will satisfy an American president. I don't see Iraq as being an exception. Saddam will be yet another demonstration piece to build the aura of invincibility.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • H HENDRIK R

      Emcee Lam wrote: Bush is attempting to repeat his success in Afghanistan. Kick out the bad guys and liberate the country. Then the TV audience will gawk as Iraqis dance in the street. Sorry, but you can't really call the operation in Afghanistan a success. The bad bad guy bin Laden, the U.S. biggest enemy and most wanted terrorist of the world, seems to be still alive. And most of the highest members of al Quaida, too. Even if they're out of the country is still not proven. And now Afghanistan's leader Kazai's power spreads only over the capital - most of the country is led by the warlords, not united in any way. It will need much time until Afghanistan can be called a liberate and democratic contry. Hope Bush finds a better way for Iraq, not leaving an unsolved problem like he did in Afghanistan.

      E Offline
      E Offline
      Emcee Lam
      wrote on last edited by
      #100

      True enough some things can be better. Nevertheless, it is a victory. Taliban and Al Qaeda have ceded their territories and have been forced to hide in the mountains. The entire Afghanistan campaign has been nothing but losses for them. They lost men, equipment, and morale. Their cause is weakened, and extremist Islam has been humiliated. You are right in saying that a lot of things have not been accomplished. It's far from perfect, but the results are still good. America is the victor. Taliban and Al Qaeda are the losers.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K KaRl

        Stan Shannon wrote: If the UN is to be a means of "balancing" off American power, and engendering an international climit hostile to our security, than it should openly admit to it. Do you really think SH is the biggest threat nowadays that have to face the US? Do you realize the cost of the damage made to the public image of the US in the Rest-of-World (R-o-W) opinion, whatever the R-o-W opinion?


        Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

        S Offline
        S Offline
        Stan Shannon
        wrote on last edited by
        #101

        KaЯl wrote: Do you really think SH is the biggest threat nowadays that have to face the US? I have no idea. But to the extent he is a threat, and to the extent that the UN appears unable or unwilling to do anything about him and his ilk, begs the question - what the hell does the UN exist for? The only role I see the UN playing is to provide organized resistance to U.S. foreign policy while doing absolutely nothing about SH. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

        K 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • S Stan Shannon

          KaЯl wrote: Do you really think SH is the biggest threat nowadays that have to face the US? I have no idea. But to the extent he is a threat, and to the extent that the UN appears unable or unwilling to do anything about him and his ilk, begs the question - what the hell does the UN exist for? The only role I see the UN playing is to provide organized resistance to U.S. foreign policy while doing absolutely nothing about SH. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

          K Offline
          K Offline
          KaRl
          wrote on last edited by
          #102

          You're IMHO unfair in your comment. It's not because UN don't fit your agenda right now that it's totally useless. Remember the Korea War, the US played well with and used it, didn't they? (no contestation here, it was IMO justified)


          Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

          S 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P Paul Watson

            Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Perhaps China will be in a position to challenge them in a few decades, but even this is unlikely Interesting point: Would the US let China get anywhere near the level to challenge the US militarily? Last time I checked the US still did not like China that much. They could easily spin up a fuss about China and validate an invasion to bring "democracy" to China. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: The only people that could stop this would be the US electorate Would the electorate do this though? How far would the leaders have to push before the electorate rebelled? Already with Iraq there have been massive rallies, but nothing has actually changed.

            Paul Watson
            Bluegrass
            Cape Town, South Africa

            My photoSIG portfolio[^]

            F Offline
            F Offline
            Felix Gartsman
            wrote on last edited by
            #103

            Paul Watson wrote: Interesting point: Would the US let China get anywhere near the level to challenge the US militarily? Last time I checked the US still did not like China that much. They could easily spin up a fuss about China and validate an invasion to bring "democracy" to China. War with China is the end of the world, including US and everyone knows it. I see US+China dominate together, with EU influence dropping. US is revising relationship with China this year, from early leaks it's encouraging.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              There is one problem. Bush doesn't have the guts to count the bodies of US soldiers as they clear Bhagdad street by street. It was other troops like Syrians that did a lot of it last time in Kuwait except the Iraqis has somewhere to retreat from so expect 1000+ US casualties. The worst thing would be for Bush to start the war and not complete it. Which is what happened last time :suss: The tigress is here :-D

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #104

              Trollslayer wrote: Which is what happened last time Ummm... no. Last time the UN stopped us. Sound familiar?? Mike Mullikin :beer:

              Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps. - Emo Philips

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • K KaRl

                You're IMHO unfair in your comment. It's not because UN don't fit your agenda right now that it's totally useless. Remember the Korea War, the US played well with and used it, didn't they? (no contestation here, it was IMO justified)


                Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

                S Offline
                S Offline
                Stan Shannon
                wrote on last edited by
                #105

                I think the world at large is increasingly inclined to view the American system of capitalism as a far greater threat than Islamic fundamentalism. The U.N. has bought into that view and is more concerned about containing us than about containing terrorism. Otherwise, I can make no sense of their behavior. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

                K 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S Stan Shannon

                  I think the world at large is increasingly inclined to view the American system of capitalism as a far greater threat than Islamic fundamentalism. The U.N. has bought into that view and is more concerned about containing us than about containing terrorism. Otherwise, I can make no sense of their behavior. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

                  K Offline
                  K Offline
                  KaRl
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #106

                  Your analysis may be good. I would rather say the capitalist system as the americans have, 'cause it's IMHO more linked to the system than to anti-americanism. Bush is the target, not America. Anti-globalization movements have changed their name, they are known now as alter-globalization movements :) They aren't against globalization, they are against the one the Market wants. The Riches have the Davos Forum, the Poors have Porto-Alegre[^]


