Pre-Turkey NewsBits

[Eagle25]

With US nuclear submarines, it's simply a deterrant force

only for scumbags who belive in mutually assured destruction, a principal witch is obsolete today for one simple reason:

terrorist groups know the us couldnt launch nukes on other countries after a terrorist attack, therefore making the us nuclear arsenal useless.

Keisuke Takahashi wrote..

Eagle, if we all got together, why would we have to have an army?

to fight against the space invaders!!1

[Dangki]

Ghengis [$t0n3d] wrote..

I am a card carrying member of the Conservative Party

I've never been more shocked in my life.

I'm not being sarcastic either, I really am shocked.

[Exo]

Edited by [user="2677"] @ [time="1038683534"]

Nighthawk, you really need to hold your tongue before you jump to put-downs, because you obviously know nothing about me.

And I think you're ignorant, but opinions don't matter much. Plenty of people agree with you, and plenty don't. Any president we've had who actually has any sense of personal integrety usually isn't very popular with quite a few people. I don't agree with every single policy Bush has made, but I certainly respect him, quite a lot more than the guy he replaced. I can certainly say he's got a lot harder job than any of us here, and it's a lot easier to criticize when you're not the guy who gets held accountable.

And I think you're a moron. I live in Texas, he was my Governor. I know more about him than you could ever dream of. I'll tell you one thing, he's firing my mom, who's a 25 year IRS worker. He's also firing 800,000 more government workers. Sound familiar? Oh wait, you didn't know that. Homeland's pretty great, that's why it's ruining the already shot economy.



Isn't he just precious?

[taffer]

rizzuh wrote..

taffer:

- Made up statistic; you couldn't place it either nor could you name its surrounding countries. Also, totally irrelevant.



Ooh sorry Riz, I bow down before thee.



The statistic was indeed made up - it was an illustrative point on the general standard of education in the US. I could trawl round for exact figures, but the fact remains that most Americans have an introverted view of the world.



I can indeed place Iraq on a map, and its surrounding countries - it's not a very difficult task.



As regards Kyoto - even the Senate might have a biased viewpoint, considering that the US is the biggest consumer of non-renewable resources in the world. In fact, it uses almost all of the oil it produces, and imports more to satisfy its needs. Which brings us to Iraq.



It doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to come to the conclusion that, within the next decade, the US wants a pro-USA government in Iraq (which currently holds the 2nd largest known oil reserves in the world), so that the US can purchase oil outside of OPEC at rates that suit them.



I'm afraid, underneath all the propaganda, it's all about oil. Hate to be bleak, simplistic, etc. but that's what it is about.



And, no - this isn't the view of tree-hugging commie conspirators.



If you've actually studied international relations then you might be able to appreciate the full picture.



But then again, I MUST be wrong, because you are Rizzuh, and Rizzuh is ALWAYS right, like all Americans HAVE to be.



U-S-A, U-S-A, *insert flag waving antics here*, U-S-A,.................

[Ghengis]

Dangki wrote..

I've never been more shocked in my life.



I'm not being sarcastic either, I really am shocked.

It is not to say that I am particularly happy witht he state of the party, merely that my views on the running on the country are more right of centre than Tony and his cronies. 20 Billion overspend being self evident, more strikes to come? Oh yes, wouldnt have happened oin Maggies time I can tell ya, she would have told em where to go.



And Taffer, I did IR at Kent, under Merv Frost, he was well in to Normative theory, another seriously flawed western method of anlaysis which the americans are even more guilty than we. There are no norms, or universal truths.

[rizzuh]

Ghengis [$t0n3d] wrote..

U say government in the US is 'by the people for the people' when only some 40 odd percent of your people bothered to pick this warmonger (Sorry I would be a republican if I was a Yank, but still, the guy is a complete asshole, an ex-coke shniffing two face liar and all round yehaw cowboy!) Shit I may as well be your next President! So really its government by a few of the people.

