Gravitymaster 0 #26 June 23, 2004 Quote>Doubtful. Much of the money Al Qaeda has comes from opium and other >investments. Remember how much money they made in the stock market >after Sept 11? People can indeed make money in the stock market. But we spend about 120 BILLION a year for imported oil; that's some serious seed money for a terrorist blue-chip fund. >In addition, the Chinese are ready, willing and able to fill >any financial gap caused by the US reduction in oil use. Agreed, but then again, if China's oil usage causes terrorism against China, I am less concerned about it, since we can't do anything about that. I mean, how worried are you about the Tamil Tigers? They are responsible for far more terrorism than Al Qaeda, but since they don't attack Americans we don't pay them as much mind. What makes you think they won't continue to attack us with the money they would get from selling oil to China and other countries? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #27 June 23, 2004 >What makes you think they won't continue to attack us with the > money they would get from selling oil to China and other countries? Same reason they're not attacking Iceland now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #28 June 23, 2004 Quote>What makes you think they won't continue to attack us with the > money they would get from selling oil to China and other countries? Same reason they're not attacking Iceland now. Please tell me you don't believe that if the US stopped buying oil from the ME that the terrorists would leave us alone. Please tell me you don't believe that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #29 June 23, 2004 >Please tell me you don't believe that if the US stopped buying oil > from the ME that the terrorists would leave us alone. Please tell me >you don't believe that. Not this year. Nor the year after that. But when a generation goes by and no one remembers the people killed by US bombs, then they will hate us no more than we hate Japan - a country that was once a sworn enemy, but one we have learned to live with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #30 June 23, 2004 Quote>Please tell me you don't believe that if the US stopped buying oil > from the ME that the terrorists would leave us alone. Please tell me >you don't believe that. Not this year. Nor the year after that. But when a generation goes by and no one remembers the people killed by US bombs, then they will hate us no more than we hate Japan - a country that was once a sworn enemy, but one we have learned to live with. What US bombs justified the first WTC bombing? What US bombs caused the downing of a US Airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland? What US bombs caused the boming of the Marine Corps. barracks. What US bombs caused the bombing of the USS Cole? What US bombs caused Sept. 11? What US bombs caused the Mar. 11 train bombing in Spain or the Bali Night Club bombing? What you fail to understand is that there are evil people in the world for whatever reasons one chooses to believe, they exist. Their goal in this period of time is to establish a Muslim Theocracy in the ME and to expand the most radical interpetation (Salafi) religion throughout the world. They want to re-introduce the practice of Sharia which removes even the slightest hint of secularism in the courts. Religious Courts that can delve out very brutal punishment for crimes against God. This cannot be accomplished in a wealthy secular society where rules of evidence etc. apply. This is part of the underlying reasons the Religious Fanatics (terrorists) want the US and other countries out of the ME. This achieved, they will attempt to expand their fanaticism throughout the world by force. They need the US out of the ME and the House of Saud to fall as a beginning step in this process IMO. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #31 June 23, 2004 QuoteTheir goal in this period of time is to establish a Muslim Theocracy in the ME and to expand the most radical interpetation .... Yeah, they are the commies of the new millenuim, out to take over the world and steal all our liberties and convert us into Muslim fundamentalists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #32 June 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteTheir goal in this period of time is to establish a Muslim Theocracy in the ME and to expand the most radical interpetation .... Yeah, they are the commies of the new millenuim, out to take over the world and steal all our liberties and convert us into Muslim fundamentalists. Why don't you try doing a little research before spouting off with the smart assed remarks? Try getting past TVs and newpapers. You might be surprised at how little you know and realize how embarrassing that statement is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #33 June 23, 2004 >What US bombs justified the first WTC bombing? The bombs, missiles and planes we sold to the Israelis to kill Palestinians with. The bombs and weapons we _gave_ the Mujahideen so they would kill Russians for us. But as I mentioned earlier, the more important issue is that we stop giving them billions. >What you fail to understand is that there are evil people in the world for >whatever reasons one chooses to believe, they exist. And what you fail to see is that there are evil people EVERYWHERE. They are here in the US. (Who do you think pulled off the Oklahoma City bombing? And what religion was he?) They are in Japan. They are in the Middle East. They are in China. They are in the UK. Most of them do not attack us because we do not make a habit of killing them, nor do we given them and their enemies billions in weapons. >Their goal in this period of time is to establish a Muslim Theocracy in the >ME and to expand the most radical interpetation (Salafi) religion >throughout the world. Yeah yeah. And the Commies were going to take over the world. Yet when the USSR collapsed, it turned out that the Russians were people just like us, just a people with a warlike government who wanted to impose its will throughout the world and make it 'safe' for their style of government (sound familiar?