Archive

Republican candidates for 2012

  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066829 wrote:I realize it just fine..as you said, it's not that hard to figure out. I just happen to be of the opinion that flying heavies into buildings is a bit on the overkill side, and the idea that we should bend our foreign policy to appease these little dickheads is ridiculous.
    Appease, absolutely not. We should have went after them with vigor. Only them. We should have went in and absolutely no remorse destroyed Al-Qaeda to the point that they didn't have the ability to influence the region significantly or recruit. If the Taliban had got in the way of that action we should have dealt with them as well. After that we should have been done with it.
  • sleeper
    I Wear Pants;1066831 wrote:You seriously didn't understand the point?

    The point is that at best there are now 66,000 Iraqi civilians whose families and friends will remember who they were shot by, bombed, or otherwise killed by.
    This was exactly my point. Thanks IWP, I'm glad someone understood it.
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066822 wrote:At the request/permission of their government. Perfectly legit. Fail.



    How do they "brutally oppress" their people    ? Yes, they have harsh punishments for crimes. So do a lot of other Muslim nations. Treat women like crap? Check...they all do that. So what do they do, that say, Iran or Syria don't do?



    LOL...hundreds of thousands? Bullshit. Link me.



    Hyperbole much? Oh yeah, I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind.



    I don't recall saying that. If I did, please point out where. Thanks.
    http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/June/Boys-Death-Symbolizes-Syrias-Oppression/

    Torture and murder of 13 year old children sounds like brutalizing their people.
  • majorspark
    I Wear Pants;1066831 wrote:The point is that at best there are now 66,000 Iraqi civilians whose families and friends will remember who they were shot by, bombed, or otherwise killed by. Regardless of whether it was an accident or whatever, there's a shitload of Iraqi citizens that in all likelihood have a burning hatred for the United States now?
    There was a shitload more Japanese with a burning hatred. Perhaps we did not beat the Iraqis ass hard enough.
    I Wear Pants;1066831 wrote: If we don't understand why 9/11 happened how can we hope to prevent it?
    We make anyone scared shitless of the hell we will unleash if they try and pull something like that off again.
  • I Wear Pants
    majorspark;1066848 wrote:There was a shitload more Japanese with a burning hatred. Perhaps we did not beat the Iraqis ass hard enough.



    We make anyone scared shitless of the hell we will unleash if they try and pull something like that off again.
    You have the exact same ideals that the people you hate do.
  • sleeper
    I Wear Pants;1066849 wrote:You have the exact same ideals that the people you hate do.
    I lol'd. That is the ironic part. A lot of people in this country have an ethnocentric view of the world and have no idea that while an American might be more to us than an Iraqi, the Iraqis feel the exact same way.
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066831 wrote:You seriously didn't understand the point?

    The point is that at best there are now 66,000 Iraqi civilians whose families and friends will remember who they were shot by, bombed, or otherwise killed by. Regardless of whether it was an accident or whatever, there's a ****load of Iraqi citizens that in all likelihood have a burning hatred for the United States now.

    Blowback, there are reactions to the policies and actions we implement abroad. Just like it took quite a few years for us to see the reaction for us interfering in the middle east in the 80s and 90s with 9/11 it may well take years for us to see the reaction to our current occupations.
    I understand his point perfectly. However, he's talking about a completely different issue. The question was what specific events led to 9/11. Iraq has nothing to do with that.
    Will there be blowback from Iraq? Time will tell. I think however, that it's reasonable to say that there were a "shitload of Iraqis" that had zero love for us well before we threw down on them.
    sleeper;1066833 wrote:I'm merely providing you the framework from your own ignorance. The US won't see the retaliation from this war on terror for many decades. Same with 9/11. I said CB would likely provide an answer to your own specific question.
    Which as you can see, has been summarily sliced & diced. But tbqh, you're not providing anything. You're talking about 2 separate instances. I guess I'm not shocked you don't realize that...I'm afraid you're just not as good at this as you think you are. You should probably stick the the General board and the titty threads. :cool:
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066845 wrote:http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/June/Boys-Death-Symbolizes-Syrias-Oppression/

    Torture and murder of 13 year old children sounds like brutalizing their people.
    That's in Syria...CB is talking about Saudi. But thanks for just proving my point for me.
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066838 wrote:Appease, absolutely not. We should have went after them with vigor. Only them. We should have went in and absolutely no remorse destroyed Al-Qaeda to the point that they didn't have the ability to influence the region significantly or recruit. If the Taliban had got in the way of that action we should have dealt with them as well. After that we should have been done with it.
    Uh, the Taliban kinda did "get in the way," if you recall. And we in fact did pretty much exactly what you just said. The issue is that it's Afghanistan. Once you have boots on the ground, it's an unwinnable theater. Ask the Russians. We got sucked in just like they did and are paying the price for it.
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066859 wrote:Uh, the Taliban kinda did "get in the way," if you recall. And we in fact did pretty much exactly what you just said. The issue is that it's Afghanistan. Once you have boots on the ground, it's an unwinnable theater. Ask the Russians. We got sucked in just like they did and are paying the price for it.
    No we didn't. We went into nationbuilding mode to try to secure resources for ourselves after we defeated the enemy.

    We should have went, killed the people responsible and those that tried to get in the way of that (Taliban) and then left. That's it.
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066858 wrote:That's in Syria...CB is talking about Saudi. But thanks for just proving my point for me.
    I'm tarded. ;)
  • sleeper
    fish82;1066856 wrote:
    Which as you can see, has been summarily sliced & diced. But tbqh, you're not providing anything. You're talking about 2 separate instances. I guess I'm not shocked you don't realize that...I'm afraid you're just not as good at this as you think you are. You should probably stick the the General board and the titty threads. :cool:
    Your intellectual integrity has been ruined. I don't know how that feels, but it must be terrible.
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066856 wrote:I understand his point perfectly. However, he's talking about a completely different issue. The question was what specific events led to 9/11. Iraq has nothing to do with that.
    Will there be blowback from Iraq? Time will tell. I think however, that it's reasonable to say that there were a "shitload of Iraqis" that had zero love for us well before we threw down on them.
    And you think they had zero love for no reason, they just hated the US right?

    It would be because of the actions we had done by supporting Saddam in the war against Iran because it was convenient for our then current foreign policy goals and then fighting him in the late 80s/early 90s and promising help to those that wanted regime change but then we never really gave them that help. Again, even if we had the best of intentions we were fucking around in other people's business. People don't just randomly hate us.
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066863 wrote:No we didn't. We went into nationbuilding mode to try to secure resources for ourselves after we defeated the enemy.

    We should have went, killed the people responsible and those that tried to get in the way of that (Taliban) and then left. That's it.
    I left the nationbuilding out as part of my "sucked in." You're right on that...although other than Opium and goats, I'm not sure what "resources" the region as to offer. My point was we did in fact render AQ relatively impotent. The majority of their infastructure is gone, their communications/money flow have been seriously disrupted, and they're overall nowhere near what they once were
  • majorspark
    I Wear Pants;1066849 wrote:You have the exact same ideals that the people you hate do.
    I don't expect them to be happy with us. I understand why they even hate us. I understand why the native americans still hold a little hatred in their hearts today against the USA. But I am still going to kick back and relax on this little plot I own that my government took from them. I am just being a realist. I do not agree with everthing our nation does or everytime it has gone to war. But this idealist view that if we just be nice the world will be a happy place is not going to happen.
  • Cleveland Buck
    fish82;1066822 wrote:At the request/permission of their government. Perfectly legit. Fail.
    Sure at the request of their government. We own their government. Not at the request of their people though.


    fish82;1066822 wrote: How do they "brutally oppress" their people? Yes, they have harsh punishments for crimes. So do a lot of other Muslim nations. Treat women like crap? Check...they all do that. So what do they do, that say, Iran or Syria don't do?
    Pants showed you a link. You could google a lot more of them if you cared to. You don't though, because Bill O would suggest you aren't a patriot then.