Both major candidates had 48% of the popular vote. In addition, we also have two legislatures which are voted in. This is not a government of the few. While I do not always agree with most Americas, please do not attack our democracy simply because you don't believe in one man's politics.



President Bush is a liar who has done coke and is also a complete asshole. I'm glad you could interject your opinions into this conversation. I highly doubt you follow what Bush even does since the majority of his duties are internal. Your opinions are based off of your own political bias and your opinion of UN v Iraq. Personally, I don't think you can judge someone's moral character simply because you disagree with their thoughts.



How many people elected your queen again? Yes I am well aware that she does nothing, but give me a break if you think the US isn't a representative democracy.



1) Selling weapons to Israel or using Saudi Arabia as a launching stage for the war in Iraq (with complete permission) does not disrespect a nation's sovereignty. What Muslims think of America is secondary: their opinions do not matter in their own country and they do not matter in the global scope at all. What they think is also molded by heavily state controlled media, so I really don't care what any uninformed Muslim thinks about America's foreign policy. And considering the education systems that are poor and the incredible lack of unbiased media, very few are informed.



2) Yes, the League of Nations failed because of no American involvement. If you think otherwise you are clearly the one with bias. Kyoto has also failed due to no US involvement. This is not me thinking that my country is great and important, this is me knowing the facts.



taffer:

- Americans in general know more about the world than most other countries. Only Americans are allowed to call the US education system poor. It is true that it does need a lot of work, but this is all relative. We have among the best education systems in the world, easily within the top 5. Keeping that in mind, it's also the largest public education system ever.



You're incorrect if you think knowing everything about every other country is something everyone in the world should master. In every single country, the vast majority of people are incredibly stupid. Yes, stupid people cannot place the UK on a map. This doesn't really mean anything besides that stupid people are stupid. Thanks.



Iraq is not something most students study. They have not been involved in world affairs until recently. I'm almost glad that most people can't place Iraq. I know where it is, but I don't act like I know its borders. It's near Iran and Saudi Arabia. Luckily, we didn't waste class time learning the world map instead of doing something productive.



A hell of a lot more people in America know exactly what the hell is going on with Iraq while still not being able to place them on a world map. That information is far more valuable than arbitrary borders and where exactly the 'no fly zone' is. The big picture is much more useful than the microscope's slide. For example, you claim to be able to place Iraq on a map but can you name the Iraqi head of parliament (I'm sure you knew they had a parliament because you're a genius about everything Iraq)? I'll field this one for you: no.



- I don't believe that you could point out Iraq on a blank world map, nor do I believe that you can name its surrounding countries from memory. If you can, congratulations. You have some useless knowledge and you think you're very smart because of it. Too because you're all crazy



- Of course the US Senate is biased in favor of America. Just like every single government in the world likes its own country. Kyoto is never going to pass. The world, if it wants America's involvement, will have to have a new plan. Kyoto would be great if economists didn't predict that 2+ million Americans would lose their jobs over it.



Oh yes we're greedy and selfish because we want to have food and be able to support our families. Oh no, evil Americans at it again! Bush didn't choose a very elegant way to exit Kyoto, but it was dead long before he came into office.



- We already get a lot of oil from Iraq. From America companies. I am very cynical but I do not believe that what's going on with Iraq right now is based on oil. I'm sure oil is a political concern and maybe a factor in favor of ridding Soddom, but it is not deciding. The guy has disrespected your country by ignoring UN mandates, he has tried to murder a former president, and there is absolutely no doubt that he wants to get a hold of "weapons of mass destruction." And his country has a lot of oil.



And even if it were all about oil.. Jesus, it's just the lesser of two evils. A dictator that removes basic rights, kills his own citizens, and wants to hold the power to murder millions more, or a pro-US democracy that gives Western countries good rates on oil. Wow, that's a tough one.



So, yes, I realize that when Bush wanted to go directly into Iraq without UN approval that it was utterly rushed and very stupid. I didn't sit on a fence protesting, however, because in the end I don't really care about the sovereignty of Iraq because its own people are not treated with the due respect and rights that comes with living in a sovereign nation.



- Apparently I'm not allowed to have an opinion without coming off as acting like your opinion is totally involved ("LOL RIZZUH IS RIGHT"). It's good to know that you can have an opinion but I cannot. You are a great man.



- Please don't act like I'm some flag waving idiot. I love America just as much as you love your country, but we're a superpower so it's apparently totally wrong for me to love my country. What a load. Your country has a flag just like everyone elses'.



Also, please look up the word trawl before using it in the future.

[Eagle25]

Edited by [user="26788"] @ [time="1038695603"]

What Muslims think of America is secondary: their opinions do not matter in their own country and they do not matter in the global scope at all

sure but when the us gets attacked by bin laden evreyone is wondering why

The guy has disrespected your country by ignoring UN mandates

dont forget to mention that israel has violated over twice as many resolutions then iraq (around 57)

[Dangki]

Not all Muslims live in Iraq.

[abel]

cruZ. wrote..

The new bond movie sucked. Invisible cars, DNA replacement, a huge laser beam from the sky...



There joking right?



Sorry for ruining it.

wow thank you. now could you please give me directions to your house so that i may stick a 2x4 up your ass you fucking prick.

[-:Nighthawk:-]

Dangki wrote...

Not all Muslims live in Iraq.

Of course not, and that wasn't implied. The vast majority, however, live in a number of middle-eastern nations which do not allow freedom of information within their borders. The point was simply that most Muslims live in countries where they simply aren't able to be informed, due to the government in place over them. It's not that Muslims are dumb or anything, it's simply that many never get a chance to figure out the world for themselves. And if they don't really have a clue what's going on in the world in reality, but are simply the victims of an effective propaganda machine, why are we supposed to care about their views of America? It's not the opinions of many people, but rather many people repeating the opinions of a few.



Iraq is actually one of the least strictly Muslim nations in the area, but the political restrictions more than make up for some of the looser religious restrictions in place.

Eagle25 wrote...

dont forget to mention that israel has violated over twice as many resolutions then iraq (around 57)

There have been 32 propositions since 1968 that Israel has violated (Turkey has violated 24 since 1974, for a comparison).



Looking at which they've violated, most have been over issues of settlements and annexation, namely, Israeli's settling in areas where the UN decided that they shouldn't live, and annexation of East Jerusalem. The few remaining were calls to stop using force against Palestinians and expelling them from the country. Yes, this is including those poor, unfortunate Palestinians that blow themselves up along with a bus full of women and kids, and who grab their AK-47's and shoot people returning from church services.



I don't see how any of these violations are on the same scale as creating weapons of mass destruction after already using chemical weapons against your own people.



Israelies can freely write their own newspaper calling for the removal of their leaders, and they won't find themselves tossed in prison as a result. Freedom of thought and religion are allowed there, and there's due process of law. Those are the types of things that we look for in countries, and respect. Most modern European countries also feature similar freedoms, even if there are various limitations here and there, which is acceptable.



So basically we're looking at how a country treats its own citizens and other countries. Iraq has a terrible record on both accounts. I can't name a country that has a perfect record, but there's a big difference between screwing up on occasion while trying to do the right thing, and constantly oppressing everyone.



As much as I hate the oppression of the Iraqi people, though, it pales in my mind by comparison to what China does on a daily basis. I really, really despise the leadership of China, and their flagrant violation of more than half of the basic human rights defined by the UN. I suppose when you're oppressing billions instead of millions, the scale just makes it that much worse in my mind. But I'll try not to get started on that, because if you think I've typed too much here already, you should see the amount I've put into research papers on the subject of China... ugh.

Eagle25 wrote...

terrorist groups know the us couldnt launch nukes on other countries after a terrorist attack, therefore making the us nuclear arsenal useless.

