holy shit. one FUCKED UP streaming war video online

[pdxsoldier]

you must watch this. it is FUCKED UP
peace.
http://home.attbi.com/~zotter/ac130_gunshipmed.wmv

[skloot]

wow.... like a fucking video game
nothing new, though... althuogh I havnt watched it to the end yet.

[ijji]

I saw this last night. It makes me feel very sad & uncomfortable. I don't really have anything else to say - I think the video speaks for itself.

[flutter]

Yea. This is freakin outta control
They can just pick you off from the little helicopter/jet/spaceship

Whats amazing to me is that they are lobbing tons of very $$$$$$ explosives down on that little crowd of what...10-20 people?

its like shit...1million...2million...oops...missed one...3million

War sux. Humans need to evolve.

PS -- kinda an odd question...but which war is this from?

[pdxsoldier]

afghanistan

[skloot]

The clip says Afganastan

I didnt realize they targeted individuals... god, that must be expensive. I mean, look - some people they needed to drop 4 or 5 bombs on! Shit!

[pdxsoldier]

i think you mean "personel".
you got to be one fucked up person to do that shit and then come back to the u.s. and try to live a civilian life??

[skloot]

Well, you are of course desensitised to that kind of violence - thats obviously a big part of war, convincing soldiers that the enemy is subhuman. Or else they might get a concience about exploding people.

[Mike S]

Well good .. glad to see our boys doing their job.

I guess some of you forgot these people were responsible for flying some planes into buildings? Yeah war sux. Thats why you should never start one with this country.

MS

[HexRei]

...and for all we know, each of those men killed was a taliban soldier who may well have tortured and maimed hundreds of women in his career. it seemed to me they were being very careful about civilian targets such as the nearby mosque.
What exactly is so frightening about this? that we've got the technology to engage the enemy without putting ourselves in serious danger?
you think the taliban or iraq would hesitate to put this technology to use if it were available to them? would you rather we ran in ground soldiers, so that some of our men could die and it would be a "fair" fight?

[skloot]

true
it was reasuring to hear the guy yelling, "no! the mosque is the square building!!"

[rayman]

wow!

[Effendi]

Originally posted by HexRei
...and for all we know, each of those men killed was a taliban soldier who may well have tortured and maimed hundreds of women in his career.


Yea.....So it's sure a good thing we killed them...just in case......
I mean after all, for all we know.......

Scott!!

[ijji]

Originally posted by HexRei
...and for all we know, each of those men killed was a taliban soldier who may well have tortured and maimed hundreds of women in his career. it seemed to me they were being very careful about civilian targets such as the nearby mosque.
What exactly is so frightening about this? that we've got the technology to engage the enemy without putting ourselves in serious danger?
you think the taliban or iraq would hesitate to put this technology to use if it were available to them? would you rather we ran in ground soldiers, so that some of our men could die and it would be a "fair" fight?



What exactly is frightening? Well, I wouldn't describe it as frightening - i'd say very saddening. You know, the part where people get killed. Some of us are NOT desensitized (thank god) to the pain of suffering of others. It doesn't matter who threw the first stone. What really matters is stopping the cycle. Some of us still believe in peace & working toward it & in the meantime we'll be very thankful for the love, life & opportunities we have every day.

Andy Shaman

[Effendi]

.

Gulf War U.S. Navy Secretary John Lehman estimated that 200,000 Iraqis died in the Gulf War. UNICEF estimates that well over a million Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S-led sanctions regime. Some 500,000 children have died, and an estimated 4,000 die from various preventable, sanctions-related diseases, every month, says the U.N. agency … More Iraqis have died then the combined casualties of the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. [http://www.mediamonitors.net/gowans22.html]

Nearly two of every five of the approximately 540,000 Gulf War vets are on disability as a result of illnesses they believe they sustained during that conflict.
[http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30664]

There is no UN resolution in place declaring ‘no-fly zones’ and no UN authority gave anyone the authority of law to bomb Iraq. The no fly zones are illegal. You can’t bomb a country into a democracy!

“The issue of no fly zones was not raised and therefore not debated: not a word. They offer no legitimacy to countries sending their aircraft to attack Iraq.” – Dr. Boutros-Ghali, former Secretary General of the United Nations. [http://www.ccmep.org/2002_articles/Iraq/122002_secret_war.htm]

The entire world is laughing at Powell’s UN speech and the American Corporate Media is whitewashing the world’s response. The government is lying about their evidence. For example, “Since the 1992 Gulf War, the CIA has been operating freely in northern Iraq, and the United States recently acknowledged that its special forces are operating in that part of the country. Powell showed what he said was a satellite photo of the [biological weapons training] “terrorist camp.” If the United States knows where such a camp lies, and has forces in the region, why has it not bombed it or attacked it, as it has bombed so many other installations in northern Iraq? It just doesn’t add up.” [http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1140.shtml]

Far from being an up-to-date intelligence assessment, the dossier was a patchwork of plagiarized student essays and contained descriptions of Iraq that are 12 years old, describing Iraq as it was at the start of the first Gulf War, not as it is today. [http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=375941] [http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20030206/dossier.html].

“My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.

I would call my colleagues’ attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed yesterday which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities.”

-- Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations Security Council, Feb. 5

“Ten of the nineteen pages of … [the] intelligence supplied by the British … had been copied, complete with spelling mistakes, from the … [1991] thesis document. The other nine pages are copied and pasted from defense magazines readily available on the Internet, such as Jane’s Defense Weekly.” [http://English.Pravda.ru/main/2003/02/08/43172.html]

Bush will be the only one to benefit if a terrorist strikes our country. Also… What about Osama Bin Laden?

“The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him.” –G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” – G.W. Bush, 3/13/02 [911: http://www.911pi.com/]

“There are tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of people in Britain and America, in Europe and worldwide, who want to see a peaceful outcome to this problem, and they are the real Americans in my opinion, the real British, the real French, the real Germans, because they think of the world in terms of their children.”

– [http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030204-055857-8266r]

The first casualty of war is truth. --Rudyard Kipling

[ijji]

Originally posted by Mike S
Well good .. glad to see our boys doing their job.

I guess some of you forgot these people were responsible for flying some planes into buildings? Yeah war sux. Thats why you should never start one with this country.

MS

Also, yes - war does suck. But your comment after that is dangerous. You imply that America is Top Dog & that a beatdown will surely follow any attack on us. While I agree that the United States is very powerful I do not think it is wise to act as if we are invincible. We are making enemies faster & in greater quantities than ever before. Great empires always fall, no matter how untouchable they think they are.

