Mission Accomplished ?
- Thread starter Risaki
- Start date
sgt slaughter
New member
So according to you, the only true and acceptable decision to the Twin Towers going down was to do absolutely nothing and simply move on with our lives like nothing happened? Just lay down and taken it and hope nothing bad ever happens again?
I'm sure you'd maintain this position if the Iranians sent a nuclear missile to Australia and obliterated Sidney from the face of the planet?
I'm sure you'd maintain this position if the Iranians sent a nuclear missile to Australia and obliterated Sidney from the face of the planet?
Your policy: we got attacked by somebdoy, let's respond by attacking somebody (and since it doesn't matter who, let's attack this guy that we might be able to profit from)
My policy: we were attacked by al qaeda, let's attack al qaeda, hunt them down at all costs, and completely eliminate their operation and effectiveness.
No war in iraq. Qed
My policy: we were attacked by al qaeda, let's attack al qaeda, hunt them down at all costs, and completely eliminate their operation and effectiveness.
No war in iraq. Qed
randomtigers
New member
We were attacked by japan not Germany (just because they were in an active alliance and declared war on us doesn't mean they physically attacked us).
The leaders then weren't blind enough or prejudice enough to miss the fact that they were fighting a statist movement that had been brewing in the world for half a century not merely a few units from someones rouge military.
The answer is one neeRAB to analyze foreign relations in the context of the truth about government and nations.
Sovereignty is the remnants of tribal territory contests, nothing more.
What should concern us is the morality of people and organizations nothing more (or less).
Why was 'Britain's' war with Germany our business?
The Nazi's were evil, their end was necessary and that necessity did not make it right to kill them their own actions did.
To say that America didn't have the right to attack saddam hussein because we weren't his direct victims is absurd.
The leaders then weren't blind enough or prejudice enough to miss the fact that they were fighting a statist movement that had been brewing in the world for half a century not merely a few units from someones rouge military.
The answer is one neeRAB to analyze foreign relations in the context of the truth about government and nations.
Sovereignty is the remnants of tribal territory contests, nothing more.
What should concern us is the morality of people and organizations nothing more (or less).
Why was 'Britain's' war with Germany our business?
The Nazi's were evil, their end was necessary and that necessity did not make it right to kill them their own actions did.
To say that America didn't have the right to attack saddam hussein because we weren't his direct victims is absurd.
dannypopso
New member
You did fight the war in Iraq the same way as in WW11 first of all and creamed the Iraqi forces then it went to rats s*it because you carried ON fighting like it was WW11...or should I say we did...
Moiraes Fate
New member
Right, and it doesn't matter what action we take. When you're required to attack somebody, you damn well better find somebody to attack
Blake Jones
New member
Britain's war with Germany became your war when Germany declared war on the USA.
The USA did not declare war on Germany until then.
Didnt you know?
The USA did not declare war on Germany until then.
Didnt you know?
America is going to hell because it has taken on Old Rome ideas about empire-building, while America itself is wasting away, its resources spent on a dwindling military.
The ideals of America have been trashed by the right wing.
The idea of America in the Declaration of Independence and its Constitution is a liberal idea which has been thoroughly compromised by the Reich.
The ideals of America have been trashed by the right wing.
The idea of America in the Declaration of Independence and its Constitution is a liberal idea which has been thoroughly compromised by the Reich.
Really? Because I don't see where socialism, collectivism, anti-upper class policies, government programs, or government control of the economy were mentioned in the Constitution, then were brushed off by Conservatives. Care to point it out to me?
You should write for Leno.
Name me a single founding father who was demonstrably liberal, like Pelosi, Clinton, or Obama.
Also, show me where left-wing ideology is reflected in the Constitution. Show me where the Constitution says that it's the job of the government to provide your healthcare, that the government should do anything at all with the economy, .
And explain to me how you're a supporter of the Constitution when you think guns should be banned, thus violating the second amendment (and I imagine you think they should be confiscated, violating the fourth). I also imagine you supported Pelosi's so-called "fairness doctrine" which would violate the first amendment.
You should write for Leno.
Name me a single founding father who was demonstrably liberal, like Pelosi, Clinton, or Obama.
Also, show me where left-wing ideology is reflected in the Constitution. Show me where the Constitution says that it's the job of the government to provide your healthcare, that the government should do anything at all with the economy, .
