Chest Rockwell Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Everyone will appreciate this: http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/opinion/0902/29bookman.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franknputer Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 The document he is referring to is available [url=http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf]right here.[/url] This is the one I was referring to as an 'interesting tidbit'. (Perhaps that was too subtle?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Boy, this sure would fit nicely in the thread that Craig created for all war related issues. ;) Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Don't worry, Craig will probably close this thread, as well... JDL on Purevolume Bird\'s Eye View on Purevolume Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franknputer Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Yeah, except that it would get buried too quickly in all the bullshit & name-calling in that thread. Personally, I think the points made need to be examined REAL hard. I agree that it should be in the war thread. That's where I posted the link to the document 2 days ago. But it got lost in all the left/right posturing... Go ahead, close it. But please don't delete it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Guys, this is like if somebody doesn't want you to smoke in their house...or their place of business. There have been times where Craig has not cared. But, now he does, so let's respect his wishes. I really appreciate that their is a forum like this, I'm sure you all do to. Let's not antogonize. Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundscape Studios. Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 You know something, I don't usually talk like this, but scince this is my first war related post, I am affording myself the right. FUCK THE LIBERAL SHIT! Is there anything wrong with having a policeman to ensure peace in foreign countries??? What the hell is his point about bases in Germany, etc...? Maybe America should have kept out of it then too - I guess I wouldn't be here writing this, all the rest of my family would have been killed as well. 3/4 of my extended family - from both sides - were murdered by the Nazis. Of course, that bag of crap would counter by saying - "Oh that was Nazi Germany, that's different..." Really??? Who bombed Israel for NO REASON other than hatred of Jews? Good old Saddam - yea. Kill 'em all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbrock1san.rr.com Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 I'm against this war in Iran because all war is bad. I did like the cool video of the royal palace getting blown up, I wonder if president Bin Laden got blowed up ? I just hope the war is over by tomorrow night so they don't pre-empt the season premiere of The Bachelor :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Ummm.... Soundscape... the only time Saddam ever bombed Israel was in retaliation when he was being attacked - BY US. So it was not "just because he hates the Jews." I'm Jewish too and I think Saddam is a monster too, but let's keep the facts straight. Also, if you really read the article posted, it simply gives an opinion as to what the writer thinks the administration is up to, it does not pass any judgement about it. You ask "What's wrong with having an international policeman?" The article never says there is anything wrong with it, it simply says it thinks that's what America wants to be. If there is any judgement being passed it's in your own head. In fact, the only criticism expressed by the writer is that he doesn't believe the administration is being honest with us about its reasons for this war: [quote] Are peace and security best achieved by seeking strong alliances and international consensus, led by the United States? Or is it necessary to take a more unilateral approach, accepting and enhancing the global dominance that, according to some, history has thrust upon us? If we do decide to seize empire, we should make that decision knowingly, as a democracy. The price of maintaining an empire is always high. Kagan and others argue that the price of rejecting it would be higher still.[/quote]Hardly a blanket condemnation. Maybe the worst thing about this war is the way it is dividing Americans both from the rest of the world, and from each other. Is the hateful attitude really necessary? :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundscape Studios. Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]Ummm.... Soundscape... the only time Saddam ever bombed Israel was in retaliation when he was being attacked - BY US. So it was not "just because he hates the Jews." I'm Jewish too and I think Saddam is a monster too, but let's keep the facts straight. And maybe the worst thing about this war is the way it is dividing Americans both from the rest of the world, and from each other. Is the hateful attitude really necessary? :( [/b][/quote]HAH! Scince when do you retaliate by bombing another country???? How about if we bombed Mexico for Sep.11 ? What?????? It was an opportunity to KILL people who had NOTHING to do with that situation (the Kuwait invasion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Sorry but Israel has EVERYthing to do with why Iraq hates the U.S. Israel is our ally and would indeed not exist without our support. Besides, they were the only one of our allies that Saddam's crude missiles could reach. And please re-read my first post, because I added to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundscape Studios. Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 And yes, the hatefull attitude IS necessary, because it hurts me very personally to see people talking like that - as if they have it all figured out - it's that simple huh? That guy sounds like an Iraqi propaganda journalist - saying that the war is only for world domination. Pleeease! As if we have nothing better to do with 75 Billion dollars right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundscape Studios. Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 C'mon Lee, any reporter talking like that isnt just speculating, he seems to have an agenda. It's out and out liberalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 But if you don't feel there is "anything wrong with having a policeman to ensure peace in foreign countries," then what would be your problem with the article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundscape Studios. Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 The fact that he is stating that as the real goal of the war. It's false. The only kind of ruling body interested in that sort of thing is that of a dictatorship - Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, et al. who have personal gains by invading and having imperialistic goals. Who exactly is interested in long term commitments to foreign countries? Bush? Trust me, he is counting down the days till he can get back to the golf course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 You're contradicting yourself. First you ask "Is there anything wrong with having a policeman to ensure peace in foreign countries???" and then you say "The only people interested in that are dictators." So you've answered your own question. You do think there's something wrong with it. But the article directly quotes reports that have been adopted by the current administration saying that this is their desired foreign policy. That is a fact. YOU are the one who made the judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundscape Studios. Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Sigh.... I'm not saying that the U.S. isn't going to be a policeman. I am saying that the US has no interest in losing servicemen, dealing with horrible POW situations, and dealing with all the bad PR. America is doing this because we are being dragged into it! Now we HAVE to police a country who's rulers have histories of abusing their powers. It's just not the CAUSE of the war, it's an unfortunate outcome of what we must sacrifice for world peace. G'nite lads! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Yup, this isn't just another war thread, it's an even lamer war thread. Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeon Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote][i]Soundscape Studios said:[/i] [b]America is doing this because we are being dragged into it![/b][/quote][img]http://home.attbi.com/~ianlamb/Thud.gif[/img] Go tell someone you love that you love them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [img]http://www.rockprojekt.de/Keyboards/Images/modular-moog.jpg[/img] Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Soundscape Studios: [b] I'm not saying that the U.S. isn't going to be a policeman. I am saying that the US has no interest in losing servicemen, dealing with horrible POW situations, and dealing with all the bad PR.[/b][/quote]How else are we supposed to be policemen? No one can be the world's policemen without 1) maintaining military occupation in countries that don't necessarily want us there, and 2) having to go to war with nations who, in our estimation, are Bad Guys. That means "losing servicemen, dealing with horrible POW situations, and dealing with all the bad PR." What else could it mean? If we're going to get rid of Bad Guys then we have to pit our own troops against some very nasty people. And if we're going to be the ones who decide who the Bad Guys are and what to do about it, we are going to get a lot of bad PR. [quote][b] America is doing this because we are being dragged into it! Now we HAVE to police a country who's rulers have histories of abusing their powers. It's just not the CAUSE of the war, it's an unfortunate outcome of what we must sacrifice for world peace. [/b][/quote]Sorry but we don't HAVE to go over there. We weren't "dragged into it" - Iraq has not attacked us, and the U.N. hasn't exactly entreated us to go over there. If you believe (as the President and his buddies obviously do) that we must make this sacrifice for world peace, then so be it. You may even have an arguable point there. But what the article is saying (and what I've been saying all along) is don't pretend like that's not the agenda. It's spelled out very clearly in the President's foreign policy report and in the 2000 "Rebuilding America's Defenses" report, as quoted in the article: [quote]U.S. forces will be required to perform "constabulary duties" -- the United States acting as policeman of the world -- and says that such actions "demand American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations."[/quote]So America not only wants to be the policeman but the judge and jury too. How are we going to do that without enormous expense, loss of servicemen, and a boatload of bad PR? How else could we possibly be perceived by the rest of the world except as dictators and imperialists? Because as you said yourself, only dictators and imperialists are interested in that sort of thing. Apparently, the administration thinks it's worth it. They clearly ARE "interested" in spending money and committing servicemen to this job. Bush's defense budget has increased steadily, and his defense report calls for greatly expanding the presence of American troops around the globe. That's the reality - YOU make the call as to whether it's right or wrong. Seems to me that you already have made that call, so don't blame the article or "liberalism." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chest Rockwell Posted March 26, 2003 Author Share Posted March 26, 2003 I thought everybody would appreciate this becuase it is more matter of fact in its literary nature but it looks like we have a turd in the punchbowl. Bummer. Go away. I haven't read the war thread. Look how long (and probably full to the brim with bickering) it is. I don't know what Craig's wishes are. I'm glad I started this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by GT3: [b] [img]http://www.rockprojekt.de/Keyboards/Images/modular-moog.jpg[/img][/b][/quote] Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Chest Rockwell: [b]I thought everybody would appreciate this becuase it is more matter of fact in its literary nature but it looks like we have a turd in the punchbowl. Bummer. Go away. I haven't read the war thread. Look how long (and probably full to the brim with bickering) it is. I don't know what Craig's wishes are. I'm glad I started this thread.[/b][/quote]Check your pm's. Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chest Rockwell Posted March 26, 2003 Author Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote] Check your pm's. [/quote]:confused: Me no understandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gtoledo3 Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Oh, there is a place at the top of the screen that says "my profile". Click on that, and you can see private messages (pm's) that people send you. :thu: Want mix/tracking feedback? Checkout "The Fade"- www.grand-designs.cc/mmforum/index.php The soon-to-be home of the "12 Bar-Blues Project" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GZsound Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 Lee, your logic is more than a little flawed. You say we don't have to go over there. That we were not "dragged" into war over there. All this is fine if you are a country like Denmark that just keeps to itself, has very little world position and is mostly left alone. At least until another Hitler shows up. We were never attacked by Hitler. We were never attacked by Milosovich. However, as a world power with certain responsibilities we most certainly had to do our best to remove those dictators. Hitler killed 6 milion Jews but no Americans. So using your logic, we were wrong to enter into war with him. Saddam has killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. He attacked and killed thousands of Kuwaiti's. He attacked Iran. Do we really have to sit by and let any dictator in the world kill as many people as they can and do nothing as long as they aren't killing Americans? Saddam pays the families of Palestine suicide bombers $25,000 each. Do you really support this guy? Do you really care so little about other citizens of the world that you would keep us from stopping the slaughter? Is the whole point of your argument the idea that Americans should sit in a corner and be quiet until we are actually attacked? Then what do we do? Especially if the attackers are not from any country, not from any specific area and not any specific nationality. What if they get their weapons and funding from Saddam? Still leave him alone? I think most of these psuedo war protestations are simply because a republican got elected. And I know you were against the Clinton unilateral bombings and war since you have so stated in prior posts..at least you are consistant. I think the world should look to America as a superpower and we should act accordingly. We need to help the oppressed, feed the hungry and protect the helpless. Supporting Butchers and madmen and their continued brutality should not be an option. Doing nothing costs hundreds of thousands of innocent lives..and you support that? Mark G. "A man may fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame others" -- John Burroughs "I consider ethics, as well as religion, as supplements to law in the government of man." -- Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by GZsound: [b]Saddam pays the families of Palestine suicide bombers $25,000 each. [/b][/quote]I'm glad someone pointed this out. While it may be true that the case for direct links to the Al Qaeda terrorist network were not firmly proven to the world "public at large" by US officials, they definitely DO support Palistinian terrorists - by their own admission. And again, while there's no firm, direct published links between Iraq and Al Qaeda, there's DEFINITE links between some Palestinian terrorist organizations and Al Qaeda. I can certainly imagine a scenario where Iraq could support - financially and otherwise - Palestinian terrorist organizations - and those same terrorists then turn around and "share" with their friends in Al Qaeda. As the Preisdent said after 9/11 - we shouldn't make any distinction between terrorists and those who support terrorists. They (Iraq) definitely DID attack Israel in 1991 even though Israel wasn't attacking them. True, we supprt Israel, as Lee correctly pointed out. But that conflict was about getting Iraq out of another Arab country - Kuwait - and had NOTHING to do with Israel. Iraq's attack on Israel was an attempt to cause division in the coalition by trying to "turn it around" and get Israel involved, so that the Arab / Islamic members of the coalition would withdraw their support. Israel stayed out of it, and that Iraqi strategy fell flat on its face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogfur Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Philip O'Keefe: [b] As the Preisdent said after 9/11 - we shouldn't make any distinction between terrorists and those who support terrorists. [/b][/quote]Then why wasn't the intelligence community allowed to investigate "special" (you know, Bush buddy stuff) Saudi money or influence before 9-11. (I am well aware that Clinton was slowing the investigations before Bush stopped them.) I concur on the Iraqi/Palestinian relationship requiring "attention", but let's face it: There's more than a few rotten apples festering in the Saudi elite and the Bush family is sticking to them like flies on poop. It is this hypocritical and dangerous type of behavior that I think personifies the evil in the White House now, and perhaps may be a key ingredient to our lack of support from other previously allied countries. Woof! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted March 26, 2003 Share Posted March 26, 2003 I told you this this thread would be a continuation of the war thread... Craig, please delete, or close it... JDL on Purevolume Bird\'s Eye View on Purevolume Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.