[flutter]

Nice post. --> THIS ONE [Forget the Hype....Get the facts.......]

Thanks

[rayman]

I noticed alot of secondery explosions,,,that place was packing alot of ordinances!!
what types were we using?

[Effendi]

Originally posted by ijji

Also, yes - war does suck. But your comment after that is dangerous.

Thank You!!

You imply that America is Top Dog & that a beatdown will surely follow any attack on us.

I must correct you, Mike does not Imply this, he is VERY clear in outright saying it!!

While I agree that the United States is very powerful I do not think it is wise to act as if we are invincible. We are making enemies faster & in greater quantities than ever before.

Thank You once again!!
There is NO-One in the world that doubts the strength, will and determination of the United States. Especially after what we did to Afganistan post 9-11. We do not NEED any more enemies now!!

Great empires always fall, no matter how untouchable they think they are.

Agreed and here is the bottom line thinking between let's say Scott and Mike!!


Mike thinks: The United States will last longer if we crush, Kill and destroy anyone who might be an enemy.

Scott thinks: The United States will last longer with fewer enemies more clearly determined by Intelligent diplomacy than daisy cutters.

Scott!!

[HexRei]

Originally posted by Effendi


Yea.....So it's sure a good thing we killed them...just in case......
I mean after all, for all we know.......

Scott!!

That's not really what I meant, Scott. You and I do not know. The footage is not clearly labelled or explained. However, the military personnel in charge of the assault may have had a whole lot of information. My point is, WE don't know, so making an assumption that it was an indiscriminate slaughter is still just an assumption.

[Effendi]

Originally posted by HexRei

WE don't know, so making an assumption that it was an indiscriminate slaughter is still just an assumption.

I read back over this thread and could not find where anyone suggested it was simply an "Indiscriminate slaughter".

If anything I kind of got the idea that it was "released" by the US Government to "Prove" to the American people of our "Video Game war" abilities.

As far as who it is being killed, who knows who it was, certainly not the pilots, according to the tape itself!!

Scott!!

[KidKaBoom]

My tax dollars pay for that shit?!? :eek: Couldn't they use something else then, like 2 million dollar missles?

BAH!

[Mike S]

Originally posted by ijji


Also, yes - war does suck. But your comment after that is dangerous. You imply that America is Top Dog & that a beatdown will surely follow any attack on us. While I agree that the United States is very powerful I do not think it is wise to act as if we are invincible. We are making enemies faster & in greater quantities than ever before. Great empires always fall, no matter how untouchable they think they are.

My comment was dangerous?

Interesting choice of words you use there.

MS

[TeknoAXE]

Originally posted by flutter
Yea. This is freakin outta control
?

its like shit...1million...2million...oops...missed one...3million



Not quite. The video fotage represented in this video is from an AC-130 Gunship.

http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/pictures/ac_130.jpg

The AC-130U gunship has three armaments. The 25mm weapon, the 40mm meter weapon and the 105mm cannon. The 25 and the 40 are both round feed guns that expend bullets. There is mention of the 40mm gun in the video.

The big explosions come from the 105mm cannon in the back. To give you an Idea of what that munition cost, copperhead rounds (laser guided rounds used in 155mm artillery) costs 1 million dollars a piece. Regular High Explosive rounds cost about 1/40th of that for my battalion. So you can imagine that 105 rounds cost alot less.

AXE

[Mike S]

Originally posted by plastorm


Mike, Mike, Mike,

14 of the WTC terrorists came from Saudi. What, I ask, did bombing sand piles and mountain tunnels in another country do for the war on terrorism? And why aren't YOU in the military?

Shew fly! Shew!


Oh golly plas REALLY? Hey plas tell ya what when you're done explaining to us how and what we should really be doing to go after the people that started this little war.. maybe you can do a little home work and remind yourself that their base of operation was Afghanistan. Not Saudi Arabia. Remember plas?..
ALL those peeps from different places all gathered together for the explicit purpose to learn how to kill you and I in a manner that inflicts the maximum amount of death on innocents and creates the maximum amount of terror for the survivors. did ya forget that huh... is it just one of those inconvenient facts that conflicts with your world view you'd like to sweep under the rug...huh plas?

Hey maybe to refresh your memory about what these people are about I should dig up some mpegs showing people jumping to their death from a hundred story building.. would ya like that plas? OR maybe your one of those people that thinks the folks in the towers had it coming.. I suspect that might be true of you.. how bout I dig up some video of these al queda buddies of yours smashing a man to death with rocks because he was accused of homosexuality.. Might that refresh your memory..hmm plas. Or Maybe ..Just maybe I should search the net for this video taken clandestinely of a woman .. who had been gang raped by al queda "soldiers" then was accused and convicted of adultery and was bludgeoned with a medium sized rock for several minutes until they figured she was dead. Starti g to refresh your memory yet you ignorant, smart ass, degenerate...hmmm?

And finally being that this is a music oriented board and we all suppposedly share that one thing in common....maybe I'll show ya a video of a soccer stadium in what was in Kabul. In the field are the accused. One of them is accused of listening to music, having photographs as well as a TV and watching it.
As he begs for his life --- are ya still listening here plas cuz this is important stuff pal--- as he begs for his life a man casually walks up to him, laughing and joking with someone else- then strafes him with an AK-47.

Any questions plas as to what were doing in Afghanistan. Hmm?

Or are you so removed from reality you don't understand yet.
Or Plas do you even care? Yes? No?
Maybe you could care less and the sum of your input into matters such as this are those ignorant smart ass posts of yours. I think thats probably closer to the truth.



Same with the rest of you whining f*cks... Jezuz H K-Ryst.. I cant believe what I'm reading from some of you people. Maybe I should take the time to dig up those videos and link them to the site so you all can remember EXACTLY what the hell is going on. Pffft... tell ya what. the videos are easy to find for those who take the time to do it. Just remember when your watching them that if these fanatics have their way - those people being killed in the way they are - will be you.




*Step on roach*

MS

[D-d0g]

Originally posted by Mike S

Hey maybe to refresh your memory about what these people are about I should dig up some mpegs showing people jumping to their death from a hundred story building.. would ya like that plas? OR maybe your one of those people that thinks the folks in the towers had it coming.. I suspect that might be true of you.. how bout I dig up some video of these al queda buddies of yours smashing a man to death with rocks because he was accused of homosexuality.. Might that refresh your memory..hmm plas. Or Maybe ..Just maybe I should search the net for this video taken clandestinely of a woman .. who had been gang raped by al queda "soldiers" then was accused and convicted of adultery and was bludgeoned with a medium sized rock for several minutes until they figured she was dead. Starti g to refresh your memory yet you ignorant, smart ass, degenerate...hmmm?

Gosh, Mike, you conveniently "forgot" that the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan after your heroes in the US government abandoned the country following the Soviet retreat. And the Taliban were in power in Afghanistan for YEARS while you and your reactionary friends couldn't give a fuck about their horrible human-rights record - which was there for all the world to see. They went right on executing women for appearing in public without a male escort for years - did you care? Nope.

Oh, wait, y'all were too busy blowing a gasket because Clinton got a blowjob. Sorry, I forgot. . . priorities, priorities.

Nobody in Radical Republican Amerika gave a flying fuck about the Taliban. That is, until they became a handy target for all that expensive ammunition purchased from the military-industrial complex. . . and a handy "change the subject" resource away from our good friends (and strong supporters of human rights) in Saudi Arabia.

Hey, and we sure have done a super job of rebuilding Afghanistan after blowing the fuck out of it, haven't we? That's Bush Promise #23,542 broken.

When ARE you signing up for the military anyway, Mike? Big, tough guy like you - about time you kicked some "towelhead" ass, isn't it? Might help you forget how much of a fucking hypocrite you are.

Peace,

D-d0g

[Mike S]

Originally posted by D-d0g


Gosh, Mike, you conveniently "forgot" that the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan after your heroes in the US government abandoned the country following the Soviet retreat. And the Taliban were in power in Afghanistan for YEARS while you and your reactionary friends couldn't give a fuck about their horrible human-rights record - which was there for all the world to see. They went right on executing women for appearing in public without a male escort for years - did you care? Nope.

Oh, wait, y'all were too busy blowing a gasket because Clinton got a blowjob. Sorry, I forgot. . . priorities, priorities.

Nobody in Radical Republican Amerika gave a flying fuck about the Taliban. That is, until they became a handy target for all that expensive ammunition purchased from the military-industrial complex. . . and a handy "change the subject" resource away from our good friends (and strong supporters of human rights) in Saudi Arabia.

Hey, and we sure have done a super job of rebuilding Afghanistan after blowing the fuck out of it, haven't we? That's Bush Promise #23,542 broken.

When ARE you signing up for the military anyway, Mike? Big, tough guy like you - about time you kicked some "towelhead" ass, isn't it? Might help you forget how much of a fucking hypocrite you are.

Peace,

D-d0g


No dog I didn't forget .. I'm just not mentally vacant enough to think that anyone back then supporting the Afghanis could possibly foresee the civil war that would follow the soviet retreat and the rise of the taliban.


MS

[Effendi]

Originally posted by Mike S

I'm just not mentally vacant enough to think that anyone back then supporting the Afghanis could possibly foresee the civil war that would follow the soviet retreat and the rise of the taliban.
MS

Yea Mike Your right, who could have ever guessed the possible outcome of us dropping our 100 Million dollar a month support of the Mujahadeen and picking up our shit and walking away from a situation we thought we had to be involved in.

I mean with all that armament we put in place (stingers and the like) how could we POSSIBLY predicted such an outcome as a civil war? Most of them have nothing BUT weapons, Why wouldn't they live happily and peacefully ever after?

Scott!!

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Effendi


Yea Mike Your right, who could have ever guessed the possible outcome of us dropping our 100 Million dollar a month support of the Mujahadeen and picking up our shit and walking away from a situation we thought we had to be involved in.

I mean with all that armament we put in place (stingers and the like) how could we POSSIBLY predicted such an outcome as a civil war? Most of them have nothing BUT weapons, Why wouldn't they live happily and peacefully ever after?

Scott!!

I dont know Scott who could have predicted it? I mean prior to the I don't know Scott who could have predicted it? I mean prior to the soviet invasion and the subsequent war Kabul was considered the Paris of the east. the arts and culture in Afghanistan were world renown. Kabul was an exotic tourist destination. so I imagine one would have thought that upon vacating the soviets from their territory the Afghanis would have wanted to reclaim that. What wasn't taken into account was the effect the huge numbers of people in Afghanistan fighting with the Afghanis against the soviets would have. People like Bin Laden.

You know all this Scott and the only reason I'm forced to write all this out is so people aren't fooled by your purposefully simple and intellectually dishonest reply.

You sometimes really do have no shame do you.

Hey you never did tell me.. what conspiracy are you gonna use to explain why your conspiracy about bush going to war in Iraq to colonize it and take its oil didn't pan out?

MS

[Effendi]

.
Your attempt to discredit me and my "Conspiracies" only lends more Credence to them.

Earlier you admitted that there was truth in the conspiraciy by stating that alas, "Oil is a world commodity, there might be some involved"......lol

Now you are back stepping and trying to convince yourself that there is no truth to what is obvious to Everyone else without their head clear up their ass!!

Scott!!

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Mike S


I dont know Scott who could have predicted it? I mean prior to the I don't know Scott who could have predicted it? I mean prior to the soviet invasion and the subsequent war Kabul was considered the Paris of the east. the arts and culture in Afghanistan were world renown. Kabul was an exotic tourist destination. so I imagine one would have thought that upon vacating the soviets from their territory the Afghanis would have wanted to reclaim that. What wasn't taken into account was the effect the huge numbers of people in Afghanistan fighting with the Afghanis against the soviets would have. People like Bin Laden.

You know all this Scott and the only reason I'm forced to write all this out is so people aren't fooled by your purposefully simple and intellectually dishonest reply.

You sometimes really do have no shame do you.

Hey you never did tell me.. what conspiracy are you gonna use to explain why your conspiracy about bush going to war in Iraq to colonize it and take its oil didn't pan out?

MS

Mike why waste your time? Obviously are friends D-Dog and Scott have forgotten all about the cold war.

-Jason

[Mike S]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD


Mike why waste your time? Obviously are friends D-Dog and Scott have forgotten all about the cold war.

-Jason

True. Either that or their pissed about which side won. ;)

MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Effendi


Scott thinks: The United States will last longer with fewer enemies more clearly determined by Intelligent diplomacy than daisy cutters.

Scott!!

Excuse me... what was that you said?

Intelligent Diplomacy?.... Really?

Well then Scotty.. you're such a smart guy and you seem to be able pull facts out of thin air.

Regarding diplomacy...

Can you provide me with the successful model you would base these negotiations on?
Will you provide me with a historic example of a negotiated peace with a person like saddam or his regime having ever been successful?
Who were the negotiations between, how were they achieved and what was the end result.. not just the immediate end result but the long term result between the negotiating parties.


Will you also provide me with the way in which you mean to bring an end to the oppression, suffering and murder of the Iraqi people through this negotiated framework?


I'll assume that when you say that intelligent diplomacy will work with Saddam you have an example that you base this assertion on of a situation in which a negotiated peace with person like saddam and his regime was successful.

Take you time Scott .. I'm interested in what you may find.

I too once believed diplomacy would do the trick with Saddam.. till I spent quite a while searching both the net and the library looking for an example - fitting this situation - I could base this belief on. Haven't found it yet.

Be interested to see what you base your belief on Scotty.

MS

[pdxsoldier]

that is funny.
and true.

[Effendi]

.
Thanks Plastorm, Someone needed to call it the way it is.

I know Mike constantly calls me a lefty, fanatical conspiricist, but in Reality I am a True American Patriot.

I hate to see the atrocities carried out in abundance around the world, but I long ago realized that we can't possibly preach and be taken seriously when we do (as a country) exactly what we claim we hate in others.

The worlds is full of Tyranical Dictators, and Saddam is right up there with the best of them...Undisputed by ANYONE, Yet I STILL believe that until we clean up our own backYard, we have NO moral or legal leg to stand on in regards to bombing alternate evils out of existence.

I. as an AMerican Citizen am NOT willing to sacrifice the lives of my Friends and Neighbors in the interest of Oil Money!!

The is NO Moral justification and any suggestion of one is a Joke.

Like has been said before, all you war mongering rightwingers pick up a gun and YOU go kick some sand nigger ass. If not then Shut the Fuck up, and Stop putting the people I love at risk for your gain!!

Scott!!

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Effendi
.
Thanks Plastorm, Someone needed to call it the way it is.

I know Mike constantly calls me a lefty, fanatical conspiricist, but in Reality I am a True American Patriot.

I hate to see the atrocities carried out in abundance around the world, but I long ago realized that we can't possibly preach and be taken seriously when we do (as a country) exactly what we claim we hate in others.

The worlds is full of Tyranical Dictators, and Saddam is right up there with the best of them...Undisputed by ANYONE, Yet I STILL believe that until we clean up our own backYard, we have NO moral or legal leg to stand on in regards to bombing alternate evils out of existence.

I. as an AMerican Citizen am NOT willing to sacrifice the lives of my Friends and Neighbors in the interest of Oil Money!!

The is NO Moral justification and any suggestion of one is a Joke.

Like has been said before, all you war mongering rightwingers pick up a gun and YOU go kick some sand nigger ass. If not then Shut the Fuck up, and Stop putting the people I love at risk for your gain!!

Scott!!


Nice rhetoric guys.. cheeky and cute as usual.

Now...Back to the question.. as to Iraq and diplomacy:

once again:


Can you provide me with the successful model you would base these negotiations on?
Will you provide me with a historic example of a negotiated peace with a person like saddam or his regime having ever been successful?
Who were the negotiations between, how were they achieved and what was the end result.. not just the immediate end result but the long term result between the negotiating parties.


Will you also provide me with the way in which you mean to bring an end to the oppression, suffering and murder of the Iraqi people through this negotiated framework?

C'mon Plas.. C'mon Scott .. You've shown you're creative with rhetoric and in the ability to attempt to marginalize those that don't think like you . cool. impressive. Wow.
Now.. Boys. If You're so convinced you're right here and that war is not the answer and a negotiated peace is the solution please provide me with a working example of one historically. C'mon guys there has got to be something you base this belief on.
show me.


MS

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by plastorm
Hmmm...Mike, I don't accept this reply. It's the same reply you always give.

Umm.. In other words you don't have a rebuttle. <G>

[Mike S]

Spas.. I mean plas.. Sorry slip o the fingers there.. ;)

Don't avoid the question. That hints at you actually being closed off mentally. Now.. do I need to repeat it?


Look at this opportunity plas... you get a chance to make me stop and reconsider my position on this. Part of which is founded on belief that there is no negotiating with a person like Saddam or a regime like his.
I know its easier for ya to think that my conclusions are based on some talk show hosts script.. but.. (and I think ya know this) it aint.
See I think questions of war shouldn't be answered by blind politics. Although being partisan I cant say politics doesn't enter into my decision making process.. that would simply be asinine to assume on my part. Anyway plas..
In coming to the conclusions I have I fall back on what I've learned and my experiences as well as what I can teach myself about the situation currently. One of those things being the lack of evidence that a person like Saddam or his regime can be successful negotiated with and a lasting peace can be achieved via negotiation with a person like Saddam. And by lasting peace I mean not only peace between the Us and Iraq but Iraq complying fully with the UN mandates and Iraq not proliferating WMD or the technology to parties who would use against US interests.. get my drift?

I am failing to find historical precedent to support the belief that this can be done.

So Plas.. instead of being a smart ass.. here's your chance to be smart and kick out one of the pillars supporting my beliefs concerning Iraq.

MS

[Mike S]

Plas I'm thrilled to hear your opinion about the country.. Really.
And as for you living in countries where violations occurred.. that's interesting. And what did you do about them?

So back to the question at hand..
We've established that you don't like what this country is about, you don't like what a good majority of the people who live here are about and you consider the countries international motives selfish and self serving. Great. Got it. Fine.

Now. As to Iraq. You don't want us to go to War. You find our reasoning dubious.. ok.. fine. The alternative to war is a negotiated peace. Part and parcel of that peace is the Iraqi compliance with UN mandates dating back to the gulf war.

Now once again... reality here plas.. Based on what successful historical model do you base your belief that this negotiated peace can be achieved? Show me where - historically- this has been achieved with a person like Saddam.

You've made the usual lame equivocations between Iraq's lovely track record of human rights abuses and other countries.. and ya know what plas .. you're absolutely right. Saudi Arabia Sux. so does China. Hell for that matter so do certain countries in Europe and so does Canada because they don't have unlimited free speech. If this were Canada its quite likely Scott could have been brought up on hate crimes charges for making some of the statements about Jews he has.. no shit. That totally fucking sux in my opinion.

But we're dealing with Iraq here plas.. No one else. Maybe if you're lucky we'll deal with the rest of them next.

I don't give a fuck about your cheeky insights into my interactions with Zup - I don't give a fuck about where you've lived.. hell between us we could easily have traversed half the globe.. big fucking deal.. I don't care about your distaste for American culture or its geo politics.
THAT wasn't the question.

C'mon Plas.. for the sake of argument the US doesn't even have to be party to the negotiations.. It can be the UN.


Now can you answer the fucking question or are you going to dance around the issue like a jack ass?


Show me precisely how negotiated peace with saddam can be achieved using historic examples of it working with people like him and regimes like his. You spew this shit all the time how my thinking process is fucked up because I don't see things as you do....well pal here's some insight into it.... prove it wrong.

MS

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by plastorm
Now Zup, are you the dog the jumps around Mike, or does he jump around you? You never answered.

I have no idea of what your talking about there.

Are you down too? Is Orlando boring you? There's always action at the Parlament House! Maybe some lookers on OBT? Take a pony ride down Orange, that'll help.

Down with what? Sounds like you have experience in that area of town. <G>

I have already addressed the questions. Questions like:

"Will you also provide me with the way in which you mean to bring an end to the oppression, suffering and murder of the Iraqi people through this negotiated framework?"

--are so absurd, they're beyond answering. I mean, it really sounds like you guys are on the payroll -- because I refuse to believe that anyone with half a brain can believe such crap! How many times do I and so many others have to spoon feed you the answers. Now I know it's hard for both of you to read and can only imagine how hard it is for your mothers to listen to you eveytime you have to sound out the words to understand them -- but go back and READ all that has been said.

Ok.. done! Hmm.. I'm puzzled I still can't find your rebuttle. Where exactly am I supposed to look again?

We are NOT a moral nation. We are NOT in anything that does not satisfy our own corporate interests. Saudi has just as many, if not more human rights violations, as well as many other of our "allies." You are chewing on the shit a goverment throws out to the sheep to chew on. That's how you move a populace. You keep shoveling out the shit until the sheep take a bite out of it. If they don't bite, mix it around, add water, try again -- something always sticks -- and both of you are choking on it!

Well be specific, what exactly am I choking on?

As I have also stated countless times before, I have personally lived in countries where such "violations" occured and the US did nothing because there was nothing in it for them. Americans don't give a fuck about their next door neighbor -- do you really think they care about opressed people in a country they couldn't find on a map!?

Again, can you be a little more specific?

We are in this to serve ourselves. But there is no way the president of the United States is going to get on national television and say: "Uh...we are a country totally dependant on oil. Iraq has one of the last oil reserves on the planet, a puny army, and a mad dictator. It is in the interest of the American people, since we are doing nothing to further renewable energy sources and other means of locomotion, to get what they got. We're big, they're small -- we can, as Ice Man so eloquently stated, "Bring on the pain." :rolleyes:

Well if you have some substancial evidence that backs up your assertions than by all means share it.

Shit, maybe if it came out like that I'd be behind this.

Iraq is the least of our worries. They are victims of geography. If Saddam was dictator of Cyprus nobody would give a flying fuck! What really upsets me about this whole situation is that these hostile initiatives will do nothing but bring us more pain and terror. This is why the world hates us and they are going to hate us even more. No one likes a bully. We are setting ourselves up and it pisses me off that people like you are blind to this arrogance!

Than by all means provide us with some details to why you think Saddam is harmless and should be allowed to have WMD.

"Why do they hate us so much?" If you have to ask, you'll never understand.

Than explain that to me. Why do they hate us so much?

-Jason

[Iokera]

getting back to the topic of this thread....

it sickens me to see us killing people like an ant infestation. Just because they did horrilbe things to us, does that mean we should run over and do equally horrible things to them? I always get fed up with this country's mottos:

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.

then in other more fit situations

Don't lower youself to their level.

I do find it very irritating that we only cared about the taliban and bin laden after we quickly came to the conclusion that they were responsible for 9/11. (I'm not one to say who did it, but i find it very susicious that we immediately tacked the responsibility onto certain individuals.) It seems like bush's motto is 'blame somebody fast and attack them faster'.

And another note: Mike you are a driveling, short thinking, irrational human being. The fact that you congradulate those, dare I call them, murders, before you think about making their kids fatherless and depressed for the rest of their lives, sickens me. I don't care what somebody does to me or my country, eye for an eye is a sick way of life. If it's so easily accepted in war, why not feel the same way about here at home? Is it any different when a man witnesses his father get killed, and later in life kills the man who committed the crime? How come that person gets punished with life behind bars? All he was doing was eye for an eye right? Who are we to take matters into our own hands like we are the final judges of this earth... You seriously sicken me.

Please tell me I'm spitting out 'mindless rhetoric' and enlighten me on your way of life that is oh so much more correct than mine or anybody elses...

fucker

[Mike S]

Lokera I could care less how you "feel" about me.. Why? Because you're a naive child and I know exactly what those people would do to you.
You can make ignorant equivocations all you want regarding those people.. they don't fit Lokera. They aren't just criminals who had a bad childhood girl.. they're fucking monsters.
These "people" you feeling sorry for not only were in on murdering thousands of Americans..Remember that..but if it were up to them.. when they got done gang raping you they'd bludgeon you to death with a stone for being an adulterer and an infidel. I sicken you? You stupid, naive, B*@#.. why don't you take a good long look at who those people are, what they did and think about what they would do to you.

An eye for an eye lokera?.. to expand on the metaphor..they were interested in gauging out your entire families eyeballs.

An eye for an eye and pretty soon every one goes blind ..right lokera?

Well keep turning the other cheek and pretty soon your heads been twisted off.


To repeat .. I don't give a rats ass what someone like you thinks about me.. any one who would morally equivocate al Queda with a run of the mill criminal THEN call our soldiers murderers is NOT firing on all cylinders and in need of a reality check.



MS

[Iokera]

ya i must be naive cause i don't see eye to eye with you. i still think our soldiers are killers, and it's more than black and white.

[LordWoon]

Aw, what's the problem? Now they're up in Paradise with their 72 virgins. :p

Any more links! Let's see 'em!!!

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Iokera
ya i must be naive cause i don't see eye to eye with you. i still think our soldiers are killers, and it's more than black and white.

And I must be a fuck because I have no sympathy for the members of Al Queda or the Taliban.. at all. None. You can exist in your gray area Lokera.. hell if it makes you feel good.. and gives you the illusion of moral superiority..fine.
It sure as hell does not make you informed.

The fact is if I drop you in the middle of a bunch of Islamo fascists... they wont care how much you claim to sympathize, say you understand them, hate people like me or how much you plea for your life.

They will kill you. Eventually.

You know who I feel sorry for.. those guys in that plane who are thousands of miles away from home and family because those fucks you feel sorry for decided to kill off 3 thousand people here.

MS

[Effendi]

Originally posted by Mike S

And I must be a fuck because I have no sympathy for the members of Al Queda or the Taliban..

No Mike...correction..You are a FUCK because you choose to be a FUCK. It has nothing to do with sympathy for the Taliban it has to do with you being an arrogant piece of white trash.

You can exist in your gray area Lokera..

Thank you for your permissiom omnipotent one.......

hell if it makes you feel good.. and gives you the illusion of moral superiority..fine.

Of course it is fine Mike, it is how YOU live your life!!
Your entire existence is a false illusion of moral superiority.

It sure as hell does not make you informed.

As you prove to us on a daily basis!!

The fact is if I drop you in the middle of a bunch of Islamo fascists... they wont care how much you claim to sympathize, say you understand them, hate people like me or how much you plea for your life.

They will kill you. Eventually.

Certainly not any sooner than your same daily boring right wing Nazi rhetoric. I'd take my chances.

You know who I feel sorry for..

Your roomate...your boss...your girlfriend.....it's not a short list....

those guys in that plane who are thousands of miles away from home and family because those fucks you feel sorry for decided to kill off 3 thousand people here.
MS

You are a psychotic arrogant fraud Mike!!
Out of this side of your mouth you CHOOSE to send people to their death. and then the Psychotic side of you jumps up and tries to suggest you feel sorry for them.
We all know who you are. you can't fool us Mike.
YOU are the real enemy of Peace and freedom loving people everywhere.
You are the epitome of a Fraud!

Scott!!

[Cedwyn]

blahblahblahchestthumpingblahblahblahstruttingblah blahblah

every last mother-fucking one of you chicken-shit hawklettes had bloody well better put your money where your mouths are and high-tail it down to your local recruiters.

as to the rest:

fuck all with this "show me diplomatic examples" bullshit. you carry on like war and diplomacy are the only two options. besides that, insisting on a historical precedent is ludicrous, as saddam and his totalitarian regime are a singular occurence. we can't compare this situation to historical precedent, because we've not encountered this specific scenario before.

beyond *that,* you completely dismiss the fact that we are currently battling our own creation. we sure as fuck weren't bombing iraq to hell and back when we befriended him - that was quite diplomatic, eh? we're just pissy now because we've realized that he was using us as much as we were using him. at any given point in our dealings with iraq, we could have made different/smarter/long-term decisions. but we didn't and here we are - berating saddam for having the audacity to make use of weapons we provided him!!!!! who the *fuck* do we think we are?

are you seriously suggesting that the only way to rectify our mistakes is to start WW3? feh! if saddam is the problem, let's send in the assassins. it really *is* that simple. there is no need to bomb the tar out of regions already so depressed and miserable as to have a quality of life comparable to centuries ago. and i *will* bitchslap the first dolt who pipes up with "but we can't assassinate him...that's immoral/illegal!"

you think war isn't a moral atrocity? fuck you.

and no, i'm not saying that saddam should just be left unsupervised to do whatever the fuck he wants, although the U.S. minding its own goddamn business would be nice. i am saying we should learn from our mistakes and not let the same knee-jerk, reactionary thinking that created this imbroglio enmesh us in something more horrifically catastrophic than anything the myopic fucks in washington could imagine.

and finally:

killing should always be personal.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
blahblahblahchestthumpingblahblahblahstruttingblah blahblah

every last mother-fucking one of you chicken-shit hawklettes had bloody well better put your money where your mouths are and high-tail it down to your local recruiters.

as to the rest:

fuck all with this "show me diplomatic examples" bullshit. you carry on like war and diplomacy are the only two options. besides that, insisting on a historical precedent is ludicrous, as saddam and his totalitarian regime are a singular occurence. we can't compare this situation to historical precedent, because we've not encountered this specific scenario before.

beyond *that,* you completely dismiss the fact that we are currently battling our own creation. we sure as fuck weren't bombing iraq to hell and back when we befriended him - that was quite diplomatic, eh? we're just pissy now because we've realized that he was using us as much as we were using him. at any given point in our dealings with iraq, we could have made different/smarter/long-term decisions. but we didn't and here we are - berating saddam for having the audacity to make use of weapons we provided him!!!!! who the *fuck* do we think we are?

are you seriously suggesting that the only way to rectify our mistakes is to start WW3? feh! if saddam is the problem, let's send in the assassins. it really *is* that simple. there is no need to bomb the tar out of regions already so depressed and miserable as to have a quality of life comparable to centuries ago. and i *will* bitchslap the first dolt who pipes up with "but we can't assassinate him...that's immoral/illegal!"

you think war isn't a moral atrocity? fuck you.

and no, i'm not saying that saddam should just be left unsupervised to do whatever the fuck he wants, although the U.S. minding its own goddamn business would be nice. i am saying we should learn from our mistakes and not let the same knee-jerk, reactionary thinking that created this imbroglio enmesh us in something more horrifically catastrophic than anything the myopic fucks in washington could imagine.

and finally:

killing should always be personal.

No Cedwyn.. lunatics like Saddam have not been singular occurrences. History is chock full of em. What WOULD be a singular occurrence is negotiations working with any of them.. You don't like the way in which I framed the discussion? . Too bad its EXACTLY how you people have approached this. Negotiate! Negotiate! Negotiate! Fine. I'm calling your bluff. Show me it works. You cant so, in typical fashion, you side step. Then start in on this pissed off straw man argument about how its about us battling our own creation. Wake up Cedwyn. We didn't MAKE Saddam. His actions and the pathology behind them are all his.
We supported Stalin In WW 2. Was he our creation too Cedwyn? Or was the fact he was a murdering freak a product of his own demented mind? I vote the latter.
Then you rant about everyone who agrees with military intervention should be signing up.. hey idiot. Some people who support this either already have served or are too old to enlist.
Should they NOT have an opinion on this now. Huh Cedwyn?

The fact is you and everyone like you have been spewing endless piles of unsubstantiated shit about how negotiations will work. How Saddam can be dealt with.. I asked you to show me using and example. You cant and now your pissed off and trying - in typical form - to redirect the conversation through your stupid equivocations and asinine assertions.

You have no room to go off on knee jerk reactionary thinking Cedwyn when the entire basis for you opposition to this is just that. You have NO proof what so ever that Saddam can be negotiated with.. He has NOT been contained.. the sanctions regime is compete failure.. the only thing it succeeded in doing is bringing misery down on the Iraqi people. You have no fucking basis what so ever to prop up ANYTHING you've, in the past, said can work. Nothing. The entire basis for you position is this ignorant knee jerk liberal reaction to anything this country does and your loathing of the administration that runs it.

You want to base serious foreign policy on that and your misty eyed belief that all killing should be personal?.. screw you.

Put your money where your mouth is Cedwyn.. show us a successful negotiated peace can be achieved with a person like saddam. Tell me who it was between, how it was achieved and what was the short term and long term result.
I don't give a fuck how far back you have to dig in history. SHOW ME!

Or using the logic you used at the beginning of your post .. step off.

Expanding on that Cedwyn.. if that bastard enables someone to take out a city every last one of you appeasing, whining pieces of shit better be lining up to appologize to the families of the dead and to clean up the mess.


MS

[pdxsoldier]

heres the comentary for those of you who just returned to this channel:
mike s. actually believes that the u.s. is going to war to stop saddam and the whole story you can here about if you watch the news or read their paper, plas on the other hand sees through the act that they are telling you on their tv.

let it be said the tv is not telling you the truth about this matter.

[Cedwyn]

mike - thanks for quoting my entire post, since your umpteen uses of my name would never have allowed someone to realize you were replying to me...

second, if you would actually read my post instead of flying off on your dismissal of my ideas which don't agree with yours, you'd notice that i have not once said "no...let's negotiate." i quite clearly suggested we simply assassinate saddam. and this is not the only thread in which i've done so.

neither did you ever posit your challenge to find historical precedent to me specifically, but mentioning stalin raises a very good point: when the fuck *will* we learn that "my enemy's enemy is my friend" is a fairly untenable foreign policy. how many times will it have to bite us in the ass before we get a clue?

and no, we have not encountered a similar situation in history. by the very definition of existing at this point in time (with the weapons capability the world currently possesses), we have no historical precedent. in no armed conflict in all of history have the stakes been so high as right now.

warfare tactics evolve. it's why we got our asses handed to us in vietnam - we weren't used to guerilla warfare and expected a "normal" fight. the tactics of the desert storm yet again morphed what we see during war and if we have another go, we will see yet newer developments. to even try to compare this conflict with historical scenarios is laughable.

and we sure as fuck did contribute to saddam's shenanigans by giving him all the arms technology we did. how do you not realize the correlation? perhaps we didn't fully realize who/what we were supporting, but support and arm him we did - make no mistake. do you really think we'd be in this mess if he hadn't been given the tools to develop his arsenal?

the tenet that all killing should be personal is misty-eyed to you? wow! i consider it a rather ruthless stance, with little room for romanticism. it is not some winsome yearning as "misty-eyed" might imply.

and on the subject of killing, is our government not taking out cities as we type? and are *you* going to apologize to the families of those who are dying for circumstances beyond their control? you're too old to enlist - great, volunteer for the peace corps or red cross and go help clean up the mess!

[pdxsoldier]

some of us overstand,
some of you dont

[Mike S]

I'll reply in more detail later Cedwyn.

OK this situation is unique and you have no historical precedent to fall back on as a basis assuming that any sort of successful negotiated peace can be achieved. Thank you for being honest.

As to assassinating Saddam. and after that we'll send in a team to assassinate his son.. and after that another team to assassinate his other son.. and after that..

this is REGIME change Cedwyn.

Be back later

MS

[LordWoon]

Cedwyn:

Our government isn't allowed to assassinate the ruler of a country unless we're officially at war with them.

Which isn't far off, anyway.

:D

[Cedwyn]

"allowed"

lol

like half the shenanigans of politicians are in any way acceptable behavior. they break laws/rules/mores all the damn time, why stop at this?

yer right mike - we could never manage to assassinate his whole family or anything. nor would we ever send troops over to "help" with elections or any such.

and quit twisting my words.

[LordWoon]

like half the shenanigans of politicians are in any way acceptable behavior. they break laws/rules/mores all the damn time, why stop at this?

So, you're for our government breaking our own laws, then?

[Cedwyn]

i'm just saying it approximates the ultimate hypocrisy to break the laws they routinely do, but somehow find "moral fiber" given the choice between a nice, clean assassination or bombing an impoverished country back to the stone age, killing countless innocent people in the process.

legality != morality, not by a long shot....

[LordWoon]

legality != morality, not by a long shot....

That's true but in addition to that, Saddam is a hard guy to find. The CIA tried to get the Kurds, along with some muslim group, to overthrow Saddam after the Gulf War but it ended badly.

[tallPall]

Um... so how do we feel about the Cuban Missle Crisis as a crisis situation averted through peaceful negotiation?

Granted, Khrushchev doesn't go down as a "mad dictator"... but I don't really know enough to comment on Saddam's relative sanity. While his brutal military record within and beyond his borders is telling... I wonder if it's objectively any more brutal than the actions of many of our historical leaders?

[seattle science]

The Cuban Missile Crisis was averted through "peaceful negotiations"? It was averted because the threat of our military caused the USSR to blink first, and withdraw their nukes. Our much improved military has been posing just such a threat over Saddam for quite a few months now, but Saddam has shown that he will never blink.

[LordWoon]

Um... so how do we feel about the Cuban Missle Crisis as a crisis situation averted through peaceful negotiation?

That was great that the Cuban Missile Crisis was handled through peaceful, albeit absolutley nerve- wracking, negotations. Of course, although this analogy is often used by our media, we're missing one prime element to make it equal to our present situation: A leader that complies and backs down. Keep in mind that if the Soviets refused to remove their missiles, there would have been war.

Granted, Khrushchev doesn't go down as a "mad dictator"... but I don't really know enough to comment on Saddam's relative sanity.

Given everything I've learned about Saddam, I'd say he's lacking in the sanity department.

While his brutal military record within and beyond his borders is telling... I wonder if it's objectively any more brutal than the actions of many of our historical leaders?

I guess that depends on how far back in our history you want to go. Despite that, this line of thinking is illogical, at best.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by tallPall
Um... so how do we feel about the Cuban Missle Crisis as a crisis situation averted through peaceful negotiation?

Granted, Khrushchev doesn't go down as a "mad dictator"... but I don't really know enough to comment on Saddam's relative sanity. While his brutal military record within and beyond his borders is telling... I wonder if it's objectively any more brutal than the actions of many of our historical leaders?

That's a good example.. Its actually the first thing I thought of when I posed the question to myself a while a go. I think one of the differences is the differences between the people that ran The Soviet Union and Saddam in the area of pathology. In fact I'll go out on a limb here and say the Khrushchev most likely had his head screwed on better than some of the people advising Kennedy at the time
MS

[Effendi]

Originally posted by Mike S

In fact I'll go out on a limb here and say the Khrushchev most likely had his head screwed on better than some of the people advising Kennedy at the time
MS

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

O yea....Kennedy was a democrat....lol

Mike, come down and Check out Thomas Michael tonight, I'm working the door, I'll Coughletyouincough.....

Scott!!

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Effendi


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

O yea....Kennedy was a democrat....lol

Mike, come down and Check out Thomas Michael tonight, I'm working the door, I'll Coughletyouincough.....

Scott!!

No I was saying that Khrushchev had a cooler head about him than some of Kennedys advisors. Civillian or military. So it wasnt a dem bash.

Ya know...If Kennedy were alive today and maintained the same beliefs he had then.. Todays run o the mill democ-rat would call him a radical rightwinger.. bash him for being for cuttin taxes and call him a religious fanatic cause he was a devout catholic. hehehehehe

I'm gonna work late then I'll coughswingbycoughandcoughcoughbuyyaadrinkcough


MS

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
blahblahblahchestthumpingblahblahblahstruttingblah blahblah

every last mother-fucking one of you chicken-shit hawklettes had bloody well better put your money where your mouths are and high-tail it down to your local recruiters.

Actually my girlfriend and I are looing into the Air Force.

as to the rest:

fuck all with this "show me diplomatic examples" bullshit. you carry on like war and diplomacy are the only two options. besides that, insisting on a historical precedent is ludicrous, as saddam and his totalitarian regime are a singular occurence. we can't compare this situation to historical precedent, because we've not encountered this specific scenario before.

I think you can. I think david Letterman said it well. When was the last time France got the proof it wanted? When the Nazi flag came waving accross thier front lines. haha..

beyond *that,* you completely dismiss the fact that we are currently battling our own creation. we sure as fuck weren't bombing iraq to hell and back when we befriended him - that was quite diplomatic, eh? we're just pissy now because we've realized that he was using us as much as we were using him. at any given point in our dealings with iraq, we could have made different/smarter/long-term decisions. but we didn't and here we are - berating saddam for having the audacity to make use of weapons we provided him!!!!! who the *fuck* do we think we are?

I just love this "our" creation. Hold the press everyone we made Saddam Hussain attack Iran, attack Kuwait, kill a million muslims, torture his people, blah blah. It's America's fault!

are you seriously suggesting that the only way to rectify our mistakes is to start WW3? feh! if saddam is the problem, let's send in the assassins. it really *is* that simple. there is no need to bomb the tar out of regions already so depressed and miserable as to have a quality of life comparable to centuries ago. and i *will* bitchslap the first dolt who pipes up with "but we can't assassinate him...that's immoral/illegal!"

Without occupying the country how would you prevent the struggle for power in Iraq?

you think war isn't a moral atrocity? fuck you.

No.. I think war fucking sux. I'm just not of the stripe that are afraid to stare down threats like most people on the left.

and no, i'm not saying that saddam should just be left unsupervised to do whatever the fuck he wants, although the U.S. minding its own goddamn business would be nice. i am saying we should learn from our mistakes and not let the same knee-jerk, reactionary thinking that created this imbroglio enmesh us in something more horrifically catastrophic than anything the myopic fucks in washington could imagine.

and finally:

killing should always be personal.

I wish we could mind our own business. Only in a peacefull world would that be possible. You can't turn you cheek to enemies who wish your distruction. Peace through strength. Where has being cowerdly, turning the other cheek, or appeasment ever got anyone?

Ahh how it must be wonderfull to be a part of the blaim america crowd. =)

Good disscusion guys..

Take care,
-Jason

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
mike - thanks for quoting my entire post, since your umpteen uses of my name would never have allowed someone to realize you were replying to me...

second, if you would actually read my post instead of flying off on your dismissal of my ideas which don't agree with yours, you'd notice that i have not once said "no...let's negotiate." i quite clearly suggested we simply assassinate saddam. and this is not the only thread in which i've done so.

neither did you ever posit your challenge to find historical precedent to me specifically, but mentioning stalin raises a very good point: when the fuck *will* we learn that "my enemy's enemy is my friend" is a fairly untenable foreign policy. how many times will it have to bite us in the ass before we get a clue?

and no, we have not encountered a similar situation in history. by the very definition of existing at this point in time (with the weapons capability the world currently possesses), we have no historical precedent. in no armed conflict in all of history have the stakes been so high as right now.

warfare tactics evolve. it's why we got our asses handed to us in vietnam - we weren't used to guerilla warfare and expected a "normal" fight. the tactics of the desert storm yet again morphed what we see during war and if we have another go, we will see yet newer developments. to even try to compare this conflict with historical scenarios is laughable.

Interesting..

and we sure as fuck did contribute to saddam's shenanigans by giving him all the arms technology we did. how do you not realize the correlation? perhaps we didn't fully realize who/what we were supporting, but support and arm him we did - make no mistake. do you really think we'd be in this mess if he hadn't been given the tools to develop his arsenal?

We gave him "ALL" of his arms? Who we were supporting? Would be in the same mess? What are you talking about? So your saying Saddams arsenal is completley are doing?

the tenet that all killing should be personal is misty-eyed to you? wow! i consider it a rather ruthless stance, with little room for romanticism. it is not some winsome yearning as "misty-eyed" might imply.

and on the subject of killing, is our government not taking out cities as we type? and are *you* going to apologize to the families of those who are dying for circumstances beyond their control? you're too old to enlist - great, volunteer for the peace corps or red cross and go help clean up the mess!

I don't think I could answer that.. that little poke looks like one for Mike. <G>

Take care,
Jason

[dale]

Give me MORE!!!! That's intense.

[Ishkur]

Originally posted by Mike S
Based on what successful historical model do you base your belief that this negotiated peace can be achieved?

two words: Magna Carta.

*rimshot*

what do I win?