Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineThe_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Economist]
    #6918101 - 05/14/07 11:59 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Communism and to a larger extent socialism is definitely on the out, its philosophy is untenable to modern society, , I think the american dollar is what has persuaded the Chinese to be a more open free-market society, their economy is very prosperous, but the trade deficit these countries hold with the US is unbelievable.

Which is why China is very active with relations with Africa and South America, obtaining more oil for to meet their growing populaces need for energy.

When you take Islamic Extremism, its network system is very decentralized, its a almost complete open source network, non-state groups within their own quasi-states, Hezbollah for example is a non-state group, effectively a state within a state. Now Israel attacked the State, they did hardly any damage to Hezbollah and wrought much destruction upon the populace, shaking already a effort for a democractic country.

Therefore, Hezbollah exploited the Israeli's weakness, Physically, Mentally and Morally.

When you take groups like Al Qaeda, they need their own quasi-states to operate, which is why when Saddam was deposed Al Qaeda was immediately there to fill the void. When you take Somalia, Ethiopia whiped out the Islamic Courts Union, which actually had put some type of law and order,and now Somalia is a complete fucking mess.

Al Qaeda is like the CIA of islamic extremism, it is highly decentralized, and they are experts at jihad, theirs really only a thousand of them in Iraq, They release literature and tactics publicy all the time for all to see, Their tactics are constantly evolving, The american tactics never change, its still oil stain counter-insurgency.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #6918315 - 05/15/07 12:58 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

A. Leftists who insist that Bush went into Iraq because he wanted to enrich his Halliburton buddies




Yes, how stupid was that? I predicted this almost 5.5 years ago on THIS FORUM and HAL has only gone up 700% since the invasion. What a silly conspiracy!


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery


Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: RosettaStoned]
    #6918400 - 05/15/07 01:27 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

RosettaStoned said:
Quote:

it's hard for me to feel any sympathy for the radical Islamist cause when they act out against the US simply because the Soviets are not around any more




I'm sure that just HAS to be the reason. :rolleyes:




If the Soviets were around today, who do you think would be the more likely target of Al Qaeda, the nation that invaded Afghanistan (Soviets) or the nation that funded and armed the resistance (US)?

What do you think would have happened if it came out that the Soviets fed faulty intelligence to Egypt to purposefully instigate the Six Day War when the Soviet Union was still around? (source: http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2003/issue3/ginor.pdf)  Do you think planes would still be hitting targets in New York, or do you think they might be hitting targets in St. Petersburg (or Leningrad as it would have been)?

No matter how much damage the US did to the Islamic world, the Soviets did 10 fold as much.  The only problem is that the Soviets are no longer around, and Russia, for all the talk of being "on the rise" is a nation so poor that they could not guard their own nuclear missiles without US financial and logistical aid (source: http://www.nti.org/e_research/cnwm/securing/warhead.asp take the "budget" link).

So, who do you target?  Starving Russians, who actually destroyed your country, or rich Americans who left your country without rebuilding it?  And would you still pick that target if the Soviets were around and well-fed?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Economist]
    #6918646 - 05/15/07 03:58 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

> The capitalists never "won", The soviet system collapsed on itself by unmarked spending

Reagan spent the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. The Soviet Union, in her mind, could not fall behind US military spending. The more the US spent on weapons, the more the Soviet Union had to spend to keep up. Remember STI? That was the straw that broke the camels back. The US "won" the cold war with the Soviet Union as certainly as the US "lost" the Vietnam war.

> We pushed an agenda of democracy abroad and then propped up dictators, this was a bad plan, no question about it.

Don't get me started... Very bad policy to support friendly leaders, including dictators, rather than democracies, friendly or not.

> Personally I'd love to get at the bastards that told us recycling would "save all kinds of money" back in the 1970s and 1980s when the programs were being set up.

Easy to find them... they are the ones scaring us about how bad global warming is going to become and telling us the best way to spend our money to fix the eventual problem. Nuclear energy today is the recycle scam of the 70's... just build more nuclear plants and all your problems will go away...