And explain to me how you're a supporter of the Constitution when you think guns should be banned, thus violating the second amendment (and I imagine you think they should be confiscated, violating the fourth). I also imagine you supported Pelosi's so-called "fairness doctrine" which would violate the first amendment.
That's the point Germany did not attack the united states japan did.
Claiming that Al'quada is singularly responsible for 9/11 or the human rights state in the middle east is akin to saying that even though Germany declared war on the U.S.A only japan, (perhaps only the pilots who dropped the bombs) should be targeted.
They are not a rouge organization they are one of many who sprung up from the political climate in the middle east.
Anyway I was pointing to an example of a just war that started between two nations when neither nation had attacked yet.
It would have been just before that.
It would have been just to invade Germany when the Nazi's took power.
That today however would be called premature unilateral imperialism
Claiming that Al'quada is singularly responsible for 9/11 or the human rights state in the middle east is akin to saying that even though Germany declared war on the U.S.A only japan, (perhaps only the pilots who dropped the bombs) should be targeted.
They are not a rouge organization they are one of many who sprung up from the political climate in the middle east.
Anyway I was pointing to an example of a just war that started between two nations when neither nation had attacked yet.
It would have been just before that.
It would have been just to invade Germany when the Nazi's took power.
That today however would be called premature unilateral imperialism
The Iraq War.
All about oil.
The "spread of democracy" is a bogus excuse for the military industrial complex.
Consider the number of people who died .. children, women, and old people .. far more than Saddam H. ever killed .. the devastation of an entire country and its infrastructure. American torture and war crimes.
The problems that create war remain the same.
What ethnocentric American arrogance to even consider whether or not it was a "success" or "failure."
For parlor room *chit-chat*. After coming home from commutes in 4 wheel drives.
SHAME.
All about oil.
The "spread of democracy" is a bogus excuse for the military industrial complex.
Consider the number of people who died .. children, women, and old people .. far more than Saddam H. ever killed .. the devastation of an entire country and its infrastructure. American torture and war crimes.
The problems that create war remain the same.
What ethnocentric American arrogance to even consider whether or not it was a "success" or "failure."
For parlor room *chit-chat*. After coming home from commutes in 4 wheel drives.
SHAME.
And you'd rather that we didn't even go after Japan at all, but redirect all our attacks to Germany and act as though Japan didn't do anything. Because that's what happened in this war. And your analogy is flawed because Iraq isn't the axis of terrorism, regardless of how many times bush and his puppets repeats it. Believe it or not, if we had to pick a country as the source of organized terrorist groups, Saudi Arabia would probably be on the top of the list. Most of the al qaeda terrorist involved in the attack, including bin laden himself, were saudis. Even the "ties" that saddam allegedly had to terrorist, were saudi connections for the most part. So why didn't we invade saudi arabia?
Queen Kira
New member
Oil didn't knock down the twin towers.
Oil interests at best were a tertiary interest just as tariRAB were a tertiary interest for secession in the American civil war.
Don't pretend slavery or the state of war that groups like al'quada had anything but everything to do with it.
That I do not believe, and even if they did I can be sure they were not targeted by U.S & Allies forces.
Right....
That I agree with.
Oil interests.
Oil interests were involved but they kept a country safe not caused it to be invaded.
If G.W.B was significantly braver and smarter he would have been invading practically every middle eastern country.
Choosing only Iraq (which is pretty dead center) was a compromise, it was hoped that it would influence other nations in the region if it was a democracy, and Saddam Hussein's doings were particularly evil.
Anyway we did attack japan and Germany and we did attack afghanistan (were al'quada itself was hanging out) and Iraq.
Oil interests at best were a tertiary interest just as tariRAB were a tertiary interest for secession in the American civil war.
Don't pretend slavery or the state of war that groups like al'quada had anything but everything to do with it.
That I do not believe, and even if they did I can be sure they were not targeted by U.S & Allies forces.
Right....
That I agree with.
Oil interests.
Oil interests were involved but they kept a country safe not caused it to be invaded.
If G.W.B was significantly braver and smarter he would have been invading practically every middle eastern country.
Choosing only Iraq (which is pretty dead center) was a compromise, it was hoped that it would influence other nations in the region if it was a democracy, and Saddam Hussein's doings were particularly evil.
Anyway we did attack japan and Germany and we did attack afghanistan (were al'quada itself was hanging out) and Iraq.