Mike111 0 #1 August 26, 2005 U.S. could wind up helping Iraq turn into a second Iran August 26, 2005 HAGE0826 Having failed to find weapons of mass destruction or a link to 9/11, the Bush administration now justifies the war in Iraq with a narrative that goes something like this: We must help Iraqis stamp out a terrorist insurgency and build a stable, Western-style democracy. "Once Iraq is safely in the hands of the Iraqi people, with a government they elected under a new constitution, our troops will be able to come home," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in early August. But even that distorts the reality of Iraq today, according to Peter Galbraith, a former U.S. diplomat, an expert on Saddam Hussein, and a professor at the National War College in Washington, D.C. Writing in the New York Review of Books, Galbraith says the violence in Iraq is not a fringe insurgency but an incipient civil war waged by three large and determined ethnic factions. The result, he says, will be either sustained bloodshed or the establishment of an authoritarian Islamic religious state. "There is, in fact, no Iraqi insurgency," Galbraith writes. "There is a Sunni Arab insurgency. Sunni fundamentalists consider the (majority) Shiites as apostates, and possibly a more dangerous enemy than even the Americans. The insurgent goal is to provoke a sectarian war, and they seem to be succeeding." The Sunnis cannot win this civil war, Galbraith says, but neither can the Shiites fully prevail. Sunni Arabs and ethnic Kurds together represent about 40 percent of Iraq's population -- and neither is willing to submit to Shiite rule. This helps explain why Iraq's leaders have struggled so hard to reach consensus on a new national constitution. But even if the Shiites defeat the Sunni resistance, Americans won't like the result, Galbraith says. That's because leading Shiites want to establish a fundamentalist Islamic state much like the one in neighboring Iran, now America's arch-enemy. Iraq's most influential politician, Ali al-Sistani, is himself an Iranian by birth and has close ties to Iran's fundamentalist leaders. Southern Iraq already is controlled by fundamentalist Islamic parties that have imposed an Iranian-style religious code and are busy making diplomatic overtures to Iran. "It may be the ultimate irony that the United States, which, among other reasons, invaded Iraq to help bring liberal democracy to the Middle East, will play a decisive role in establishing its second Shiite Islamic state," Galbraith concludes. Quote If that is the case, if it is true and will turn out that way, what will happen in the middle east then? How to resolve it? can it be resolved? Maybe Iraq was wrong after all, and strategically wasn;t worth ot after all the bloodshed and carnage. Looks like the anti war voewere right, and if this is the case, and it turns like this, people who supported it, including myself, were wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ViperPilot 0 #2 August 26, 2005 It's a fact that the Sunnis hate the Shiites, and will probably remain so for a very long time, if not indefinately. However, that's not an excuse to just says, "fuck it, let 'em all burn." None of these discussions are about right and wrong, they're about opinions. In my opinion, would it have been more right to just leave the Iraqi people in a shithole that, despite the war, was worse before? Of course people can argue the deaths caused by war, but guess what, Saddam and his henchman weren't as nice as war, they were a lot worse. So not only did war get Saddam out, who deserves what he's gotten so far, but it gave the people at least some hope. As bleak as it may seem sometimes, there is some hope, where as there was none under Saddam's rule. So, I guess we have to ask ourselves, is the action taken by the US worth it, or should we have just given the Iraqi people, and ourselves to some extent, the one finger salute? Bring on the bashing... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #3 August 26, 2005 QuoteSo, I guess we have to ask ourselves, is the action taken by the US worth it, or should we have just given the Iraqi people, and ourselves to some extent, the one finger salute? Who appointed the USA to be the world's policeman and social worker?... 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 ViperPilot 0 #4 August 26, 2005 Every other state in the world (obviously a bit of an exageration, but nonetheless, multiple states). The US doesn't intervene, people bitch, the US intervenes, people bitch. It's just a never-ending cycle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #5 August 26, 2005 QuoteEvery other state in the world (obviously a bit of an exageration, but nonetheless, multiple states). The US doesn't intervene, people bitch, the US intervenes, people bitch. It's just a never-ending cycle. Really? I seem to recall many many states telling the US NOT to invade Iraq in 2003. Those states then got vilified by the neo-cons.... 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 ViperPilot 0 #6 August 27, 2005 Well, it's not much to say France, Germany and the lot. With their ties to oil in Iraq, it's a no brainer they didn't want us to go in there and fuck up their oil deals. Oh well Chirac/Schroeder, suck it up. Ex: French wanted to reclaim their colony in Vietnam, so please America, help. Well, we all see how popular that one was. Ex: Why isn't the US doing anything about the genocide? Why!!! Ok, so we go in, lose some good men and kill around 1000 and get out, for obvious reasons. Gee America, you reall fucked up, what the hell were you thinking, why didn't you solve the problem? The point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... "Who said America is the world's police." Then right along w/ that statement comes... "Hey, genocide...America fix this." "Hey disaster...America, do something." "Hey we're getting the shit kicked out of us, America come save us." See the point? We're asked to be world police, we're criticized for acting like world police. That's the point I'm making. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Skyrad 0 #7 August 27, 2005 Maybe we need a strong ruler that can keep them all in liine, forget about imposing democracy as they clearly don't want the 'right kind' of democracy (The kind that we want them to have.) How about we have a uniparty state in Iraq that will keep them all in line, sure it will require someone that knows the country and is not adverse to breaking a few heads but at least we will not have a Shiite superpower forming. Now then who fits the bill?....... Err...Sadam.....Sorry, Mr President Sir! When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #8 August 27, 2005 Quote See the point? We're asked to be world police, we're criticized for acting like world police. That's the point I'm making. No, I don't see the point at all. I do not see any nations saying what you claim. The US has ASSUMED the role, often contrary to international opinion.... 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 Mike111 0 #9 August 27, 2005 No, I don't see the point at all. I do not see any nations saying what you claim. The US has ASSUMED the role, often contrary to international opinion. Quote Well if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Doubtable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kinaa 0 #10 August 27, 2005 QuoteWell if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Russia and PRC will do that in the future, I suppose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #11 August 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteWell if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Russia and PRC will do that in the future, I suppose. Yes!! Pinnacles of freedom and beacons of light for the world. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites crozby 0 #12 August 27, 2005 QuoteThe point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... The criticism is that the USA inflicts its 'help' on other nations, prelongs and/or worstens whatever strife exists there, and then sods off leaving a mess. This has happened on enough occasions that you'd think the US foreign policy makers would have spotted a pattern by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #13 August 27, 2005 QuoteWho appointed the USA to be the world's policeman and social worker? Oooh! I've not seen this line in a while. So, by that logic, you believe that we were correct in not taking action in Rwanda, and that we were wrong for taking action in the Balkans?So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #14 August 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... The criticism is that the USA inflicts its 'help' on other nations, prelongs and/or worstens whatever strife exists there, and then sods off leaving a mess. This has happened on enough occasions that you'd think the US foreign policy makers would have spotted a pattern by now. You want a mess...let's look at Africa, the far east and the middle east. Who was running the show in this region during the majority of the 20th century ... three guesses, the first two don't count. ... ... ... EUROPE. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites crozby 0 #15 August 27, 2005 QuoteYou want a mess...let's look at Africa, the far east and the middle east. Who was running the show in this region during the majority of the 20th century ... three guesses, the first two don't count. ... ... ... EUROPE. Don't see how this disproves my statement one bit. Intervention in regional disputes by outside agencies for their own political benefit has a proven track record of making bad situations worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #16 August 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteYou want a mess...let's look at Africa, the far east and the middle east. Who was running the show in this region during the majority of the 20th century ... three guesses, the first two don't count. ... ... ... EUROPE. Don't see how this disproves my statement one bit. Intervention in regional disputes by outside agencies for their own political benefit has a proven track record of making bad situations worse. I disagree, the adjustments are certainly painful in some cases (Central/South America during the 80s), and shocking in others (Grenada, Libya) and utterly unsuccessful in a few (Vietnam, Lebanon). I'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I'll use Iraq as the example: Prior to WWI, Iraq was essentially three semi-independent provinces within the Ottoman Empire. In 1920, Britain forged the "modern" Iraq under an appointed Sunni King. This left the Kurds without a state, split amongst Turkey, Iran and Iraq. British and Sunni forces repressed a Shia and Kurdish revolt and dominated the society. In 1958 a coup brought independence and a republic, only to be in constant instability until the Ba'ath Party takeover in 1968. From that point on we know the rest. Israel suffered a similar fate when the UN did a slop-job partitioning of Britain's former Palestinian mandate. The US too, has had its failures, Vietnam comes to mind. Our successes, some painful, have been successes though: Our initiative in the Balkans, Grenada, Panama, and other areas of Latin America ultimately paid off. Afghanistan will be a success and I believe that Iraq will be too.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ViperPilot 0 #17 August 28, 2005 You're basing your opinion of 'assumed role" off of Iraq, in which case the people who weren't all for us going in were the ones saying, "13 years isn't enough time, lets give Saddam more time...just one more chance." Well, how smart is that statement? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ViperPilot 0 #18 August 28, 2005 QuoteWell if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Doubtable. Change doubtable to guaranteed and you got yourself a deal! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites crozby 0 #19 August 28, 2005 QuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ViperPilot 0 #20 August 28, 2005 Isolationism can be good to an extent, but for some of us, you can't just let some stuff go. Some things have to be delt with, no matter how terrible of a situation it is. Of course we all have our own degrees of what level is bad enough to warrant stepping in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Mike111 0 #21 August 28, 2005 I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more oftenQuote I rather they didn;t since that often they are one of the more capable countries in dealing with a situation. Russia are powerful, but as good yet as the USA. Although this is YET. Although it might have been better not to have taken action in IRaq this time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #22 August 28, 2005 QuoteQuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. I can think of three times in the past hundred years where we wanted to "stay out of it". Results? WWI: Zimmerman letter proved that we were getting pulled into the conflict regardless. We chose to join the fight in Europe rather than let the Germans carry out their plans and use Mexico to invade. WWII: December 7, 1941. 6 million Jews, and at least 6 million ethnic minorities dead. Russia lost twice that. Rwanda: No one did anything a million dead. So, if we left it alone, Germany would stretch from Paris to Moscow, Warsaw to Cairo. Israel would never have existed and Japan would stretch from the Aleutians to Australia. Mexico would have possession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Heaven knows what else...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ViperPilot 0 #23 August 28, 2005 Yeah really, why do we have to be "world police"? God, American audacity... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #24 August 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. I can think of three times in the past hundred years where we wanted to "stay out of it". Results? WWI: Zimmerman letter proved that we were getting pulled into the conflict regardless. We chose to join the fight in Europe rather than let the Germans carry out their plans and use Mexico to invade. WWII: December 7, 1941. 6 million Jews, and at least 6 million ethnic minorities dead. Russia lost twice that. Rwanda: No one did anything a million dead. So, if we left it alone, Germany would stretch from Paris to Moscow, Warsaw to Cairo. Israel would never have existed and Japan would stretch from the Aleutians to Australia. Mexico would have possession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Heaven knows what else... Serious assumptions there. US involvement in WWI was pretty late and minor - the push that defeated Germany came from the French and British on the Marne www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/firstworldwar/battles/counter.htm, and Hitler sealed his own fate when he invaded Russia too late to take Moscow in 1941, before the US was even involved. Finally, can you find Rwanda on this list?... 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 Kinaa 0 #25 August 29, 2005 QuoteYes!! Pinnacles of freedom and beacons of light for the world. Crazy Tongue Nothing that good PR can't fix. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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
ViperPilot 0 #2 August 26, 2005 It's a fact that the Sunnis hate the Shiites, and will probably remain so for a very long time, if not indefinately. However, that's not an excuse to just says, "fuck it, let 'em all burn." None of these discussions are about right and wrong, they're about opinions. In my opinion, would it have been more right to just leave the Iraqi people in a shithole that, despite the war, was worse before? Of course people can argue the deaths caused by war, but guess what, Saddam and his henchman weren't as nice as war, they were a lot worse. So not only did war get Saddam out, who deserves what he's gotten so far, but it gave the people at least some hope. As bleak as it may seem sometimes, there is some hope, where as there was none under Saddam's rule. So, I guess we have to ask ourselves, is the action taken by the US worth it, or should we have just given the Iraqi people, and ourselves to some extent, the one finger salute? Bring on the bashing... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #3 August 26, 2005 QuoteSo, I guess we have to ask ourselves, is the action taken by the US worth it, or should we have just given the Iraqi people, and ourselves to some extent, the one finger salute? Who appointed the USA to be the world's policeman and social worker?... 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
ViperPilot 0 #4 August 26, 2005 Every other state in the world (obviously a bit of an exageration, but nonetheless, multiple states). The US doesn't intervene, people bitch, the US intervenes, people bitch. It's just a never-ending cycle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #5 August 26, 2005 QuoteEvery other state in the world (obviously a bit of an exageration, but nonetheless, multiple states). The US doesn't intervene, people bitch, the US intervenes, people bitch. It's just a never-ending cycle. Really? I seem to recall many many states telling the US NOT to invade Iraq in 2003. Those states then got vilified by the neo-cons.... 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
ViperPilot 0 #6 August 27, 2005 Well, it's not much to say France, Germany and the lot. With their ties to oil in Iraq, it's a no brainer they didn't want us to go in there and fuck up their oil deals. Oh well Chirac/Schroeder, suck it up. Ex: French wanted to reclaim their colony in Vietnam, so please America, help. Well, we all see how popular that one was. Ex: Why isn't the US doing anything about the genocide? Why!!! Ok, so we go in, lose some good men and kill around 1000 and get out, for obvious reasons. Gee America, you reall fucked up, what the hell were you thinking, why didn't you solve the problem? The point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... "Who said America is the world's police." Then right along w/ that statement comes... "Hey, genocide...America fix this." "Hey disaster...America, do something." "Hey we're getting the shit kicked out of us, America come save us." See the point? We're asked to be world police, we're criticized for acting like world police. That's the point I'm making. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #7 August 27, 2005 Maybe we need a strong ruler that can keep them all in liine, forget about imposing democracy as they clearly don't want the 'right kind' of democracy (The kind that we want them to have.) How about we have a uniparty state in Iraq that will keep them all in line, sure it will require someone that knows the country and is not adverse to breaking a few heads but at least we will not have a Shiite superpower forming. Now then who fits the bill?....... Err...Sadam.....Sorry, Mr President Sir! When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #8 August 27, 2005 Quote See the point? We're asked to be world police, we're criticized for acting like world police. That's the point I'm making. No, I don't see the point at all. I do not see any nations saying what you claim. The US has ASSUMED the role, often contrary to international opinion.... 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
Mike111 0 #9 August 27, 2005 No, I don't see the point at all. I do not see any nations saying what you claim. The US has ASSUMED the role, often contrary to international opinion. Quote Well if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Doubtable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kinaa 0 #10 August 27, 2005 QuoteWell if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Russia and PRC will do that in the future, I suppose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #11 August 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteWell if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Russia and PRC will do that in the future, I suppose. Yes!! Pinnacles of freedom and beacons of light for the world. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #12 August 27, 2005 QuoteThe point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... The criticism is that the USA inflicts its 'help' on other nations, prelongs and/or worstens whatever strife exists there, and then sods off leaving a mess. This has happened on enough occasions that you'd think the US foreign policy makers would have spotted a pattern by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #13 August 27, 2005 QuoteWho appointed the USA to be the world's policeman and social worker? Oooh! I've not seen this line in a while. So, by that logic, you believe that we were correct in not taking action in Rwanda, and that we were wrong for taking action in the Balkans?So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #14 August 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... The criticism is that the USA inflicts its 'help' on other nations, prelongs and/or worstens whatever strife exists there, and then sods off leaving a mess. This has happened on enough occasions that you'd think the US foreign policy makers would have spotted a pattern by now. You want a mess...let's look at Africa, the far east and the middle east. Who was running the show in this region during the majority of the 20th century ... three guesses, the first two don't count. ... ... ... EUROPE. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #15 August 27, 2005 QuoteYou want a mess...let's look at Africa, the far east and the middle east. Who was running the show in this region during the majority of the 20th century ... three guesses, the first two don't count. ... ... ... EUROPE. Don't see how this disproves my statement one bit. Intervention in regional disputes by outside agencies for their own political benefit has a proven track record of making bad situations worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #16 August 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteYou want a mess...let's look at Africa, the far east and the middle east. Who was running the show in this region during the majority of the 20th century ... three guesses, the first two don't count. ... ... ... EUROPE. Don't see how this disproves my statement one bit. Intervention in regional disputes by outside agencies for their own political benefit has a proven track record of making bad situations worse. I disagree, the adjustments are certainly painful in some cases (Central/South America during the 80s), and shocking in others (Grenada, Libya) and utterly unsuccessful in a few (Vietnam, Lebanon). I'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I'll use Iraq as the example: Prior to WWI, Iraq was essentially three semi-independent provinces within the Ottoman Empire. In 1920, Britain forged the "modern" Iraq under an appointed Sunni King. This left the Kurds without a state, split amongst Turkey, Iran and Iraq. British and Sunni forces repressed a Shia and Kurdish revolt and dominated the society. In 1958 a coup brought independence and a republic, only to be in constant instability until the Ba'ath Party takeover in 1968. From that point on we know the rest. Israel suffered a similar fate when the UN did a slop-job partitioning of Britain's former Palestinian mandate. The US too, has had its failures, Vietnam comes to mind. Our successes, some painful, have been successes though: Our initiative in the Balkans, Grenada, Panama, and other areas of Latin America ultimately paid off. Afghanistan will be a success and I believe that Iraq will be too.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #17 August 28, 2005 You're basing your opinion of 'assumed role" off of Iraq, in which case the people who weren't all for us going in were the ones saying, "13 years isn't enough time, lets give Saddam more time...just one more chance." Well, how smart is that statement? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #18 August 28, 2005 QuoteWell if the US hadn't of done it, who would have? The UN? Doubtable. Change doubtable to guaranteed and you got yourself a deal! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #19 August 28, 2005 QuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #20 August 28, 2005 Isolationism can be good to an extent, but for some of us, you can't just let some stuff go. Some things have to be delt with, no matter how terrible of a situation it is. Of course we all have our own degrees of what level is bad enough to warrant stepping in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike111 0 #21 August 28, 2005 I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more oftenQuote I rather they didn;t since that often they are one of the more capable countries in dealing with a situation. Russia are powerful, but as good yet as the USA. Although this is YET. Although it might have been better not to have taken action in IRaq this time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #22 August 28, 2005 QuoteQuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. I can think of three times in the past hundred years where we wanted to "stay out of it". Results? WWI: Zimmerman letter proved that we were getting pulled into the conflict regardless. We chose to join the fight in Europe rather than let the Germans carry out their plans and use Mexico to invade. WWII: December 7, 1941. 6 million Jews, and at least 6 million ethnic minorities dead. Russia lost twice that. Rwanda: No one did anything a million dead. So, if we left it alone, Germany would stretch from Paris to Moscow, Warsaw to Cairo. Israel would never have existed and Japan would stretch from the Aleutians to Australia. Mexico would have possession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Heaven knows what else...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ViperPilot 0 #23 August 28, 2005 Yeah really, why do we have to be "world police"? God, American audacity... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #24 August 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. I can think of three times in the past hundred years where we wanted to "stay out of it". Results? WWI: Zimmerman letter proved that we were getting pulled into the conflict regardless. We chose to join the fight in Europe rather than let the Germans carry out their plans and use Mexico to invade. WWII: December 7, 1941. 6 million Jews, and at least 6 million ethnic minorities dead. Russia lost twice that. Rwanda: No one did anything a million dead. So, if we left it alone, Germany would stretch from Paris to Moscow, Warsaw to Cairo. Israel would never have existed and Japan would stretch from the Aleutians to Australia. Mexico would have possession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Heaven knows what else... Serious assumptions there. US involvement in WWI was pretty late and minor - the push that defeated Germany came from the French and British on the Marne www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/firstworldwar/battles/counter.htm, and Hitler sealed his own fate when he invaded Russia too late to take Moscow in 1941, before the US was even involved. Finally, can you find Rwanda on this list?... 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 Kinaa 0 #25 August 29, 2005 QuoteYes!! Pinnacles of freedom and beacons of light for the world. Crazy Tongue Nothing that good PR can't fix. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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
Gawain 0 #22 August 28, 2005 QuoteQuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. I can think of three times in the past hundred years where we wanted to "stay out of it". Results? WWI: Zimmerman letter proved that we were getting pulled into the conflict regardless. We chose to join the fight in Europe rather than let the Germans carry out their plans and use Mexico to invade. WWII: December 7, 1941. 6 million Jews, and at least 6 million ethnic minorities dead. Russia lost twice that. Rwanda: No one did anything a million dead. So, if we left it alone, Germany would stretch from Paris to Moscow, Warsaw to Cairo. Israel would never have existed and Japan would stretch from the Aleutians to Australia. Mexico would have possession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Heaven knows what else...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #23 August 28, 2005 Yeah really, why do we have to be "world police"? God, American audacity... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #24 August 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm merely pointing out for everyone sitting in the "arm chair" that it's better to participate than to sit idly by, or "wash your hands" of a situation. I know you are, and I'm suggesting that it would be better if the US sat idly by a whole lot more often. I can think of three times in the past hundred years where we wanted to "stay out of it". Results? WWI: Zimmerman letter proved that we were getting pulled into the conflict regardless. We chose to join the fight in Europe rather than let the Germans carry out their plans and use Mexico to invade. WWII: December 7, 1941. 6 million Jews, and at least 6 million ethnic minorities dead. Russia lost twice that. Rwanda: No one did anything a million dead. So, if we left it alone, Germany would stretch from Paris to Moscow, Warsaw to Cairo. Israel would never have existed and Japan would stretch from the Aleutians to Australia. Mexico would have possession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Heaven knows what else... Serious assumptions there. US involvement in WWI was pretty late and minor - the push that defeated Germany came from the French and British on the Marne www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/firstworldwar/battles/counter.htm, and Hitler sealed his own fate when he invaded Russia too late to take Moscow in 1941, before the US was even involved. Finally, can you find Rwanda on this list?... 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
Kinaa 0 #25 August 29, 2005 QuoteYes!! Pinnacles of freedom and beacons of light for the world. Crazy Tongue Nothing that good PR can't fix. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