Yes, our ICBM forces aren't a deterrant against lone terrorist groups. They are a deterrant against any government sponsoring terrorists, as US military doctrine is to respond to weapons of mass destruction (whatever kind they may be) with our own weapons of mass destruction (nukes). Because of our policy of holding those who fund and support terrorists equally responsible as the terrorists who actually do the acts of terrorism, a country would have to think long and hard if they were willing to risk being wiped off the map.



The main point of our ICBM forces, however, is to prevent large-scale wars turning nuclear. I know it seems ironic to have these weapons with the purpose of never using them, but it makes sense when you think about it. The USA is the only thing standing between a number of conflicts starting. We're the only reason China isn't trying to militarily take over Taiwan at the moment. There's quite a few countries (unfortunately) who have nuclear weapons. Some of them are a little more rash than others, and would likely be willing to use their arsenal were it not for the moderating influence of Russia and America.



No one dares attack our allies in anything other than a conventional war, because they know their country would not survive doing otherwise. Likewise, our allies with nukes can't go launching them left and right, as they know Russia would not hesitate to respond with equal force. Disarmament is great, to a certain point, but what would we do if we got rid of all our nukes, along with everyone else, only to find out that another country had secretly developed their own nuclear weapons? Heck, even North Korea is claiming to have a nuclear missle program now, even though they're breaking their earlier agreements by doing so.



Like I said, it's not a fantastic way for things to be, but unfortunately we can't go back in time and uninvent everything that's been created. Luckily relations between Russia and America, the two largest nuclear powers, have gotten a lot better, and we don't have to worry so much about world destruction.

Ghengis wrote...

I would like to take this opportunity to apologise on behalf of my nation, for controlling two thirds of the planets surface at one time under the British Empire and unfortunately unleashing America upon the rest of the world. The responsibilty is ours and we must pay the price of being the USA's bitch for all time as pennance.

I don't understand why you are so negative toward the United States. We'll crack jokes about Europe and any other place in the world, but when it comes down to it, most Americans respect the UK quite a bit, and don't in any way view your country as "our bitch." Britain was the world's most powerful nation for quite some time, and (in my opinion) unfortunately released a lot of that control. Yeah, there have been a lot of things that the British did to their colonies that were less than respectable. But overall, nations under Britain were much more prosperous than the colonies of other nations, and the British were a blessing, overall.



After gaining independance from the Commonwealth, many nations plummeted into chaos, incapable of ruling themselves effectively at this point in time. Most of Africa is still much worse off liberated than it was under British rule. Certainly not ideal, but a lot better than the alternative, sadly. But, of course, postmodern education wants to tell us that all conquests, all empires, and all nations that controlled other areas were evil scourges on the every land they set foot on, because that's what's politically correct.



The joys of debating politics. Enjoy it while it lasts, because most threads that head this way end up getting half the comments deleted. :)

[Ghengis]

Ok Ive pressed a wrong button once and lost 50 minutes of my life as a result so I shall endeavour to recreate the jist of my lost post.



Rze, you are obviously more politically aware than the majority of people and I applaud you fro this. Hoever you are surely aware that the 48% that voted for your president, are only some 48% of hte 40% of eligible voters that botherd to vote at all. I believe the latest election was finally resolved by the electoral college. Hardly of the people for the people.



If you think representatvie democracy works, fine, then pursue your false consciousness to its ends. If you think that your founding fathers for one moment intended representitive democracy to represent all people then you are sorely mistaken. They scertainly never intended for women and slaves to have the vote, nevermind the working classes. They intended people with an interest in the nation to posess the vote and this is still true today. (I agree with this)

Perversley to the point of where money buys nearly all the influence in Washington, with their pork barrelling, fillibustering Pressure Group stagnated politics. And we all know what money is the root of yes?



My opinions are based upon four years of Politics and International Relations with special subjects Transition to Industrial Revolution, American Politics and Government and American Political Society.

I say again nose out or nose in all.



Do not pick and choose what is to benefit your selves, and play it off to the world as a necessary evil. Eagles comment was bang on.