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #6918672 - 05/15/07 04:43 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:

A. Leftists who insist that Bush went into Iraq because he wanted to enrich his Halliburton buddies




Yes, how stupid was that? I predicted this almost 5.5 years ago on THIS FORUM and HAL has only gone up 700% since the invasion. What a silly conspiracy!





This lie again. Last time you popped in here with this nonsense it was 1,000% over 5 years. Now it's 700% in 5.5 years. Both are lies.

Price in Jan 2002.......$13.75
Price in May 2007.......$34.07
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=HAL&a=00&b=1&c=2002&d=04&e=14&f=2007&g=m

Not even close.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 19 days
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6918895 - 05/15/07 07:35 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

> Price ...

Assuming no stock splits in that time frame. From their own web site:

Quote:

Since 1980, Halliburton common stock has undergone three 2:1 stock splits with distribution dates on December 1, 1980, July 21, 1997, and July 14, 2006.




... still, nowhere near 1000%


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRosettaStoned
Stranger

Registered: 05/29/06
Posts: 540
Loc: North America
Last seen: 16 years, 19 days
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Economist]
    #6918985 - 05/15/07 08:30 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

You compare recycling to a war that has resulted in the deaths of half a million people? With all your study into economics you seem to have lost your humanity at some point. There is no way to even compare the two and only someone who is trying to skew honest debate would attempt such.

The thing about laws are, the people who make them find a way to make themselves exempt. The way this war was handled was done so in a way so they could be safe from prosecution. That's not to say there isn't a law you could hang them with, but it would not be easy since the deck is stacked in their favor.

I find it pretty simple though. I personally was lied to. I was told saddam had WMD, I was told saddam was partially behind 9/11, I was told the iraqis would greet us as liberators and they turned out to be complete lies. I found out that instead of helping them, we have actually poisoned their cities with DU. We didn't find a single functional piece of WMD and those fucking morons at the WH (and some of their moronic supporters) still claim there are links to terrorism after it has been soundly refuted numerous times.

Those are lies my friend. Lies that caused the death of half a million people. I do need to cite a US law made by the same people who lead us into this war, I cite a law of mankind. Even their own religious laws have been broken. The WH admin are traitors to their own people, they used us, they used me personally. I believed in this war early on till I found out it was nothing but lies. Never again. So I will not bother to dig up a law they broke, they have tortured prisoners, targeted civilians, defied the geneva conventions and attacked a sovereign nation under false pretenses. War crimes by any standards, it's just too bad the Dems are more concerned with taking power than doing what's right.

As far as your claim the arabs are attacking the US simply because "we are there". It's ridiculous and it doesn't fit well with your normal intelligent commentary. They are attacking us because they feel we have wronged them. We have our armies on their land, we have deposed favorable govts, installed dictators and supported despots. And lets not forget our continued billions flowing to israel, don't suppose they're too happy about that eh? There is a multitude of reason for arabs to be pissed at the US and none of it has anything to do with them just spinning a bottle and it pointed to the US.

I am very disappointed you resorted to such a simpleton view on such a complex subject.


--------------------
"Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa

Edited by RosettaStoned (05/15/07 08:35 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleArp
roving mycophagist
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/98
Posts: 2,191
Loc: in a van by the river
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6918997 - 05/15/07 08:35 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Perhaps he is confusing the stock value with the contracts?

Insight in multinational corporations is just wishful thinking. Why do you think they moved their HQ to Dubai?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #6919015 - 05/15/07 08:42 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

... HAL has only gone up 700% since the invasion.




Incorrect. HAL was trading at $22 in March of 2003. It has since split 2 for 1 and is now trading at $34 (so $68 with the split factored in). That's an increase of 310%, not 700%.


Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: RosettaStoned]
    #6919068 - 05/15/07 08:57 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

RosettaStoned writes:

Quote:

I find it pretty simple though. I personally was lied to.




Perhaps. But who was it telling those lies? Let's examine your list, shall we?

Quote:

I was told saddam had WMD...




The Clinton administration was certain Saddam hadn't destroyed all his stocks of WMDs, as was every major intelligence agency in the world at the time of the invasion. For that matter, Hussein's own generals believed he still had them, and some people argue that even Hussein himself thought he still had some left.

Quote:

I was told saddam was partially behind 9/11...




Not by anyone in the Bush administration you weren't.

Quote:

... I was told the iraqis would greet us as liberators...




Most Iraqis did. Some did not.

Quote:

I found out that instead of helping them, we have actually poisoned their cities with DU.




No, Iraqi cities have not been "poisoned" with depleted uranium.

Quote:

We didn't find a single functional piece of WMD...




Somewhere around 500 artillery shells filled with sarin and mustard gas have been found to date. Whether or not they remain functional I couldn't say, as I haven't seen any reports that any of those shells were test fired to see if they still worked.

However, I will concede that the number is small enough to be considered essentially zero.

Quote:

...and those fucking morons at the WH (and some of their moronic supporters) still claim there are links to terrorism after it has been soundly refuted numerous times.




Hussein's Ba'athist Iraq definitely was linked to numerous terrorists and terrorist organizations. That hasn't been "soundly refuted" because it can't be... those links were reported in the media several times before the invasion -- in some cases years before the invasion. Time, Newsweek, the New York Times... all had run articles about Iraq's involvement with terrorist ties as far back as the mid Nineties.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Economist]
    #6919535 - 05/15/07 11:52 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. The Soviets were an aggressive and severe threat that needed to be dealt with. They also interefered repeatedly in the Muslim world (probably more than America). And the fact that America is the "big guy" on the stage makes us much more of a target. However, it must be noted that Islamic extremists are presently attacking Soviet interests all of the time because of the Chechnya situation.

There are one billion Muslims around the world and there are two schools of thought as to why the Muslims are pissed at America:

1. America has interfered in the Muslim world and caused death and hardship. This opinion is commonly held by the Left.

2. Muslim extremists are hateful, aggressive, and so possessed by intolerance and extremism that they will use any excuse to lash out at everybody. This opinion is commonly held by the Right.

I actually think that it's a combination of both and I think that there are different levels of Islamic extremists:

A. Hardcore extremists - These are the people who are actively engaged in or who actively support jihadist-type activities where innocent civilians are targeted. They are so possessed by their ideology that they will use any excuse to attack and achieve "martyrdom". I am going to guess that their worldwide numbers are about 100,000 or so.

B. Devout sympathizers - These people strongly identify with the hardcore extremists and agree with them on a lot of matters but they don't actually act out. However, people in this group sometimes hop into Group A. I am going to guess that there are about 30 million or so of these people.

C. Moderate sympathizers - These people can agree with a lot of the complaints of the extremists but they would never participate in violent attacks against civilians. I am going to guess that there are about 400 million of these people around the world.

Admittedly, I pulled those statistics out of my ass. But, I think it is safe to assume that easily half of the Muslims in the world are pissed at America. I think that if America stopped doing the things that piss most Muslims off (weapons to Israel, propping up of unpopular Arab regimes, interference in Middle Eastern matters, etc..) that we would completely change the minds of Group C, we would remove a significant amount of momentum from Group B, and we would severely isolate Group A. We would in effect absolutely neuter the anti-American Islamic extremist cause.

The Rightists will scream and howl about how we should not make concessions and that this would be a sign of weakness. I disagree. I think that we should step up our attacks on Muslims extremists. We should be much harsher on them than we are now. But, we should also strive to steal the momentum of their movement by stopping certain policies. I think that this is the best way to combat them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #6919545 - 05/15/07 11:54 AM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:

A. Leftists who insist that Bush went into Iraq because he wanted to enrich his Halliburton buddies




Yes, how stupid was that? I predicted this almost 5.5 years ago on THIS FORUM and HAL has only gone up 700% since the invasion. What a silly conspiracy!




The Bush administration did not go into Iraq in order to enrich associates. They went into Iraq because they hoped to achieve certain strategic goals which would benefit America. It's too bad that they were wrong and that it didn't work out how they planned.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRosettaStoned
Stranger

Registered: 05/29/06
Posts: 540
Loc: North America
Last seen: 16 years, 19 days
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Phred]
    #6919620 - 05/15/07 12:10 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

The Clinton administration was certain Saddam hadn't destroyed all his stocks of WMDs, as was every major intelligence agency in the world at the time of the invasion. For that matter, Hussein's own generals believed he still had them, and some people argue that even Hussein himself thought he still had some left.





