This is great.
-
What about the chemical, biological and nucelar weapons in Israel, or their violation of UN resolutions ? Oops, can't mention that X| The tigress is here :-D
Trollslayer wrote: What about the chemical, biological and nucelar weapons in Israel, or their violation of UN resolutions ? What resolutions?
-
If UN passes a resolution that asks US to open itself to weapons inspectors from other countries, will it comply? I am certain that it will not; and there will be nothing that UN can do about it. If Saddam had a few nuclear weapons mounted on a couple of ICBMs, everyone would still be negotiating. What can be enforced is inversely proportional to the military strength of the opponent. It comes back to Israel because all the issues that are in the Middle-East today are directly linked to Israel - the patronizing of Israel by the West; and the hatred of Israel by Arabs. This issue that causes the most tension around the world, whereas most other conflicts are localized. They are localized particularly because there are no third-party superpowers involved. I don't expect the middle-east problems to get solved until the hatred dies down on both sides. I have no particular affiliation to either Israel or Arabs; but I get the feeling that the western policies heavily favour the Israeli side. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Thomas George wrote: If UN passes a resolution that asks US to open itself to weapons inspectors from other countries, will it comply? I am certain that it will not; and there will be nothing that UN can do about it If you remember correctly, Saddam agreed to inspections as a condition of surrender in the first gulf war. He knew the UN was spineless so he ignored the resolutions. Thomas George wrote: They are localized particularly because there are no third-party superpowers involved. While at the same time the "superpowers" are involved to keep a lid on a potentially catastophic situation created by the UN when it officially established the state of Israel after WW2. Do you appreciate the irony here? ;P Thomas George wrote: I don't expect the middle-east problems to get solved until the hatred dies down on both sides. I don't expect the middle-east problems to get solved until we (the world) develop an alternate energy source, abandon the area and let the current inhabitants kill each other. There is too much bigotry, racism and pure hatred for any other outcome. Mike Mullikin :beer:
Capitalism - Coming to a Country Near You!!
-
you sure thats not misover-estimate ? ;) BW "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
-
"I think that we believe there are chemical weapons in Syria, for example," Bush said. Does he want to start another war? Also, is the US claiming that they, the Russians, the Chinese etc. don't have chemical weapons, that having chemical weapons became a big issue? AFAIK, whatever their reputation be, Syria has not done a military offensive on a neighbouring country like Iraq did. Anyway, the statement sounds ominous. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Thomas George wrote: "I think that we believe there are chemical weapons in Syria, for example," Bush said. Well, the whole "chemical weapons in Syria" argument doesn't hold a lot of real weight. The fact of the matter is that bio/chem weapons are rather distasteful - in part because of their capability to kill civilians indescriminantly and in large numbers. But, they aren't any less civilian-friendly than, say, nuclear weapons. So, simply having them isn't really a big offense (unless we're going to say that having nuclear weapons is a big offense). And we all know of plenty of nations with nukes. I think that's different than the possibility of Iraq having bio/chem/nuclear weapons, however, because Iraq has shown a lot of bad behavior, so everyone recognizes that they should be disarmed (everyone, including the French, Germans, and Russians agree with that statement). It's a little bit like laws in the US: you own a gun, and you can be an ex-convict, but an ex-convict cannot own a gun. Merely owning the gun is not sufficient to be in violation of any laws. ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
-
Thomas George wrote: AFAIK, whatever their reputation be, Syria has not done a military offensive on a neighbouring country like Iraq did. 1948,1967,1973 - Israel. 1970 - Attempt to overthrow King Hussein of Jordan together with the PLO. 1982 - Lebanon, Syria occupies it even today. Same as Kuwait, but Lebanon doesn't have oil (only drugs), so no one cares Almost war with Turkey few years, until they expelled Kurdish rebels. Damascus hosts every terror group on earth - Shia, Sunni, African, etc...
Small correction: Syria sent troops to Lebanon in 1976 with claims of fighting terrorists. Israel invaded southern Lebanon in 1982 whereupon Syria immediately claimed they were assisting Lebanon.
-
"I think that we believe there are chemical weapons in Syria, for example," Bush said. Does he want to start another war? Also, is the US claiming that they, the Russians, the Chinese etc. don't have chemical weapons, that having chemical weapons became a big issue? AFAIK, whatever their reputation be, Syria has not done a military offensive on a neighbouring country like Iraq did. Anyway, the statement sounds ominous. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Thomas George wrote: Does he want to start another war? No. There will not be a war in Syria unless they start it or are linked to a terrorist act. There will not be the public support for a war with Syria like there is/was with Iraq. The point of this is a now that we showed how easy it was to disarm Iraq. How hard would it be to disarm Syria? This was a threat to the Syrians to cooperate and nothing more. John
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: Saddam was a villain, easy to stoke the fires of war against Weird, I don't see differences betwwen SH and the Assad dynasty! Mike Mullikin wrote: Not to menetion, it's time for the UN to step up and prove it's relevence. Sadly, I doubt this will happen. I doubt it too, unless the US back for this time the UN policy, even if it doesn't follow strictly the american point of view.