Hawky, man oh man, I have lost one of the best posts of all time, by trying to quote a marked comment at the end of my healthy essay. I have spent the last hour calming down and trying not to cry



The thrust of it is as follows. The Muslim world has no need for the freedoms which you take to be so inherent. Islam is a way of life based upon the word of god. The submission of ones earthly will to the will of Allah, as defined in the Quran, which is the word of god himself. It is taken by every Muslim as the truth, so one cannot argue with such a degree of conviction or belief. Gods will is final, a muslim exists only to glorify and worhsip god, so that he may be rewarded with paradise in the after life. We are different formthe jinn and the angels in that we have free will, we have that free will as a test against the temptations of Shaitan. Work, food, pleasure are all etremely low down on the list of necessities. It is our duty to come to Allah, under our own free will and then subjugate the temptations of pleasure and the flesh etc, in order to purify the soul and get closer to god, ultimately acending to paradise áfter the day of Judgement. Do you go invading Amish communities forcing free speech and the press upon them?



This is why the west will never get the Islamic way. We pray five times a day. So that we may never forget God or become lax on the matter whihc is always of ultimate importance to us, the position of our eternal soul. We are told that to sin will result in hell, so people try not to sin. We see temptation coming a very close second to sin, so the west to us appears extremely sinful. Islam is now quite an old religion and there has been scope over time for it to be preverted by those in power for their own good.



However the essence remains the same. What need of freedom is there when all you need to do is worshiop god ? This life is merely a passing stage before we get to the hereafter. This is the truth, the norms that muslims see. They are very very different from your western secular views. We are of an age before, as the religion was layed down in that age. We are more like the orthadox Jew, the Greek Orthoidox Christian, the Amish community in some ways. No manner of rational argument can compete with faith.



I darent even say that my 'modern' approach to islam is the right one. Many would call me a kafir or non believer. This is why I dont really have any faith left in organised religion. Read the Quran and its teachings you may be surprised. I try and folow it, but one of the most often said phrases in the book, is that Allah is the most beneficent, the most merciful. This is where my faith lies, in the kindness of Allah, coem the Day of Judgement I will pay ofr my sins, but ultimately I will seek forgiveness, and hoipe the pros of my life, will out weiegh the sins, and lead me to redemption slavation etc.



I can tell you that there are at least a billion people on the planet that believe this in at least a similar form. Islam is the fastest growing religion in existence. And that 1/5th of the worlds population do not as a whole wish the west any harm. However it is not for the west to impose the views of its own norms and truths upon other alien cultures.



Islam is our 'space invaders' of today, but you are wrong to fear it. There is no evangelism within islam, all 'conversion' (or reversion as we believe that everyone is born muslim,) should happen by example and this occurs by the nonmuslim seeing the muslim in their everyday life and being attracted to its simplicity, its discipline and the obvious happiness of the muslim.



Today the muslims are losing their way, and to some degreee this is because of the influence and example of western ideals.



The last version was sooo much better than this, but what im saying is your not right because you know your self to be. My truth is my truth as is all of the worlds. There is no such thing as basic human rights before a religous zealot, and through the manipulaiton of power poeple twist religion to benefit their aims.



To impose your ideals upon the world is to be the threat to world culture that evryone fears you to be, and we judge you by your own doctrines of indivuality and freedom of speech!



Therefore a sovereign nation has the right to deny freedom of speech, if people within that sovereign antion dont like it, so be it, they will either be oppressed and free themselves in the future or remain oppressed. It is NOT your place to change the world to suit you.



However being civilised peoples , we can agree to disagree cant we?

Added @ [time="1038746587"]

Oh I remember what I missed now, Yes we did run a lot of the world and brought a lot of good to it too. We also layed the foundations for almost every major conflict of the twentieth centruy, and at least if not us, then some other european clonial ower. Cant we just learn from history and keep our noses out of other peoples business? War on terror fine, invading a nation over one man, not fine, I still think the Afghanistan thing was perhaps one of the greatest travesties of international Law, and has set perhaps the worst precendet possible.



I have the natural pride of being English, (not british) adna teensey bit of Jealousy towards the superpowers of today. However England percieves it self as being the US' bitch, and so do many of the worlds nations. George Michaels Wag the DOg, was greeted with groans, of yea yeah, do we have to be reminded of it. Not outrage. Tony Blair sucks it mate, s'true! He bends over and gets it good from Dubbya!

[Eagle25]

Edited by [user="26788"] @ [time="1038755114"]

I still think the Afghanistan thing was perhaps one of the greatest travesties of international Law

while i do agree with you, i belive afganistan was good, not for bombing al-quaida but for removing the taliban witch as we all know was a pretty radical regime.

i however dont see the point of deploying a massive military force just to bomb a few caves and kill 30 guys armed with old soviet weaponry..



oh yea and speaking about afghanistan, that was the most hilarious military campaign ive ever seen, more "coalition" soldiers were killed by freindly fire and equipment malfunction (plane, choppers crashing) then by enemy fire.



o and also im surprised bin laden left before the bombing started, how could he have known with evrey major us network going live 24/7 givin detailed battle plans lol

[-:Nighthawk:-]

Ghengis [$t0n3d] wrote..

Ok Ive pressed a wrong button once and lost 50 minutes of my life as a result so I shall endeavour to recreate the jist of my lost post.

I hate it when that happens. I now often use notepad to edit my longer posts, just like I never compose emails in the hotmail browser anymore, ugh.

If you think representatvie democracy works, fine, then pursue your false consciousness to its ends.

It's done us pretty good so far, I'd say, as I seldom meet an American who would rather have any other form of government.

My opinions are based upon four years of Politics and International Relations with special subjects Transition to Industrial Revolution, American Politics and Government and American Political Society.

I say again nose out or nose in all.

Obviously you've done your own studies. Of course, everyone (myself included) takes their own perspective into these issues, so we often view issues in our own personal light, so we can't expect to always agree.

Do not pick and choose what is to benefit your selves, and play it off to the world as a necessary evil.

I can't say that America is innocent of ever doing this, but then again, how many countries are? It seems to be natural for countries to try to achieve things that are good for themselves (and if possible their allies) over others. Not really a condemning point, imho.

I have spent the last hour calming down and trying not to cry

Hehehe... :)

The thrust of it is as follows. The Muslim world has no need for the freedoms which you take to be so inherent.

I think this shows the basic difference in perspective. I am religious myself, and so part of me imagines living in a country where the religion I am a part of was the only religion, and everyone obeyed it. The thing is, would everyone be following it for the right reasons?



So, from my perspective, until such a time as God himself comes down from on high in a form that's unmistakable and shows the world what He wishes us to be doing religiously, then we can't be forcing others to believe as us. You mention that Muslims don't try to convert anyone, but unfortunately ignore the fact that, living in a country with a national religion, in essence you are attempting to convert everyone within that nation.

Do you go invading Amish communities forcing free speech and the press upon them?

Amish communities already have free speech and press. They don't have a lot of technology by their own choosing, but any person within an Amish community can choose to leave that organization at will, and it's not considered wrong by themselves for an Amish person to read a newspaper. They limit what technology they choose to use as a community, but they still are free to excercise any of the rights of an American citizen. Bad analogy, imho.

This is why the west will never get the Islamic way.

...

What need of freedom is there when all you need to do is worshiop god ?

Basic difference of view. You say, no need for freedom as we worship god. We say we need freedom to worship god in the manner our faith tells us we should (or not at all, for some).

No manner of rational argument can compete with faith.

That is very true. Unfortunately, I'm not a big proponent of "blind faith" but rather having faith in something because of the things you have seen, and being able to reconcile the two.

Today the muslims are losing their way, and to some degreee this is because of the influence and example of western ideals.