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #34 June 23, 2004 Quote>What US bombs justified the first WTC bombing? QuoteThe bombs, missiles and planes we sold to the Israelis to kill Palestinians with. The bombs and weapons we _gave_ the Mujahideen so they would kill Russians for us. I'd say in both cases they were sold weapons to defend themselves. The US wasn't the only country selling them weapons either. QuoteBut as I mentioned earlier, the more important issue is that we stop giving them billions. Oh, good idea. Lets starve them. That will make them like us better and stop terrorism. >What you fail to understand is that there are evil people in the world for >whatever reasons one chooses to believe, they exist. QuoteAnd what you fail to see is that there are evil people EVERYWHERE. They are here in the US. (Who do you think pulled off the Oklahoma City bombing? And what religion was he?) They are in Japan. They are in the Middle East. They are in China. They are in the UK. Most of them do not attack us because we do not make a habit of killing them, nor do we given them and their enemies billions in weapons. I believe I said there were evil people in the World The fact that these hate groups are tied up spewing there evil in their own countries does not mean they would not turn their rage against us given the opportunity. >Their goal in this period of time is to establish a Muslim Theocracy in the >ME and to expand the most radical interpetation (Salafi) religion >throughout the world. QuoteYeah yeah. And the Commies were going to take over the world. Yet when the USSR collapsed, it turned out that the Russians were people just like us, just a people with a warlike government who wanted to impose its will throughout the world and make it 'safe' for their style of government (sound familiar?) How naive of you. Are you really going to sit there and claim the US didn't have enemies in these former communist countries? If you agree we had enemies in former communist countries, where do you think they are now? Do you think when the Berlin Wall fell, that on that date, all our enemies suddenly became our friends and now love us? Do you think it's possible that just maybe our former enemies in the former USSR and East Germany have anything to do with the current anti-Americanism in Europe? Naw can't be. Our former enemies now love and support us, right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #35 June 23, 2004 >I'd say in both cases they were sold weapons to defend themselves. The >US wasn't the only country selling them weapons either. We gave the Mujahideen weapons so they would kill russians for us. To believe that we, out of the goodness of our hearts, decided to help the radical islamic terrorists "defend themselves" is, well, a little naive. >Oh, good idea. Lets starve them. That will make them like us better and stop terrorism. Who said anything about starving them? We're not giving Iceland anywhere near the money we're giving Saudi Arabia. Are we starving Iceland? >How naive of you. Are you really going to sit there and claim the US didn't >have enemies in these former communist countries? Their governments, under control of the USSR, were indeed our enemies. Like I said, the people of Russia were not. >If you agree we had enemies in former communist countries, where do >you think they are now? Retired. >Do you think when the Berlin Wall fell, that on that date, all our >enemies suddenly became our friends and now love us? No, they simply stopped living under a government that wanted to kill us. Sixty years ago, Japan wanted to annihilate us. Do you hate the Japanese? If a Japanese man thought that all Japan's old enemies in the US are now thinking of Japan as friends, would you claim he is naive? >Do you think it's possible that just maybe our former enemies in the >former USSR and East Germany have anything to do with the current >anti-Americanism in Europe? Hmm. A secret communist plot, or the result of the US declaring unilateral war, insulting the countries that opposed that, ignoring the UN and killing tens of thousands? The answer is clear - it's a secret communist plot! I saw a movie like that once, that must be what's going on. Counter question - do you think that our dislike of Germany is the result of a cabal of Jewish leaders who want to destroy Germany for what they did in the 1940's, or does Germany just piss us off? >Our former enemies now love and support us, right? I see your point. Japan, Russia, Germany, and Mexico are right now meeting in a secret underground bunker to plot the destruction of the US. Thank god there are people out there who sniff these things out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #36 June 23, 2004 Quote>Our former enemies now love and support us, right? I see your point. Japan, Russia, Germany, and Mexico are right now meeting in a secret underground bunker to plot the destruction of the US. Thank god there are people out there who sniff these things out. You forgot the Italians. And the Brits, two wars against them.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Remster 30 #37 June 23, 2004 QuoteQuote>Our former enemies now love and support us, right? I see your point. Japan, Russia, Germany, and Mexico are right now meeting in a secret underground bunker to plot the destruction of the US. Thank god there are people out there who sniff these things out. You forgot the Italians. And the Brits, two wars against them. Once again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know!Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #38 June 23, 2004 >Once again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know! Hey, you just wait your turn. So little time, so many countries to pre-empt. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #39 June 23, 2004 Quote>I'd say in both cases they were sold weapons to defend themselves. The >US wasn't the only country selling them weapons either.Quote QuoteWe gave the Mujahideen weapons so they would kill russians for us. To believe that we, out of the goodness of our hearts, decided to help the radical islamic terrorists "defend themselves" is, well, a little naive. I didn't say we did it out of the goodness of our hearts. I said we gave them weapons to defend themselves. Yes, from the USSR when they were our enemy and doing the same thing to us. In my view, the Israelis have done everything they can to try to appease the Palestinian terrorists. The fact that nothing they do is good enough is plenty to base how our efforts to appease terrorists in the future will be. >Oh, good idea. Lets starve them. That will make them like us better and stop terrorism. QuoteWho said anything about starving them? We're not giving Iceland anywhere near the money we're giving Saudi Arabia. Are we starving Iceland? Two different cultures and to try to compare them is naive. People in the ME have become so dependent on the govt. for their daily existence that to remove oil as a source of income would cause starvation. How can you liberals argue on one hand that the sanctions placed on Iraq after the 1st Gulf War caused massive starvation of children and now argue that without it all will be well? >How naive of you. Are you really going to sit there and claim the US didn't >have enemies in these former communist countries? Their governments, under control of the USSR, were indeed our enemies. Like I said, the people of Russia were not. >If you agree we had enemies in former communist countries, where do >you think they are now? QuoteRetired. Uh huh, yeah, right. >Do you think when the Berlin Wall fell, that on that date, all our >enemies suddenly became our friends and now love us? QuoteNo, they simply stopped living under a government that wanted to kill us. Sixty years ago, Japan wanted to annihilate us. Do you hate the Japanese? If a Japanese man thought that all Japan's old enemies in the US are now thinking of Japan as friends, would you claim he is naive? No, but that because the differences we had with Japan were more economic than ideological. I also thing 2 atomic bombs had some effect on the govt. of Japans attitude. >Do you think it's possible that just maybe our former enemies in the >former USSR and East Germany have anything to do with the current >anti-Americanism in Europe? From this point I will not respond to the rest of your post because it is a poorly conceived attempt to be inflammatory and insulting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #40 June 23, 2004 Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world with different ideologies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #41 June 23, 2004 >Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the >possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world >with different ideologies. I am sure that there is a group in China with a plan for eastern supremacy of the world. That is no more a reason to invade China (or kill the authors, or scare them into submission etc) than the PNAC is a valid reason for India to invade us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #42 June 23, 2004 Quote>Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the >possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world >with different ideologies. I am sure that there is a group in China with a plan for eastern supremacy of the world. That is no more a reason to invade China (or kill the authors, or scare them into submission etc) than the PNAC is a valid reason for India to invade us. Uh huh. Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might exist? And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? Can't you even admit there is the possibility that they exert some influence with these groups and could be using them to advance an agenda? Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #43 June 23, 2004 QuoteOnce again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know! You're not forgotten, you just don't matter.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #44 June 23, 2004 QuoteYou're not forgotten, you just don't matter. That's unfair. After all, they did burn the white house. Of course militarily they're not up to the challenge now so they try to destroy our culture by sending us Bryan Adams, Celine Dion, Alanis Moriset and others of their ilk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #45 June 23, 2004 Rubbish. It was Brits in canadian disguise. Everyone knows that canada is the only country with a worse record than France.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #46 June 23, 2004 >Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US >eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. We were, but then you said you didn't want to talk about that any more. >How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, > which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being >influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the >political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other >countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might >exist? I did not deny that they might exist in other countries. There are small groups like that all over the world. PNAC is just one of them. But we have a pretty strong belief here in the US that you should be able to say, believe, write etc anything you want - as long as you don't hurt anyone else. And if there is a chinese version of the PNAC, then we should not attempt to erase it (and kill its members) unless they take action against us. I am sure you would not want to see Jordan do the same to the PNAC, even though it clearly contains plans that would not be to Jordan's liking. >And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they >don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? They probably do! There are probably some even more nuts organizations out there who are insane enough to be almost completely ineffective (which is good.) The Army of God comes to mind. >Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements > of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? It may indeed. So which would be a better approach - watch them closely but avoid contact, or give them billions in money and weapons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #47 June 24, 2004 Quote>Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US >eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. QuoteWe were, but then you said you didn't want to talk about that any more. My arguement was consistent. My point has always been that even if we stopped buying oil from the ME that terrorists with warped ideologies would continue to attack us with money they would get when China moved in to fill the gap. Try to follow along please. >How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, > which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being >influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the >political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other >countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might >exist? QuoteI did not deny that they might exist in other countries. There are small groups like that all over the world. PNAC is just one of them. But we have a pretty strong belief here in the US that you should be able to say, believe, write etc anything you want - as long as you don't hurt anyone else. And if there is a chinese version of the PNAC, then we should not attempt to erase it (and kill its members) unless they take action against us. I am sure you would not want to see Jordan do the same to the PNAC, even though it clearly contains plans that would not be to Jordan's liking. Good to see you are finally getting the point. Now if you can understand the influence these types of groups would have with a Theocratic Govt. and then link that up with the money they would continue to get from other countries, you will almost be in agreement with me. >And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they >don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? QuoteThey probably do! There are probably some even more nuts organizations out there who are insane enough to be almost completely ineffective (which is good.) The Army of God comes to mind. Yep. But we were talking about ME groups with nutsy ideologies influencing the govt. >Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements > of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? QuoteIt may indeed. So which would be a better approach - watch them closely but avoid contact, or give them billions in money and weapons? So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. Other countries would fill the gap and wacko groups within ME countries would continue to attack the US because they would still have money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #48 June 24, 2004 >So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. And I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? There will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #49 June 24, 2004 Quote>So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. QuoteAnd I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? This isn't a point of disagreement Bill. The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with oil money from the Chinese. QuoteThere will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. I agree. This is the point I have made over and over. There will always be those who hate the US whether we buy oil from the ME or not and it matters not whether they get their money from the US, Germany, France, N. Korea, Australia or Canada, they will still attack us because there are always going to be evil people in the world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #50 June 24, 2004 >The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have > the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with > oil money from the Chinese. The Chinese will indeed buy oil from the Middle East if we don't, but they will not buy as much. Their demand is lower and they just don't have enough money (yet.) The Saudi Arabians won't starve, they will just be able to afford fewer RPG's. And when the chinese do have the money to replace us? The arabs will find someone new to hate, someone who gives them billions but is even more adamantly non-Islamic than we are. Will arab terrorists stop hating us immediately? No. Will everyone in Jordan stop hating us? Again, no. But there will come a day when Middle Eastern rallies denounce China rather than burn US flags, and the people who hate the US will be a rabble of disorganized malcontents instead of a ten thousand strong organization willing to die to infiltrate the US and kill thousands of americans. And that will be a good day for the USA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 3,118 #35 June 23, 2004 >I'd say in both cases they were sold weapons to defend themselves. The >US wasn't the only country selling them weapons either. We gave the Mujahideen weapons so they would kill russians for us. To believe that we, out of the goodness of our hearts, decided to help the radical islamic terrorists "defend themselves" is, well, a little naive. >Oh, good idea. Lets starve them. That will make them like us better and stop terrorism. Who said anything about starving them? We're not giving Iceland anywhere near the money we're giving Saudi Arabia. Are we starving Iceland? >How naive of you. Are you really going to sit there and claim the US didn't >have enemies in these former communist countries? Their governments, under control of the USSR, were indeed our enemies. Like I said, the people of Russia were not. >If you agree we had enemies in former communist countries, where do >you think they are now? Retired. >Do you think when the Berlin Wall fell, that on that date, all our >enemies suddenly became our friends and now love us? No, they simply stopped living under a government that wanted to kill us. Sixty years ago, Japan wanted to annihilate us. Do you hate the Japanese? If a Japanese man thought that all Japan's old enemies in the US are now thinking of Japan as friends, would you claim he is naive? >Do you think it's possible that just maybe our former enemies in the >former USSR and East Germany have anything to do with the current >anti-Americanism in Europe? Hmm. A secret communist plot, or the result of the US declaring unilateral war, insulting the countries that opposed that, ignoring the UN and killing tens of thousands? The answer is clear - it's a secret communist plot! I saw a movie like that once, that must be what's going on. Counter question - do you think that our dislike of Germany is the result of a cabal of Jewish leaders who want to destroy Germany for what they did in the 1940's, or does Germany just piss us off? >Our former enemies now love and support us, right? I see your point. Japan, Russia, Germany, and Mexico are right now meeting in a secret underground bunker to plot the destruction of the US. Thank god there are people out there who sniff these things out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #36 June 23, 2004 Quote>Our former enemies now love and support us, right? I see your point. Japan, Russia, Germany, and Mexico are right now meeting in a secret underground bunker to plot the destruction of the US. Thank god there are people out there who sniff these things out. You forgot the Italians. And the Brits, two wars against them.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #37 June 23, 2004 QuoteQuote>Our former enemies now love and support us, right? I see your point. Japan, Russia, Germany, and Mexico are right now meeting in a secret underground bunker to plot the destruction of the US. Thank god there are people out there who sniff these things out. You forgot the Italians. And the Brits, two wars against them. Once again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know!Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #38 June 23, 2004 >Once again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know! Hey, you just wait your turn. So little time, so many countries to pre-empt. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #39 June 23, 2004 Quote>I'd say in both cases they were sold weapons to defend themselves. The >US wasn't the only country selling them weapons either.Quote QuoteWe gave the Mujahideen weapons so they would kill russians for us. To believe that we, out of the goodness of our hearts, decided to help the radical islamic terrorists "defend themselves" is, well, a little naive. I didn't say we did it out of the goodness of our hearts. I said we gave them weapons to defend themselves. Yes, from the USSR when they were our enemy and doing the same thing to us. In my view, the Israelis have done everything they can to try to appease the Palestinian terrorists. The fact that nothing they do is good enough is plenty to base how our efforts to appease terrorists in the future will be. >Oh, good idea. Lets starve them. That will make them like us better and stop terrorism. QuoteWho said anything about starving them? We're not giving Iceland anywhere near the money we're giving Saudi Arabia. Are we starving Iceland? Two different cultures and to try to compare them is naive. People in the ME have become so dependent on the govt. for their daily existence that to remove oil as a source of income would cause starvation. How can you liberals argue on one hand that the sanctions placed on Iraq after the 1st Gulf War caused massive starvation of children and now argue that without it all will be well? >How naive of you. Are you really going to sit there and claim the US didn't >have enemies in these former communist countries? Their governments, under control of the USSR, were indeed our enemies. Like I said, the people of Russia were not. >If you agree we had enemies in former communist countries, where do >you think they are now? QuoteRetired. Uh huh, yeah, right. >Do you think when the Berlin Wall fell, that on that date, all our >enemies suddenly became our friends and now love us? QuoteNo, they simply stopped living under a government that wanted to kill us. Sixty years ago, Japan wanted to annihilate us. Do you hate the Japanese? If a Japanese man thought that all Japan's old enemies in the US are now thinking of Japan as friends, would you claim he is naive? No, but that because the differences we had with Japan were more economic than ideological. I also thing 2 atomic bombs had some effect on the govt. of Japans attitude. >Do you think it's possible that just maybe our former enemies in the >former USSR and East Germany have anything to do with the current >anti-Americanism in Europe? From this point I will not respond to the rest of your post because it is a poorly conceived attempt to be inflammatory and insulting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #40 June 23, 2004 Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world with different ideologies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #41 June 23, 2004 >Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the >possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world >with different ideologies. I am sure that there is a group in China with a plan for eastern supremacy of the world. That is no more a reason to invade China (or kill the authors, or scare them into submission etc) than the PNAC is a valid reason for India to invade us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #42 June 23, 2004 Quote>Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the >possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world >with different ideologies. I am sure that there is a group in China with a plan for eastern supremacy of the world. That is no more a reason to invade China (or kill the authors, or scare them into submission etc) than the PNAC is a valid reason for India to invade us. Uh huh. Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might exist? And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? Can't you even admit there is the possibility that they exert some influence with these groups and could be using them to advance an agenda? Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #43 June 23, 2004 QuoteOnce again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know! You're not forgotten, you just don't matter.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #44 June 23, 2004 QuoteYou're not forgotten, you just don't matter. That's unfair. After all, they did burn the white house. Of course militarily they're not up to the challenge now so they try to destroy our culture by sending us Bryan Adams, Celine Dion, Alanis Moriset and others of their ilk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #45 June 23, 2004 Rubbish. It was Brits in canadian disguise. Everyone knows that canada is the only country with a worse record than France.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #46 June 23, 2004 >Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US >eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. We were, but then you said you didn't want to talk about that any more. >How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, > which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being >influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the >political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other >countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might >exist? I did not deny that they might exist in other countries. There are small groups like that all over the world. PNAC is just one of them. But we have a pretty strong belief here in the US that you should be able to say, believe, write etc anything you want - as long as you don't hurt anyone else. And if there is a chinese version of the PNAC, then we should not attempt to erase it (and kill its members) unless they take action against us. I am sure you would not want to see Jordan do the same to the PNAC, even though it clearly contains plans that would not be to Jordan's liking. >And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they >don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? They probably do! There are probably some even more nuts organizations out there who are insane enough to be almost completely ineffective (which is good.) The Army of God comes to mind. >Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements > of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? It may indeed. So which would be a better approach - watch them closely but avoid contact, or give them billions in money and weapons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #47 June 24, 2004 Quote>Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US >eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. QuoteWe were, but then you said you didn't want to talk about that any more. My arguement was consistent. My point has always been that even if we stopped buying oil from the ME that terrorists with warped ideologies would continue to attack us with money they would get when China moved in to fill the gap. Try to follow along please. >How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, > which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being >influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the >political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other >countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might >exist? QuoteI did not deny that they might exist in other countries. There are small groups like that all over the world. PNAC is just one of them. But we have a pretty strong belief here in the US that you should be able to say, believe, write etc anything you want - as long as you don't hurt anyone else. And if there is a chinese version of the PNAC, then we should not attempt to erase it (and kill its members) unless they take action against us. I am sure you would not want to see Jordan do the same to the PNAC, even though it clearly contains plans that would not be to Jordan's liking. Good to see you are finally getting the point. Now if you can understand the influence these types of groups would have with a Theocratic Govt. and then link that up with the money they would continue to get from other countries, you will almost be in agreement with me. >And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they >don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? QuoteThey probably do! There are probably some even more nuts organizations out there who are insane enough to be almost completely ineffective (which is good.) The Army of God comes to mind. Yep. But we were talking about ME groups with nutsy ideologies influencing the govt. >Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements > of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? QuoteIt may indeed. So which would be a better approach - watch them closely but avoid contact, or give them billions in money and weapons? So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. Other countries would fill the gap and wacko groups within ME countries would continue to attack the US because they would still have money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #48 June 24, 2004 >So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. And I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? There will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #49 June 24, 2004 Quote>So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. QuoteAnd I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? This isn't a point of disagreement Bill. The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with oil money from the Chinese. QuoteThere will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. I agree. This is the point I have made over and over. There will always be those who hate the US whether we buy oil from the ME or not and it matters not whether they get their money from the US, Germany, France, N. Korea, Australia or Canada, they will still attack us because there are always going to be evil people in the world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #50 June 24, 2004 >The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have > the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with > oil money from the Chinese. The Chinese will indeed buy oil from the Middle East if we don't, but they will not buy as much. Their demand is lower and they just don't have enough money (yet.) The Saudi Arabians won't starve, they will just be able to afford fewer RPG's. And when the chinese do have the money to replace us? The arabs will find someone new to hate, someone who gives them billions but is even more adamantly non-Islamic than we are. Will arab terrorists stop hating us immediately? No. Will everyone in Jordan stop hating us? Again, no. But there will come a day when Middle Eastern rallies denounce China rather than burn US flags, and the people who hate the US will be a rabble of disorganized malcontents instead of a ten thousand strong organization willing to die to infiltrate the US and kill thousands of americans. And that will be a good day for the USA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Gravitymaster 0 #40 June 23, 2004 Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world with different ideologies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #41 June 23, 2004 >Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the >possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world >with different ideologies. I am sure that there is a group in China with a plan for eastern supremacy of the world. That is no more a reason to invade China (or kill the authors, or scare them into submission etc) than the PNAC is a valid reason for India to invade us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #42 June 23, 2004 Quote>Interesting how you get so charged up about PNAC but dismiss the >possibility that the same type of groups may exist elsewhere in the world >with different ideologies. I am sure that there is a group in China with a plan for eastern supremacy of the world. That is no more a reason to invade China (or kill the authors, or scare them into submission etc) than the PNAC is a valid reason for India to invade us. Uh huh. Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might exist? And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? Can't you even admit there is the possibility that they exert some influence with these groups and could be using them to advance an agenda? Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #43 June 23, 2004 QuoteOnce again, Canadians are forgotten. We wanna detroy the US too you know! You're not forgotten, you just don't matter.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #44 June 23, 2004 QuoteYou're not forgotten, you just don't matter. That's unfair. After all, they did burn the white house. Of course militarily they're not up to the challenge now so they try to destroy our culture by sending us Bryan Adams, Celine Dion, Alanis Moriset and others of their ilk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #45 June 23, 2004 Rubbish. It was Brits in canadian disguise. Everyone knows that canada is the only country with a worse record than France.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #46 June 23, 2004 >Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US >eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. We were, but then you said you didn't want to talk about that any more. >How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, > which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being >influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the >political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other >countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might >exist? I did not deny that they might exist in other countries. There are small groups like that all over the world. PNAC is just one of them. But we have a pretty strong belief here in the US that you should be able to say, believe, write etc anything you want - as long as you don't hurt anyone else. And if there is a chinese version of the PNAC, then we should not attempt to erase it (and kill its members) unless they take action against us. I am sure you would not want to see Jordan do the same to the PNAC, even though it clearly contains plans that would not be to Jordan's liking. >And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they >don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? They probably do! There are probably some even more nuts organizations out there who are insane enough to be almost completely ineffective (which is good.) The Army of God comes to mind. >Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements > of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? It may indeed. So which would be a better approach - watch them closely but avoid contact, or give them billions in money and weapons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #47 June 24, 2004 Quote>Thats nice to know but what we were discussing is whether the US >eliminating our dependence on ME oil would stop terrorist attacks. QuoteWe were, but then you said you didn't want to talk about that any more. My arguement was consistent. My point has always been that even if we stopped buying oil from the ME that terrorists with warped ideologies would continue to attack us with money they would get when China moved in to fill the gap. Try to follow along please. >How can you argue on one hand that groups with ideologies like PNAC, > which I've heard you and some of the other lefties accuse of being >influential in our foreign policy decisions, exist in the US and carry the >political weight you claim they have, yet deny they may exist within other >countries and even go so far as to ridicule me for suggesting they might >exist? QuoteI did not deny that they might exist in other countries. There are small groups like that all over the world. PNAC is just one of them. But we have a pretty strong belief here in the US that you should be able to say, believe, write etc anything you want - as long as you don't hurt anyone else. And if there is a chinese version of the PNAC, then we should not attempt to erase it (and kill its members) unless they take action against us. I am sure you would not want to see Jordan do the same to the PNAC, even though it clearly contains plans that would not be to Jordan's liking. Good to see you are finally getting the point. Now if you can understand the influence these types of groups would have with a Theocratic Govt. and then link that up with the money they would continue to get from other countries, you will almost be in agreement with me. >And if you agree that they most probably do exist, how can you argue they >don't influence groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda and Hezbullah? QuoteThey probably do! There are probably some even more nuts organizations out there who are insane enough to be almost completely ineffective (which is good.) The Army of God comes to mind. Yep. But we were talking about ME groups with nutsy ideologies influencing the govt. >Can you honestly say that the Russian Mafia dosen't contain elements > of the old KGB and that they could supporting terrorists and perhaps would be willing to sell them nuclear or chemical weapons? QuoteIt may indeed. So which would be a better approach - watch them closely but avoid contact, or give them billions in money and weapons? So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. Other countries would fill the gap and wacko groups within ME countries would continue to attack the US because they would still have money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #48 June 24, 2004 >So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. And I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? There will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #49 June 24, 2004 Quote>So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. QuoteAnd I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? This isn't a point of disagreement Bill. The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with oil money from the Chinese. QuoteThere will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. I agree. This is the point I have made over and over. There will always be those who hate the US whether we buy oil from the ME or not and it matters not whether they get their money from the US, Germany, France, N. Korea, Australia or Canada, they will still attack us because there are always going to be evil people in the world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #50 June 24, 2004 >The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have > the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with > oil money from the Chinese. The Chinese will indeed buy oil from the Middle East if we don't, but they will not buy as much. Their demand is lower and they just don't have enough money (yet.) The Saudi Arabians won't starve, they will just be able to afford fewer RPG's. And when the chinese do have the money to replace us? The arabs will find someone new to hate, someone who gives them billions but is even more adamantly non-Islamic than we are. Will arab terrorists stop hating us immediately? No. Will everyone in Jordan stop hating us? Again, no. But there will come a day when Middle Eastern rallies denounce China rather than burn US flags, and the people who hate the US will be a rabble of disorganized malcontents instead of a ten thousand strong organization willing to die to infiltrate the US and kill thousands of americans. And that will be a good day for the USA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 3,118 #48 June 24, 2004 >So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. And I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? There will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #49 June 24, 2004 Quote>So now we come full circle and back to the original point that it > wouldn't matter whether we stopped buying oil or not. QuoteAnd I will continue to believe that a terrorist with a stick is not as dangerous as a terrorist with a billion dollars worth of US-supplied (or US-funded) munitions. Think we'd be as upset if nineteen radical islamic terrorists attacked the WTC with big hammers? This isn't a point of disagreement Bill. The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with oil money from the Chinese. QuoteThere will always be people who hate the US, just as there will always be people who hate _anyone_ - the Chinese, the Germans, the Jews, the Arabs etc. The heavily funded ones will always be the most dangerous. It behooves us to not fund the dangerous ones very heavily. I agree. This is the point I have made over and over. There will always be those who hate the US whether we buy oil from the ME or not and it matters not whether they get their money from the US, Germany, France, N. Korea, Australia or Canada, they will still attack us because there are always going to be evil people in the world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #50 June 24, 2004 >The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have > the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with > oil money from the Chinese. The Chinese will indeed buy oil from the Middle East if we don't, but they will not buy as much. Their demand is lower and they just don't have enough money (yet.) The Saudi Arabians won't starve, they will just be able to afford fewer RPG's. And when the chinese do have the money to replace us? The arabs will find someone new to hate, someone who gives them billions but is even more adamantly non-Islamic than we are. Will arab terrorists stop hating us immediately? No. Will everyone in Jordan stop hating us? Again, no. But there will come a day when Middle Eastern rallies denounce China rather than burn US flags, and the people who hate the US will be a rabble of disorganized malcontents instead of a ten thousand strong organization willing to die to infiltrate the US and kill thousands of americans. And that will be a good day for the USA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 3,118 #50 June 24, 2004 >The point of disagreement is whether US purchases of oil will have > the desired effect. I say it won't because they will just by them with > oil money from the Chinese. The Chinese will indeed buy oil from the Middle East if we don't, but they will not buy as much. Their demand is lower and they just don't have enough money (yet.) The Saudi Arabians won't starve, they will just be able to afford fewer RPG's. And when the chinese do have the money to replace us? The arabs will find someone new to hate, someone who gives them billions but is even more adamantly non-Islamic than we are. Will arab terrorists stop hating us immediately? No. Will everyone in Jordan stop hating us? Again, no. But there will come a day when Middle Eastern rallies denounce China rather than burn US flags, and the people who hate the US will be a rabble of disorganized malcontents instead of a ten thousand strong organization willing to die to infiltrate the US and kill thousands of americans. And that will be a good day for the USA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