                  Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

                  S 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • K KaRl

                    Your analysis may be good. I would rather say the capitalist system as the americans have, 'cause it's IMHO more linked to the system than to anti-americanism. Bush is the target, not America. Anti-globalization movements have changed their name, they are known now as alter-globalization movements :) They aren't against globalization, they are against the one the Market wants. The Riches have the Davos Forum, the Poors have Porto-Alegre[^]


                    Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

                    S Offline
                    S Offline
                    Stan Shannon
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #107

                    KaЯl wrote: they are known now as alter-globalization movements Which is just another name for Marxism. The Europeans feel that if they just keep giving Marxism a new name, someday it will magically begin to work. We American's are very much aware of this, and feel very much threatened by it. We do not want Socialism. You guys seem to believe that there is some kind of mass of Americans waiting to be liberated from capitalism. I can assure you the truth is guite the contrary. The core of American culture remains committed to our capitalistic system. The free market is the source of our political/social freedom. We will not give it up without a fight. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

                    K 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • S Stan Shannon

                      KaЯl wrote: they are known now as alter-globalization movements Which is just another name for Marxism. The Europeans feel that if they just keep giving Marxism a new name, someday it will magically begin to work. We American's are very much aware of this, and feel very much threatened by it. We do not want Socialism. You guys seem to believe that there is some kind of mass of Americans waiting to be liberated from capitalism. I can assure you the truth is guite the contrary. The core of American culture remains committed to our capitalistic system. The free market is the source of our political/social freedom. We will not give it up without a fight. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

                      K Offline
                      K Offline
                      KaRl
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #108

                      Stan Shannon wrote: Which is just another name for Marxism. Please, throw your blinkers away and open your mind! The brain is like a parachute, it needs to be open to work. You made progress in the last times, why this relapse ;P ? Stan Shannon wrote: I can assure you the truth is guite the contrary. But I know some Americans don't think your way, on the contrary. I've seen it on TV at Seattle, I've listened to it on radio with Rage Against the Machine. I would make a big mistake to confuse your opinion with the American one, it would be pure anti-americanism :) Stan Shannon wrote: We will not give it up without a fight. The Davy Crockett complex ;) ? Now, listen: **I don't want US to change, but I don't want US impose me their system


                      Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop**

                      S 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • K KaRl

                        Stan Shannon wrote: Which is just another name for Marxism. Please, throw your blinkers away and open your mind! The brain is like a parachute, it needs to be open to work. You made progress in the last times, why this relapse ;P ? Stan Shannon wrote: I can assure you the truth is guite the contrary. But I know some Americans don't think your way, on the contrary. I've seen it on TV at Seattle, I've listened to it on radio with Rage Against the Machine. I would make a big mistake to confuse your opinion with the American one, it would be pure anti-americanism :) Stan Shannon wrote: We will not give it up without a fight. The Davy Crockett complex ;) ? Now, listen: **I don't want US to change, but I don't want US impose me their system


                        Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop**

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Stan Shannon
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #109

                        KaЯl wrote: Please, throw your blinkers away and open your mind! How, precisely, does it differ from Marxism? KaЯl wrote: But I know some Americans don't think your way, on the contrary. I've seen it on TV at Seattle, I've listened to it on radio with Rage Against the Machine. The media is blowing it out of proportion. Places like California, Washington,Oregon and New England are about the only areas you will find those groups in sizable proportions. KaЯl wrote: I would make a big mistake to confuse your opinion with the American one, it would be pure anti-americanism If anything, I am very much a moderate compared to most people in the Southern, Midwestern and Western areas of the U.S. The core of the U.S. population remains solidly anti-Socialistic. Violently so. KaЯl wrote: The Davy Crockett complex ? Davy was a great man. A hero of mine. KaЯl wrote: Now, listen: I don't want US to change, but I don't want US impose me their system A house divided against itself cannot stand. It must become all of one thing or all of the other. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

                        K 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • S Stan Shannon

                          KaЯl wrote: Please, throw your blinkers away and open your mind! How, precisely, does it differ from Marxism? KaЯl wrote: But I know some Americans don't think your way, on the contrary. I've seen it on TV at Seattle, I've listened to it on radio with Rage Against the Machine. The media is blowing it out of proportion. Places like California, Washington,Oregon and New England are about the only areas you will find those groups in sizable proportions. KaЯl wrote: I would make a big mistake to confuse your opinion with the American one, it would be pure anti-americanism If anything, I am very much a moderate compared to most people in the Southern, Midwestern and Western areas of the U.S. The core of the U.S. population remains solidly anti-Socialistic. Violently so. KaЯl wrote: The Davy Crockett complex ? Davy was a great man. A hero of mine. KaЯl wrote: Now, listen: I don't want US to change, but I don't want US impose me their system A house divided against itself cannot stand. It must become all of one thing or all of the other. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle

                          K Offline
                          K Offline
                          KaRl
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #110

                          Marxism is not democratic, it offers as solution a dictatorship of a class over the society. Marxism implies also that any production mean is controled by the State. Socialists are republican and claim the right to the private property. The break between the two movements was made in France in 1920, after the creation of the Communist Party, and the departure of the ones refusing the conditions of the 3rd internationale (Komintern), then creating the socialist party. IMHO, the best sum-up of ideals of socialism (in the french context) is the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen from The Constitution of 1793[^]. Some woud call that heresy, but it's my opinion. Stan Shannon wrote: The core of the U.S. population remains solidly anti-Socialistic. Violently so. I'm not surprized after 50 years of brainwashing justified by the cold war. Stan Shannon wrote: Davy was a great man. A hero of mine And from french origin ;) Stan Shannon wrote: A house divided against itself cannot stand. It must become all of one thing or all of the other. It does not implies that one has to decide for the others. Otherwise, a lot of people have no place in your world.


                          Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups