Are US armed forces out of control? (spin-off thread)

Dirk

Anarchist
Apr 27, 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#41
Gulf War II was about oil, but it's a little more complex than most people presume. :p
 
Feb 4, 2010
360
0
United Kingdom
#43
You don't believe some Americans are honest?
I believe Americans are among the most honest and decent people on the face of this earth.

Really? America and the US were patrolling Iraqi airspace daily but I don't recall the opposite?
I do. Saddam Hussein expressed himself in a very hostile manner. Of course America and Britain should defend themselves against this.

Iraq at the time was prostrate from Gulf War 1 and years of sanctions. Iraq was threatening no-one. Poodle Tony and dubya were just picking on the weakest country in the Gulf because it was a no-lose adventure with a lot of war profiteering in the offing.
I'd hardly call it the weakest country. Saddam Hussein had great power and plagued his neighbouring countries very often.

Why would I ask them anything? Its none of my business.
Injustice towards groups of people should always be everyone's business.

Because Iraq looked weaker. It was and is an illegal invasion that makes America look like pre-WW2 fascist Italy invading Abysinnia. Same trick, same reasons, same cowardice.
I totally disagree. America liberated the countries they've defended themselves against, can't really compare to fascism. Liberation and fascism are two very different ideologies.
 

Dirk

Anarchist
Apr 27, 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#44
Why is it in the past tense "was" and why complicated?
Because the objective has been fulfilled.

It's complicated because it wasn't about really about obtaining oil for any purpose, more about controlling one of the most energy-rich regions in the world. Erm, how can i put it? It was more about political capital than economic capital.
 
Jan 14, 2010
317
0
#45
It's 1 thing to criticize America, it's another thing to insult us by calling us fascists.
I think I've written often enough why I do so. It is a political description based on how the government behaves. You might not hear it from US media, but much of the world has come to that fear.
 
Jan 14, 2010
317
0
#46
Saddam Hussein expressed himself in a very hostile manner. Of course America and Britain should defend themselves against this.
Saddam talked tough at the same time as dubya talked tough so that justifies a war that has lasted longer than WW2?

I'd hardly call it the weakest country. Saddam Hussein had great power and plagued his neighbouring countries very often.
Read up on it.

Injustice towards groups of people should always be everyone's business.
Which is why America gets called fascist, to smarten it up.

I totally disagree. America liberated the countries they've defended themselves against, can't really compare to fascism. Liberation and fascism are two very different ideologies.
Ahh, the Liberation Party? Why didn't you say so?
 
Jan 14, 2010
317
0
#47
Because the objective has been fulfilled.

It's complicated because it wasn't about really about obtaining oil for any purpose, more about controlling one of the most energy-rich regions in the world. Erm, how can i put it? It was more about political capital than economic capital.
Don't forget war profiteering.
 
Feb 4, 2010
360
0
United Kingdom
#48
Saddam talked tough at the same time as dubya talked tough so that justifies a war that has lasted longer than WW2?
Yes, of course it does. The suicide bombings that happen day in and day out, the established terrorist organizations, the killing of civilians and the fight against Western soldiers in Iraq is great, it has been so since 2003, of course it is justifiable to stay there longer than WW2 lasted. Just because a war is long doesn't mean the invading country is worse than Adolf Hitler.

I have. Kuwait as a very important example.

Which is why America gets called fascist, to smarten it up.
It's called fascist by people who like to call it fascist, but there are no real basis for it.

Ahh, the Liberation Party? Why didn't you say so?
The important of the liberation The US has done in these countries is so great. Through the years they've liberated groups of people and women. This fight is the best and most important fight modern war is about, to liberate human being and fight down the terrorists who keep these people in old dark age systems.
 
Jan 14, 2010
317
0
#49
Yes, of course it does. ... the fight against Western soldiers in Iraq is great....
If a western country occupied the US would you fight back? That is the answer to your question. America invaded illegally and should not be there, and staying longer does not make it legal.

I have. Kuwait as a very important example.
Example of what? Iraq invaded in 1990. Since then Iraq has suffered a major military defeat and years of sanctions that did not let it rebuild its military. Before the US invaded in 2003 Iraq was already weakened to a shadow of what it was in 1990 .

It's called fascist by people who like to call it fascist, but there are no real basis for it.
Do you think "fascist" is just a name like "axxhole"? It is a well defined political definition with measurable criteria the same as "communism" and "capitalism".

The important of the liberation The US has done in these countries is so great. Through the years they've liberated groups of people and women. This fight is the best and most important fight modern war is about, to liberate human being and fight down the terrorists who keep these people in old dark age systems.
Most people who study the Gulf states would disagree with you. Before the US invasion Iraq had a bigger middle class, more education and more women`s rights than any other Gulf state. It just had a violent boss, which George Bush I declined to overthrow after GW1 because his experts told him that only Saddam could hold the country together.

If you think the US should be championing rights, how about womens rights in Sudan, Somalia and Saudi Arabia? I think I've asked this before but you didn't respond?
 
Feb 4, 2010
360
0
United Kingdom
#50
If a western country occupied the US would you fight back? That is the answer to your question. America invaded illegally and should not be there, and staying longer does not make it legal.
And I simply disagree. If The US and Britain is supposed to wait for The UN response on everything, they would get nowhere.

Example of what? Iraq invaded in 1990. Since then Iraq has suffered a major military defeat and years of sanctions that did not let it rebuild its military. Before the US invaded in 2003 Iraq was already weakened to a shadow of what it was in 1990 .
It is still a greater power than Kuwait, and up to thirteen years after Saddam Hussein still plagued Kuwait everyday. Kuwait was among the few Arab countries that were pretty thankful for the American invasion.

Do you think "fascist" is just a name like "axxhole"? It is a well defined political definition with measurable criteria the same as "communism" and "capitalism".
Of course it is, and that's exactly why it's wrong to put a fascist stamp on America because it does not go together with what The US actually have done. Through history we should have learned how to use those words with caution.

Most people who study the Gulf states would disagree with you. Before the US invasion Iraq had a bigger middle class, more education and more women`s rights than any other Gulf state. It just had a violent boss, which George Bush I declined to overthrow after GW1 because his experts told him that only Saddam could hold the country together.
And still I think you should look into the situation the Shiites and the Kurds had during Saddam Hussein's time as president, he was more to them "than just a violent leader".

If you think the US should be championing rights, how about womens rights in Sudan, Somalia and Saudi Arabia? I think I've asked this before but you didn't respond?
How do you think The US could invade every single country? But I agree, women's rights in all these countries are a big issue and they should be dealt with. But what I have been saying is that The US are fighting against terrorists in Afghanistan who have been undermining women for such a long time, and now the country is looking towards liberation. I know this is difficult for some war opponents to swallow, but it is indeed the fact that Afghanistan is becoming more and more liberated compared to the situation they've experience earlier on, and the source of this liberation are NATO soldiers. I'd be happy to see them do the same thing in Sudan, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Libya, Yemen, Syria etc. But there comes a certain limit to how much The US can afford to finance, you can't finance war in all these countries. But instead of putting America down, I think we should hail them and the rest of The NATO participants in what they've been doing. Without them women would still be gassed and stoned for walking alone out of their front door in Afghanistan, they would still be beaten and shot to death for speaking to their husbands without having been spoken to first.
 
Last edited:

Dirk

Anarchist
Apr 27, 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#51
I think maybe Russia and China should get together with some of the Middle Eastern Arabic countries and invade the US.

I mean, seriously, the US have WMDs, nukes, an outmoded economic/political system and little or no democracy. (Plus, they have oil). Perfectly justifiable, i think. Don't you agree, comrade Chuck?

;)
 
Jan 14, 2010
317
0
#52
And I simply disagree.
That's fine, but you also disagree with calling the US fascist. Making war on weak 3rd world countries is one of the things that causes a nation to be defined as fascist. You are supporting fascism.

It is still a greater power than Kuwait, and up to thirteen years after Saddam Hussein still plagued Kuwait everyday. Kuwait was among the few Arab countries that were pretty thankful for the American invasion.
So what? As you say, nobody else welcomed US bullying. All they proved is that they are mightier than Saddam. Gee, best news since they proved the Vietnamese could kick them out. They just don't learn.

Of course it is, and that's exactly why it's wrong to put a fascist stamp on America because it does not go together with what The US actually have done. Through history we should have learned how to use those words with caution.
I have family there and went to school there. Until George Bush II I supported most US policies. I presume you have heard the expression, 'If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck?' There is nothing random or unstudied about my reference to America as fascist.

And still I think you should look into the situation the Shiites and the Kurds had during Saddam Hussein's time as president, he was more to them "than just a violent leader".
I don't think I should. It does not change the fact that the US invasion is illegal. They have committed atrocities there. Tell the families of the dead children that they are happier than under Saddam? Or go to the US and do something about systemic poverty, or the fact that America has more people in jail than any other country in the world? As sad a place as the world is, it is still illegal to invade another country and hang its leaders because you disliked them. As the Bible says, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

.... But what I have been saying is that The US are fighting against terrorists in Afghanistan who have been undermining women for such a long time, and now the country is looking towards liberation. I know this is difficult for some war opponents to swallow, but it is indeed the fact that Afghanistan is becoming more and more liberated compared to the situation they've experience earlier on, and the source of this liberation are NATO soldiers.
Ahhhh, so you think that if we left tomorrow women would be "free"? What makes you think that western ideals would even work there? How many generations are you prepared to stay?