It doesn't matter if the gods themselves told us he had WMD. It was us who acted on false information. Saddam was a threat to no one and as is proof positive 2007, the iraqi people were better off under his rule. But the US big oil wasn't.

You can't start a war then expect to be forgiven because other countries believed the info too. The other countries weren't willing to do it and the UN (as useless as they can be) were not behind it. If everyone believed the info then everyone should have been behind the war right? Wrong. Obviously many countries did not believe the imminent threat bullshit.

Once again phreddy you show your ability to manipulate the truth so eloquently. You honestly saying that the WH did not lead us to believe saddam had a hand in 9/11? Lets look at this quote shall we?

Quote:

"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."

State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003





We were told we were attacked by al-qaida, then we are told saddam protects and aids al-qaida? Take off the blinders, they told us over and over saddam - 9/11 - al qaida, saddam - 9/11 - al qaida, saddam - 9/11 - al qaida. Your claims don't fly with the majority of this country.

Then you go on to suggest most greeted us as liberators? For what all of 5mins till they realized we had zero interest in making any kind of serious effort at rebuilding infrastructure? They said, "Yay america! Yay bush! When do we get water and electricity?" For most of them it never came and still isn't there. But I suppose that would be blamed on the "evil terrorists" huh?

Quote:

No, Iraqi cities have not been "poisoned" with depleted uranium.





Wow, did you actually say that with a straight face? Do you realize how much DU we dropped on iraq? Do you realize the half-life on that shit is billions of years? The cancer rates of iraq and of our returning troops will speak far louder than the right-wing apologists denials.

Quote:

Hussein's Ba'athist Iraq definitely was linked to numerous terrorists and terrorist organizations. That hasn't been "soundly refuted" because it can't be... those links were reported in the media several times before the invasion -- in some cases years before the invasion. Time, Newsweek, the New York Times... all had run articles about Iraq's involvement with terrorist ties as far back as the mid Nineties.





Blah blah blah same old shit. US media reporting what they are told from US military sources or ex-saddam men who wanted a part of the new iraq are not reliable sources. Saddam had zero desire to share power and the US had far more concrete connections to arab extremists than saddam ever did. But when someone mentions the US - al qaida connection you laugh at that, yet there is far more evidence to support that. Ring wing apologists see the world a certain way no matter where the facts point and bend facts to suit their view. Very sad it is still being done this late in the game.


--------------------
"Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: RosettaStoned]
    #6919808 - 05/15/07 12:47 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

It doesn't matter if the gods themselves told us he had WMD. It was us who acted on false information.




Disseminating false information and "lying" are not the same thing. If even Hussein's own generals thought he still had some WMD left, how on earth can anyone else be accused of "lying" for thinking the same? Hussein did pretty much everything he could to give the impression he retained bio and chem weaponry stocks.

And of course he DID retain the weaponry programs. Post invasion inspections confirm this. They could have been ramped up again on very short notice. A week in the case of some of the simpler agents.

This assumes no stashes of bio and chem weaponry are ever found within Iraq's borders, of course. Someone may stumble across a buried bunker tomorrow, the same way a construction company in Berlin a few years back unearthed a hidden underground hangar filled with WWII era German aircraft. That hangar sat there for six decades before it was found.

Quote:

You honestly saying that the WH did not lead us to believe saddam had a hand in 9/11? Lets look at this quote shall we?




That quote says nothing about Iraq being involved in the 9/11 attacks. Nor do any other quotes from the Bush administration. Not one. On the other hand, there have been multiple quotes from the Bush administration where some reporter actually got around to asking if Hussein had any involvement in the 9/11 attacks, and in every case the answer was no.

Did Iraq shelter known Al Qaeda terrorists (and other terrorists as well) up to the time of the invasion? Of course they did. That is beyond dispute. That's not to say that any of those terrorists -- Al Qaeda or non Al Qaeda -- were involved with the 9/11 attacks.

Quote:

Then you go on to suggest most greeted us as liberators?




I don't suggest it, I state it as fact. This was just four years ago we're talking about, dude. Is your memory that short?