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
KaЯl wrote: Weird, I don't see differences betwwen SH and the Assad dynasty! But you can't fight dynasties. Hafiz al Assad was, at best, a Saddam Hussein wannabe. (Though he was much smarter and much less vain and not nearly as paranoid.) Bashar al Assad is, by most accounts, a spineless idiot and is likely simply a figurehead. This makes it a little more difficult to figure out who actually runs the country.
-
What about the chemical, biological and nucelar weapons in Israel, or their violation of UN resolutions ? Oops, can't mention that X| The tigress is here :-D
NON-BINDING resolutions. There is a difference.
-
Thomas George wrote: If UN passes a resolution that asks US to open itself to weapons inspectors from other countries, will it comply? I am certain that it will not; and there will be nothing that UN can do about it If you remember correctly, Saddam agreed to inspections as a condition of surrender in the first gulf war. He knew the UN was spineless so he ignored the resolutions. Thomas George wrote: They are localized particularly because there are no third-party superpowers involved. While at the same time the "superpowers" are involved to keep a lid on a potentially catastophic situation created by the UN when it officially established the state of Israel after WW2. Do you appreciate the irony here? ;P Thomas George wrote: I don't expect the middle-east problems to get solved until the hatred dies down on both sides. I don't expect the middle-east problems to get solved until we (the world) develop an alternate energy source, abandon the area and let the current inhabitants kill each other. There is too much bigotry, racism and pure hatred for any other outcome. Mike Mullikin :beer:
Capitalism - Coming to a Country Near You!!
Mike Mullikin wrote: There is too much bigotry, racism and pure hatred for any other outcome History shows us that even the bitter enemies may become friends.
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
-
Trollslayer wrote: What about the chemical, biological and nucelar weapons in Israel, or their violation of UN resolutions ? What resolutions?
-
NON-BINDING resolutions. There is a difference.
Yep. some are protected by UN veto powers, others aren't :suss: (No particular attack against the US, the 5 holders have the same behaviour)
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
-
Thomas George wrote: "I think that we believe there are chemical weapons in Syria, for example," Bush said. Well, the whole "chemical weapons in Syria" argument doesn't hold a lot of real weight. The fact of the matter is that bio/chem weapons are rather distasteful - in part because of their capability to kill civilians indescriminantly and in large numbers. But, they aren't any less civilian-friendly than, say, nuclear weapons. So, simply having them isn't really a big offense (unless we're going to say that having nuclear weapons is a big offense). And we all know of plenty of nations with nukes. I think that's different than the possibility of Iraq having bio/chem/nuclear weapons, however, because Iraq has shown a lot of bad behavior, so everyone recognizes that they should be disarmed (everyone, including the French, Germans, and Russians agree with that statement). It's a little bit like laws in the US: you own a gun, and you can be an ex-convict, but an ex-convict cannot own a gun. Merely owning the gun is not sufficient to be in violation of any laws. ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
Brit wrote: because Iraq has shown a lot of bad behavior Is there any nation which didn't have a bad behavior at a moment of its History? My point is, what are the factors which guide us to judge the behavior of a Nation? CNN? :confused:
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
-
"I think that we believe there are chemical weapons in Syria, for example," Bush said. Does he want to start another war? Also, is the US claiming that they, the Russians, the Chinese etc. don't have chemical weapons, that having chemical weapons became a big issue? AFAIK, whatever their reputation be, Syria has not done a military offensive on a neighbouring country like Iraq did. Anyway, the statement sounds ominous. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Yes, it's clear to me that Bush is realising that this sudden victory means he could mount a hostile takeover of the Middle East. Dark days ahead, I believe..... Christian NO MATTER HOW MUCH BIG IS THE WORD SIZE ,THE DATA MUCT BE TRANSPORTED INTO THE CPU. - Vinod Sharma Anonymous wrote: OK. I read a c++ book. Or...a bit of it anyway. I'm sick of that evil looking console window. I think you are a good candidate for Visual Basic. - Nemanja Trifunovic
-
Brit wrote: because Iraq has shown a lot of bad behavior Is there any nation which didn't have a bad behavior at a moment of its History? My point is, what are the factors which guide us to judge the behavior of a Nation? CNN? :confused:
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