I'd be happy to see them do the same thing in Sudan, Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Libya, Yemen, Syria etc.
You speak as though you think I am a 21 year old college peacenik? 'Fraid not. You wonder why Muslims set off bombs in the west? Does it ever occur to you that making war on people does not make them more peaceful? Look back in western history a relatively short distance.
 
Feb 4, 2010
360
0
United Kingdom
#53
That's fine, but you also disagree with calling the US fascist. Making war on weak 3rd world countries is one of the things that causes a nation to be defined as fascist. You are supporting fascism.
No, I am absolutely not.

So what? As you say, nobody else welcomed US bullying. All they proved is that they are mightier than Saddam. Gee, best news since they proved the Vietnamese could kick them out. They just don't learn.
Vietnam - supported by The USSR would be correct.

I have family there and went to school there. Until George Bush II I supported most US policies. I presume you have heard the expression, 'If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck?' There is nothing random or unstudied about my reference to America as fascist.
It most definitely is!

I don't think I should. It does not change the fact that the US invasion is illegal. They have committed atrocities there. Tell the families of the dead children that they are happier than under Saddam? Or go to the US and do something about systemic poverty, or the fact that America has more people in jail than any other country in the world? As sad a place as the world is, it is still illegal to invade another country and hang its leaders because you disliked them. As the Bible says, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Ask The Shiites and The Kurds if they would want Saddam Hussein back. Saddam Hussein and his family posed a grave danger to the people in Iraq, and not to do anything with this is more fascist than not doing anything.

Ahhhh, so you think that if we left tomorrow women would be "free"? What makes you think that western ideals would even work there? How many generations are you prepared to stay?
Until we've managed to give innconet civilians the freedom they deserve.

You speak as though you think I am a 21 year old college peacenik? 'Fraid not. You wonder why Muslims set off bombs in the west? Does it ever occur to you that making war on people does not make them more peaceful? Look back in western history a relatively short distance.
Got absolutely nothing to do with that. Have you registered how much they hate Western values? This is why. They'd bomb us whether we were in Afghanistan and Iraq or not. Got nothing to do with that.
 
Mar 24, 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
#54
I think maybe Russia and China should get together with some of the Middle Eastern Arabic countries and invade the US.

I mean, seriously, the US have WMDs, nukes, an outmoded economic/political system and little or no democracy. (Plus, they have oil). Perfectly justifiable, i think. Don't you agree, comrade Chuck?

;)
I think that would be very interesting. Because Russia and China would not work together for a week. And their egos would demand that each one would need to be in charge. And this is not an "unarmed" population like they are used to controlling. We will not "just roll over". Jimmy Carter might want to negotiate for Georgia.:rolleyes:
 
Jul 26, 2009
5,666
406
Opa Locka
#55
I think that would be very interesting. Because Russia and China would not work together for a week. And their egos would demand that each one would need to be in charge. And this is not an "unarmed" population like they are used to controlling. We will not "just roll over". Jimmy Carter might want to negotiate for Georgia.:rolleyes:
:giggle: True, tyre. Still we have no military at home, if they did join up...
 
Mar 24, 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
#56
:giggle: True, tyre. Still we have no military at home, if they did join up...
Yeah we would have to do the "citizen army" thing. I may be too old to go to war. But I can damn sure fight a war at home. When trouble comes home I have nowhere to go. And I will do what it takes to defend the home front. Within seconds I can be "armed and dangerous.
 

deanhills

Secretary of State
Mar 15, 2009
2,187
2
#57
I think maybe Russia and China should get together with some of the Middle Eastern Arabic countries and invade the US.
;)
I'm sure they are working on that, but much more subtly than we can give credit to them for. Right now China seems to have got the US sorted out financially. Their products and services have been marketed all over the world at rock bottom prices, and they are all over the Middle East, so are the Russians. The war that is being fought right now is in the area of world finance and over the last two decades the Chinese have made enormous progress, the Russians are everywhere as well, I believe especially in Yemen too.
 
Jan 14, 2010
317
0
#59
Despite the fact that there is absolutely no military threat in the world to the territorial integrity of the US, its citizens pay a higher defence bill and a greater proportion of its military is in other peoples' countries than any other nation. A greater number of Americans are in jail than any other nation. In the meantime Americans call Iraqis "insurgents" for fighting back in their own country.

What a confusing world?
 

Similar Discussions