Quote:

Wow, did you actually say that with a straight face? Do you realize how much DU we dropped on iraq? Do you realize the half-life on that shit is billions of years? The cancer rates of iraq and of our returning troops will speak far louder than the right-wing apologists denials.




The whole "DU-as-deadly-poison" myth has been so thoroughly debunked so many times by so many reputable sources that no one with more than a passing bit of knowledge on the topic can take it seriously any longer. Do some research and get back to us on it.

Quote:

US media reporting what they are told from US military sources or ex-saddam men who wanted a part of the new iraq are not reliable sources.




Ever hear of Abu Nidal? or Abu Abbas? Missed that whole business of Hussein paying thousands of dollars to families of suicide bombers, too, I see. Ever heard of Salman Pak? Or the 1993 WTC bomber who fled to Iraq, was given citizenship and a house and a pension?

You can try to argue that the terrorists Hussein had ties to had retired by the time they hooked up with Hussein. I suppose that is not an impossibility. But to claim he had NO ties to terrorists is absurd.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Phred]
    #6919917 - 05/15/07 01:17 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Splendid smackdown Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Phred]
    #6920118 - 05/15/07 02:00 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Ever hear of Abu Nidal? or Abu Abbas? Missed that whole business of Hussein paying thousands of dollars to families of suicide bombers, too, I see. Ever heard of Salman Pak? Or the 1993 WTC bomber who fled to Iraq, was given citizenship and a house and a pension?

You can try to argue that the terrorists Hussein had ties to had retired by the time they hooked up with Hussein. I suppose that is not an impossibility. But to claim he had NO ties to terrorists is absurd.




And Saudia Arabia, or Syria, or Egypt, Virtually every arab nation in the region supported palestinian terrorist groups, Egypt stopped with Sadat, but Saudia Arabia to this day does big payouts to "martyrs"

The Syrians supported Abu Nidal considering their position with the PLO had deterioriated, Abu Nidal was a split in PLO.

Every Arab country has supported the PLO, Its a terrible excuse for an Invasion. Ever heard of Hama Syria, These dictators may have PR problems, America could whipe out an entire block of insurgents but they are worried about their PR image in the world.

Dictators who could kill their own civilians like in Hama, Syria or Saddam in 88 with the Kurds, They know how shaky their presidency is, It took a extreme brutal dictator to exercise some actual law and order.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: The_Red_Crayon]
    #6920128 - 05/15/07 02:02 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

You just illustrated perfectly how fucked up that part of the world is. Those people over there will never get their shit together. Let them blow each other up.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineThe_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN Flag
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #6920170 - 05/15/07 02:13 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

RandalFlagg said:
You just illustrated perfectly how fucked up that part of the world is. Those people over there will never get their shit together. Let them blow each other up.




What I find strange is how large of an amount of engineers and electricians become terrorists, Its gotten to a point in Iraq that assissinating each others factions electricians is the best way to get them out of the equation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 9 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: Economist]
    #6920445 - 05/15/07 03:12 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Economist said:
It wasn't just the Soviet system that collapsed, communism failed in every single country that it touched, and now people are even beginning to question the merits of Socialism, when it results in 23% unemployment for college graduates (hence Sarkozy's election).





Was the Soviet Union really communist? So far as I know they didn't really have much in the way of communal ownership or communal control of the means of production. Putting one man in charge of everything who uses secret police to enforce his will is hardly what I would call putting the means of production in the hands of the many.

I suppose they did label themselves communist, but they also labeled themselves a democracy. Much like the Democratic Republic of North Korea, their actions often belie their accusations.

In any event the mere collapse of a system does not prove that it was weak. On the contrary, I see the fact that they were able to become as adversarial as they were with the US as a sign of the USSR's strength. They went from feudal agricultural kingdom to the world's largest industrial empire and second super power in less then four decades. They defeated Nazi Germany while the US was recovering from an economic depression. And they fell not as the socialist USSR, but when they adopted capitalist reforms.

The last point is crucial, the USSR lost 40% of its economy and it's superpower status not as a socialist nation, but when it implemented a capitalist economy. Saying the collapse of the USSR disproves socialism, is like saying the collapse of the Roman Empire signifies the triumph of Christianity over secularism. In fact many Christians attribute the collapse of the Soviet system to the government's atheistic tendencies. I hope you aren't going to say the USSR fell because it was secular.