KaЯl wrote: Is there any nation which didn't have a bad behavior at a moment of its History? Well, no. But, "bad behavior" covers a pretty wide area. Afterall, I could characterize Nazi Germany as guilty of "bad behavior", but you might again say that "is there any nation which didn't have bad behavior at a moment of its history?" (No, I'm not comparing Iraq to Nazi Germany. I'm merely pointing out that the elasticity of your argument can cover pretty much everything.) My point is, what are the factors which guide us to judge the behavior of a Nation? CNN? I don't know. What factors guide us to judge anything from Nazi Germany to serial killers? Who are we to setup courts in the first place, since humankind is never a perfect judge of anything? ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
-
Brit wrote: because Iraq has shown a lot of bad behavior Is there any nation which didn't have a bad behavior at a moment of its History? My point is, what are the factors which guide us to judge the behavior of a Nation? CNN? :confused:
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
I want to know where Syria got them from. I thought the US only sold them to Iraq ? Christian NO MATTER HOW MUCH BIG IS THE WORD SIZE ,THE DATA MUCT BE TRANSPORTED INTO THE CPU. - Vinod Sharma Anonymous wrote: OK. I read a c++ book. Or...a bit of it anyway. I'm sick of that evil looking console window. I think you are a good candidate for Visual Basic. - Nemanja Trifunovic
-
I want to know where Syria got them from. I thought the US only sold them to Iraq ? Christian NO MATTER HOW MUCH BIG IS THE WORD SIZE ,THE DATA MUCT BE TRANSPORTED INTO THE CPU. - Vinod Sharma Anonymous wrote: OK. I read a c++ book. Or...a bit of it anyway. I'm sick of that evil looking console window. I think you are a good candidate for Visual Basic. - Nemanja Trifunovic
-
KaЯl wrote: Is there any nation which didn't have a bad behavior at a moment of its History? Well, no. But, "bad behavior" covers a pretty wide area. Afterall, I could characterize Nazi Germany as guilty of "bad behavior", but you might again say that "is there any nation which didn't have bad behavior at a moment of its history?" (No, I'm not comparing Iraq to Nazi Germany. I'm merely pointing out that the elasticity of your argument can cover pretty much everything.) My point is, what are the factors which guide us to judge the behavior of a Nation? CNN? I don't know. What factors guide us to judge anything from Nazi Germany to serial killers? Who are we to setup courts in the first place, since humankind is never a perfect judge of anything? ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
the Third Reich could be an obvious example, but whatabout Turkey and the armenian genocide? Did it have the same repercussion in the World opinion? but let's try an harder one: what's the difference between Syria and Iraq? Syrya promotes terrorist groups, has probably chemical weapons and is a bloody dictatorship which invaded a part of Lebanon and still occupies it, without counting the aggression wars against Israel. Brit wrote: Who are we to setup courts in the first place, since humankind is never a perfect judge of anything There's now an International Court of Justice. It could be a good idea to begin to use it.
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
-
Trollslayer wrote: What about the chemical, biological and nucelar weapons in Israel, or their violation of UN resolutions ? What resolutions?
For the record, most "anti"-Israel resolutions are non-binding, passed by the general assembly and have outnumbered "anti-Arab resolutions by about 25 to 1. The two key binding resolutions concerning Israel are 242 and 338. 242 was passed following the 1967 war and 338 following the Yom Kippur war in 1973. What critics completely fail to realize is that the resolution applies to ALL parties involved, not just Israel. Article 1 states: 1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles: (i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; (ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
-
the Third Reich could be an obvious example, but whatabout Turkey and the armenian genocide? Did it have the same repercussion in the World opinion? but let's try an harder one: what's the difference between Syria and Iraq? Syrya promotes terrorist groups, has probably chemical weapons and is a bloody dictatorship which invaded a part of Lebanon and still occupies it, without counting the aggression wars against Israel. Brit wrote: Who are we to setup courts in the first place, since humankind is never a perfect judge of anything There's now an International Court of Justice. It could be a good idea to begin to use it.
But I did emphasie techies who I would imagine are brighter than the average freedom fry eating rednecks - Chris Austin
You want to abolish courts and Department of Justice? My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Thomas George wrote: Does he want to start another war? No. There will not be a war in Syria unless they start it or are linked to a terrorist act. There will not be the public support for a war with Syria like there is/was with Iraq. The point of this is a now that we showed how easy it was to disarm Iraq. How hard would it be to disarm Syria? This was a threat to the Syrians to cooperate and nothing more. John
You sound very certain. I am not as certain as you are. Going back a few months, the Iraq situation also started with innocent sounding statements, which many people on CP said was 'posturing'. Thomas My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers