Next target in the war aginst terror: Somalia ?

[VoodooAce]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Of course we funded the Taliban. We also funded Iraq.

I'm talking about good intentions via the United Nations.

We provide the military aid that would work in our favor, obviously! Any other country with our status would do so.

Do you really believe that the UN acts with 'bad' intentiosns???

hey, wait a second....

I think you really DO believe that. Paranoia will destroy ya.

I got news for you. The US doesn't wear the white hat, to everyone elses black. Just because you support one blindly and hate the other blindly does not make one always right and the other always wrong. There are those of us with the abliity to look at issues in an unbiased manner, from both perspectives, as there are ALWAYS two sides to a story. Not just the US's.

See, I'll prove it. The US is not always wrong, and the UN is not always right.

 

[shadowwolf]

I just spent about 15 min reading this thread. I am amazed at how far from the origional topic it has gotten. The uneducated ramblings of a few socialist souls can distract us so well.

Much of what has been said I agree with and some of the people here have made very intelegent and eloquent statments. Even if one doesn´t agree with the statment one must realize its validity, or lack there of as the case may be (animepornstar, atawa). I guess I am just trying to say, think and respect those who do think and bless us all with their educated thoughts. And in turn try not to be too iritated with those not blessed with the capacity for comprehensive contimplation and still posses the need to blab endlessly.

I do not know for sure where the "War on Terrorism" will go next. But I am sure of one thing, it will be persued. It may well be an impossible task to eleminate terrorism, but WE WILL MAKE IT A MISERABLE EXISTANCE!!! Terrorists deserve to die without glory or even passing notice. Any one, person or agency, who activly and intentionaly targets non combatants in an act of so called "war" is in my mind a terrorist.

That statment will no doubt create a new target for our America bashing "friends", but it is my opinion. And as an American that is my right. One which I have served for like so many other Americans. That is why we are who we are. We as Americans are willing to stand up and serve, fight, and die for our beliefs. Not Hide Behind Them!!!!! The next time one of the countries that argues with our methods and objectives needs help, we will remind them. Then we will help them, because that is what we do. We make a habit of saveing everyones asses at our own expense.

As for Iraq. F*#!´´em. If the chose to follow a facist dictator, and lack of revolt is a choice, then I have no pity for them.

Oh and P.S.
If I managed to piss you off with my opinions, sorry but I wont lose any sleep over it.

 

[ComradeDavo]

do not know for sure where the "War on Terrorism" will go next

Apparently the Phillipines, according to latest British (well BBC) news reports.

The uneducated ramblings of a few socialist souls

Does it not occur to you that it was education that lead to them being socialist in the first place?

We as Americans are willing to stand up and serve, fight, and die for our beliefs.

This could apply to many a country, whats your point?

 

[VoodooAce]

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade

It must have come as a terrible disappointment to some that the war has been prosecuted in such a successful manner.
Everyone was looking forward to dragging out the "quagmire" and "Vietnam" referrences, and were desparately looking for some US failure to delight about, but those damn spoilsports went and did the so called impossible, and overran the country.

Those that feel this way are a very small minority, Simon.

But I do believe that Duh-bya and his admin probably feel that way to some extent. I'm sure they'll keep it going one way, or another. They surely are aware of the fact that this 'war' is the sole reason he has approval ratings above 50% at this point, and that they would absolutely plummet, as did George I's, when this military action comes to an end.

 

[atawa]

Originally posted by shadowwolf
.
We make a habit of saveing everyones asses at our own expense.

Yeah, right, the only reason the US has ever gotten into a war is economics, can you give me one example of this selfsacrifice by the us?

As for Iraq. F*#!´´em. If the chose to follow a facist dictator, and lack of revolt is a choice, then I have no pity for them.

Hmm you grew up in a trailerpark listening to Pat Buchanan tapes?
This is pathetic, you obviously dont know the first thing about Irak, In the last uprising (kurds) saddam exterminated whole villages with chemical weapons. You want to be responsible for your whole town dying couse you want to revolt? Not that you'd have the weapons or the US support (look what happened after the gulf war...........

 

[VoodooAce]

Actually, I think the 'As for Iraq, f*ck em' attitude WAS that of the Sr. Bush's admin.

Afterall, that's exactly what they did once the Kuwaiti oil was resecured.

 

[knowltok3]

Yeah, right, the only reason the US has ever gotten into a war is economics, can you give me one example of this selfsacrifice by the us?

Being a firm believer in the economic concept of rational self interest I can tie just about anything to economics. That being the case I'd love to see you do it with some of the following: (Note that I think it can be done, so don't think I'm saying it can't).

War of 1812
WWII (Both Theatres)
Korea
Vietnam
Grenada
Kosovo
Somalia

Also, since shadow wolf didn't specify war please consider:

The Marshall plan
The Berlin Airlift

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by VoodooAce
I got news for you. The US doesn't wear the white hat, to everyone elses black. Just because you support one blindly and hate the other blindly does not make one always right and the other always wrong.

There's nothing blind about patriotism, and believing in my nation.

There are those of us with the abliity to look at issues in an unbiased manner, from both perspectives, as there are ALWAYS two sides to a story.

I'd hardly consider your leftist views "unbiased." As well, if you are "unbiased" as you claim, it really shows that you don't have the capacity to formulate your own opinions.

 

[scorch]

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade

CORRECT, Mr. Cookie! When a government supports a terrorist group, it is taken out, like was done in Afghanistan. Where it joins the fight against terror, such as the Phillipines and Pakistan, it is aided and brought into the fold. Simple enough, I should think.

If you look back on history, you will find that the terrorists that blew up the rainbow warrior were state funded. And they have not been taken out, NZ wanted to punish them, but being the pussys we are, we handed the over to the french, who 'punished' them, by giving them a permenant holiday on some little island.


The point of my arguement, is not to get justice on the dudes that blew up the RW, but to point out that this war against terror is not including all terrorists. I doubt that the mafia will be taken out in this 'war'.

 

[VoodooAce]

Oh, geez, man. My bad.

Leftist views = biased.

Rightist views = unbiased.

How could I be so blind?

I will always admit it when I think I, or my country, are wrong. Does that make me unpatriotic?

I think not.

 

[amadeus]

I never said I was unbiased. Of course I'm biased! As well as everyone else is.

 

[VoodooAce]

What about my question on patriotism, though?

Can I still be patriotic if I disagree with my country? What if I disagree and voice my feelings? Does this make me unpatriotic?

OR should a patriot never voice his disagreement? Or does a patriot never disagree?

Just curious.

 

[knowltok3]

Originally posted by VoodooAce
What about my question on patriotism, though?

Can I still be patriotic if I disagree with my country? What if I disagree and voice my feelings? Does this make me unpatriotic?

OR should a patriot never voice his disagreement? Or does a patriot never disagree?

Just curious.

You can still be a patriot in my book. Patriotism is not blind support. I do think it lends the benefit of the doubt. It also realizes that perfection is unobtainable and holds its nation to a high standard, not an impossible one. Patriotism is the belief that in the sum total, the nation in question brings more good than evil. It is not wrong or unpatriotic to want that equation to be more favorable and to believe that another course of action would make it more so.

While I don't agree with you on many points Voodoo, I personally don't call into question your patriotism.

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by VoodooAce
What about my question on patriotism, though?

Can I still be patriotic if I disagree with my country? What if I disagree and voice my feelings? Does this make me unpatriotic?

OR should a patriot never voice his disagreement? Or does a patriot never disagree?

Just curious.

You said I had a "blind" faith in my nation, nor did I say anything remotely similar to what you're asking me about.

 

[VoodooAce]

Didn't say you did. Nobody did. Just asking a question.

 

[VoodooAce]

The 'you' in that post wasn't any specific 'you'.

For the sake of simplicity, just replace 'you' with 'one'.

People that are overly, imo, nationalistic are usually the type that only sees their side of an issue.

Such nationalists fail to realize that other nations have nationalists that always believe that THEIR country is right. They are patriots themselves. There's nothing wrong, per se, for looking out for your nations best interests.

The problem is, as I stated in another thread recently, I think those (not targeting any individual, here) right wing/nationalistic types cause an overwhelming majority of todays problems in the world. Bear with me here.

It's the right wing Palestinians and Israelis that perpetuate the violence. There are left wingers on both sides that only want peace....they want the violence to stop. The righties say no, they must respond. They accuse the left wingers of backing the other side, or being soft on the other side, or whatever. Fact is, they just want the violence to stop.

Every nation has people of both ilk. The right wingers dislike the right wingers from adversary nations because the righties from each side are looking out for their side's best interest, which puts them at odds with the righties on the other side of the fence.

Crap, I'm tired and talking in circles. Hopefully you get my meaning, though.

The right wing Palestinians get mad at the left wing Palestinians. They blast them by saying they support the violence Israel does against the Palestinians. The right wing Palestinians are NO DIFFERENT than any other right wingers. You are all the same, even if you argue opposite points.

Check some of the threads about the never ending confict in Isael. It's ridiculous to see righties from each side go at each other. Only thing they have in common is they hate the lefties on their side, but tend to agree with the lefties on the other side. Ridiculous.

So, it's probably not realistic that the other side's lefties are going to be put in charge, so our righties must maintain the first and last line of defense.

I, being a left winger in this sense, believe that both sides in that conflict are guilty. It's like a gang war, with drive bys to retaliate against last nite's drive by. But whenever I voice that opinion on a specific issue, I get blasted by the nationalists, from either side, depending on the issue/circumstance.

If I say Arafat is a D!ck that cares not for his people, but only to wipe Israel from the face of the earth, right wing backers of Palestine will blast me.

If I say the same about Sharon, Israeli righties hate me.

Fact is, I believe fully in both statements.

I also believe that even if Arafat wanted peace, and worked toward it, he'd be a dead man as the right wing there would have none of it.

Same goes for Israel. Fact is, it was unfortunately played out that way with Rabin, when a right winger, that didn't like all this talk about peace, put a bullet in him.

 

[Flatlander Fox]

Ask a soldier of any armed services if he agrees with all of the policies of his nation... And you will usually hear no... But who are the biggest "true" patriots?

The Phillipines present a great opportunity for the Alliance to look good... They already have a government in place, and they have been screaming for help for awhile...

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Flatlander Fox...the key word is ALL...it would be remarkable if anyone anywhere could say that ALL their governmental policies they could approve of...HELL we don't know what most of them are!!!

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by VoodooAce
The 'you' in that post wasn't any specific 'you'.

Then, who am I?

People that are overly, imo, nationalistic are usually the type that only sees their side of an issue.

What's wrong with seeing one side of an issue? If you believe in something, you should pursue it.

The problem is, as I stated in another thread recently, I think those (not targeting any individual, here) right wing/nationalistic types cause an overwhelming majority of todays problems in the world.

Care to give me the merits of that statement?

It's the right wing Palestinians and Israelis that perpetuate the violence. There are left wingers on both sides that only want peace....

As Ronald Reagan put it, "there you go again."

Why would the so-called "right-wing" NOT want peace?

The right wingers dislike the right wingers from adversary nations because the righties from each side are looking out for their side's best interest, which puts them at odds with the righties on the other side of the fence.

That's human nature. There's always an internal sense of loyalty to your nation/ethnic background/tribe/etc.

The right wing Palestinians are NO DIFFERENT than any other right wingers. You are all the same, even if you argue opposite points.

I'd respond, but right now I'm preparing my bomb-making tools for blowing up a local mosque later...

If I say the same about Sharon, Israeli righties hate me.

They damn well should, if you're comparing a terroist like Yasir Arafat to Ariel Sharon.

I also believe that even if Arafat wanted peace, and worked toward it, he'd be a dead man as the right wing there would have none of it.

See my other statement about making statements without merit.

 

[Maj]

What's wrong with seeing one side of an issue? If you believe in something, you should pursue it.

So ignorance is a valid point of view now? I'm hoping I simply misunderstood that...