--------------------


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin

Edited by FrenchSocialist (05/15/07 03:13 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery


Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
Re: Rethinking American foreign policy and Iraq [Re: RosettaStoned]
    #6920959 - 05/15/07 05:00 PM (16 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

RosettaStoned said:
You compare recycling to a war that has resulted in the deaths of half a million people? With all your study into economics you seem to have lost your humanity at some point. There is no way to even compare the two and only someone who is trying to skew honest debate would attempt such.



And I would say that you have missed the idea of what justice is if you believe that emotions have a place in seeking it.

The statue of Lady Justice is blind because justice is supposed to be about weighing the evidence and deciding truth of argument, not a rage-fueled ideological crusade.

You want to try Bush for fraud because he manipulated the available information, that's fine. But you need to understand that the law must apply equally to all. Charging someone with a crime because they manipulated the available intelligence means you must charge EVERYONE who commits the same act with that crime. You cannot simply arrest the drunk drivers who kill people, you must get them ALL off the road.

Quote:

RosettaStoned said:
I find it pretty simple though. I personally was lied to.



As was I. Note the lyrics to this Sesame Street song played during my childhood: http://www.lyricsdownload.com/sesame-street-keep-on-truckin-lyrics.html

Note the claim that "recycling saves energy too". Now please go back to the early 1980s, when the song was played, and look at the recycling campaigns that made outrageous claims about how recycling programs would save money and energy. They knew it was lie, but they said it anyway, and they even fed the false information to children via PBS!

If manipulating the available information to justify a political agenda is a lie, then the proponents of recycling from the 1980s are equally as guilty as Bush. Just like failing to arrest drunk drivers who do not ultimately kill people, failing to arrest people whose manipulation and lies do not lead to deaths will only encourage more of the same behavior until someone dies. That is how deterrence works, and it's the basis of the criminal justice system.

Quote:

RosettaStoned said:
As far as your claim the arabs are attacking the US simply because "we are there". It's ridiculous and it doesn't fit well with your normal intelligent commentary. They are attacking us because they feel we have wronged them. We have our armies on their land, we have deposed favorable govts, installed dictators and supported despots. And lets not forget our continued billions flowing to israel, don't suppose they're too happy about that eh? There is a multitude of reason for arabs to be pissed at the US and none of it has anything to do with them just spinning a bottle and it pointed to the US.




You seem to have completely missed my point. My point is that the Soviets and the US both did everything you describe here. I think most will agree with me that what the Soviets did up until 9/11 was far worse in relation to the Arab world. Look up Soviet intervention in Yemen and Oman if you need more proof, or just look at the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

However, the Soviet Union does not exist anymore. So, instead of having 2 targets (or, IMO one target, as Soviet actions were far worse in the Arab world) the Islamic terrorists of the world are left with only 1, the US.

I specifically stated in my above posts that I disagreed with US actions in the Arab world and think they are grossly irresponsible. My point is that they were less extreme than those taken by the Soviets, but with the Soviets out of the picture, the only viable target left is America.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* A view of American Foreign Policy Ped 1,214 8 09/09/03 06:11 PM
by afoaf
* American foreign policy: pure comedy Anonymous 375 2 04/14/03 06:25 PM
by diggitydankman
* New Foreign Policy Coalition Warns of US 'Empire-Building' Zahid 665 3 10/28/03 12:29 PM
by Xlea321
* American voters lose faith in Bush's foreign policy
( 1 2 all )
Zahid 2,210 20 10/14/03 06:57 PM
by Zahid
* US foreign policy.
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Anonymous 5,089 104 01/23/03 11:29 PM
by GazzBut
* Lies and War: Leo Strauss, the Neocons, and Iraq Zahid 578 1 10/22/03 07:28 AM
by Zahid
* Orchards and American Integrity Zahid 556 1 10/20/03 02:25 PM
by wingnutx
* Unprepared for Peace in Iraq wingnutx 622 3 08/27/03 07:31 AM
by shakta

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,597 topic views. 6 members, 4 guests and 11 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.03 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.