There are definite downsides of freedom. You get more things going on in a free society than in an oppressed one. Personally, I disagree with some of the extents to which our freedoms have been taken, which has made the western world seem even more corrupt. For example, I don't think free speech was intended to protect pornography. But, I live in a society that for the most part ignores the religious morals that our country was based on, as people want to do as they please. Not really my ideal for a country, but certainly better than having someone else's religion forced upon me.

My truth is my truth as is all of the worlds.

Unlike most relativistic people, I do believe there is an absolute right and wrong, and one truth. However, I cannot claim I have perfect understanding of these absolutes. I definitely don't believe that there can be truth for one person that's not truth for another. Some people are wrong, some are right, probably most of us are wrong more often than right. :)

To impose your ideals upon the world is to be the threat to world culture that evryone fears you to be, and we judge you by your own doctrines of indivuality and freedom of speech!

Again, we believe in freedom of the individual. This is not the same thing as the freedom of a religious political leader to impose his will on millions of others. Nobody here is trying to say that you shouldn't be able to be a Muslim, simply that you should allow Muslims to each choose whether they're able to excercise freedom. I doubt that we would ever agree on this point, however.

However being civilised peoples , we can agree to disagree cant we?

Us civilized people, indeed. :) And it's control the center, not centre! Crazy Brit spellings, heh. But yeah, ultimately it always comes down to agreeing to disagree, as I doubt any of us will convert another CSN viewer to our way of looking at things. :)

War on terror fine, invading a nation over one man, not fine, I still think the Afghanistan thing was perhaps one of the greatest travesties of international Law, and has set perhaps the worst precendet possible.

It wasn't over one man. Sure, there's one guy that stands out as the biggest target of all, but the point was the Talliban was supporting him and had knowledge of the attacks planned. Support + Knowledge = Responsibility in our view. That was an act of war against the United States, and as such, we responded with war, as any nation does.



The fact that their government was completely against the ideals of ours did play a factor, just like it did in the early 1940's with Germany and Japan. Guess what, we changed those governments to a form we supported, and haven't had military conflict with them since. And again in our battles post WWII, you haven't seen us duking it out with true democracies, because real democracies aren't causing the problems.

However England percieves it self as being the US' bitch, and so do many of the worlds nations. George Michaels Wag the DOg, was greeted with groans, of yea yeah, do we have to be reminded of it.

Funny movie. There have been issues that England has asked America to back her up on, and for the most part, we've always done so. How often to England and America vote opposite directions in the UN? It's like a brotherhood there, our two countries sticking up for each other's interests. I'm curious how the EU will affect that.

Eagle25 wrote..

while i do agree with you, i belive afganistan was good, not for bombing al-quaida but for removing the taliban witch as we all know was a pretty radical regime.

i however dont see the point of deploying a massive military force just to bomb a few caves and kill 30 guys armed with old soviet weaponry..

I'm reading this, trying to find a hint of sarcasm, but unfortunately finding none. Do you have any clue at all how many enemy soldiers we killed in Afghanistan? 30 guys?!? Let me guess, you also think we only killed 50 guys armed with AK's and one or two scud missiles during our war with Iraq, not the 150,000+ that we actually killed.



Unfortunately, it hasn't been enough time since the major military operations have been in full battle there, to get accurate information on the numbers of enemy deaths. Due to some of the nature of our combat (some of it was bombing caves, though certainly not the majority) we may never know. However, just from a few individual conflict reports, one can easily come up with a number in the hundreds, and it's likely more in the several thousand range.

oh yea and speaking about afghanistan, that was the most hilarious military campaign ive ever seen, more "coalition" soldiers were killed by freindly fire and equipment malfunction (plane, choppers crashing) then by enemy fire.

Hilarious? You're sick. I don't find any aspect of loss of life to be funny, whether those of my country or those of another. Life is precious, and it's a damn shame that we don't have better ways of fixing certain problems.



Well, there we go boys, I doubt I'll respond to another post after this, as I'm about done with the subject. We've said what can be said, and now it comes to the "agree to disagree" point that's been mentioned. Fun to debate things sometimes. :)