    And Saudi Arabia does the same thing nearly every Arab government does. And we give them all foreign aid to keep their dictators in power. And their people all hate us. The one exception is ironically Iran. We don't give them foreign aid and their people are more pro-America than any other Arab nation, or at least they were before we started sanctioning them and trying to starve them out.
    fish82;1066822 wrote:LOL...hundreds of thousands? Bullshit. Link me.
    Look at the wikipedia page. It has like 10 different sourced estimates. None of which are less than 100,000.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions


    fish82;1066822 wrote:Hyperbole much? Oh yeah, I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind.
    Yes, I understand you aren't happy with the frequency we bombed the Iraqi people in the 90s, that incidentally never attacked us.
    fish82;1066822 wrote:I don't recall saying that. If I did, please point out where. Thanks.
    I didn't say you did. I was asking you if you thought that way.
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066867 wrote:And you think they had zero love for no reason, they just hated the US right?

    It would be because of the actions we had done by supporting Saddam in the war against Iran because it was convenient for our then current foreign policy goals and then fighting him in the late 80s/early 90s and promising help to those that wanted regime change but then we never really gave them that help. Again, even if we had the best of intentions we were ****ing around in other people's business. People don't just randomly hate us.
    So they were pissed because we helped them not become a province of Iran, and then because we had the nerve to kick them out of one of our allies whom they invaded without provocation. Those seem like good reasons. :cool:

    Lots of countries fuck around in other people's business. It's the way the world works, like it or not.
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066875 wrote:So they were pissed because we helped them not become a province of Iran, and then because we had the nerve to kick them out of one of our allies whom they invaded without provocation. Those seem like good reasons. :cool:

    Lots of countries fuck around in other people's business. It's the way the world works, like it or not.
    Well yeah, because we started the chain of events that put that regime of Iran in power. Again, shit we interfered with.

    There's the good ole GOP attitude from majorsparks and fish..."well, we're going to be assholes because, um, it's convenient for us and um, that how the world works".
  • I Wear Pants
    Cleveland Buck, my link was for Syria because I can't read so that point isn't exactly valid. My bad. Though I imagine there are similar things going on in Saudia. *absconds to Google*
    majorspark;1066872 wrote:I don't expect them to be happy with us. I understand why they even hate us. I understand why the native americans still hold a little hatred in their hearts today against the USA. But I am still going to kick back and relax on this little plot I own that my government took from them. I am just being a realist. I do not agree with everthing our nation does or everytime it has gone to war. But this idealist view that if we just be nice the world will be a happy place is not going to happen.
    This is a lazy and pathetic view. What if people had that attitude about everything? Slavery, women's rights, diseases, technology, etc. The world is a better place because people strive to change "the way things are". You make fun of them for being what you see as idealist while I'll applaud them for actually trying to do something good instead of relying on the fact that they were lucky enough to be born in a place that doesn't suck.
  • fish82
    Cleveland Buck;1066873 wrote:Sure at the request of their government. We own their government. Not at the request of their people though.
    LOL...their government could buy and sell our asses.
    Cleveland Buck;1066873 wrote:Pants showed you a link. You could google a lot more of them if you cared to. You don't though, because Bill O would suggest you aren't a patriot then.
    Which was for Syria, proving my point. Sweet strawman though...well played. :rolleyes:
    Cleveland Buck;1066873 wrote:And Saudi Arabia does the same thing nearly every Arab government does. And we give them all foreign aid to keep their dictators in power. And their people all hate us. The one exception is ironically Iran. We don't give them foreign aid and their people are more pro-America than any other Arab nation, or at least they were before we started sanctioning them and trying to starve them out.
    Actually, there are several countries that we don't give any foreign aid to...and several more where it's negligible.


    Cleveland Buck;1066873 wrote:Look at the wikipedia page. It has like 10 different sourced estimates. None of which are less than 100,000.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions
    And none of which can tie any concrete number of deaths directly related to sanctions...they merely estimate the deaths that took place while they were in effect. I think I remember reading that Saddam offed one or two of his own people during that time period too.

    Cleveland Buck;1066873 wrote:Yes, I understand you aren't happy with the frequency we bombed the Iraqi people in the 90s, that incidentally never attacked us.
    And deflecting...predictable. Sorry for having the nerve to call you out on your hyperbole. My bad. :cool:
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066880 wrote:Cleveland Buck, my link was for Syria because I can't read so that point isn't exactly valid. My bad. Though I imagine there are similar things going on in Saudia. *absconds to Google*

    This is a lazy and pathetic view. What if people had that attitude about everything? Slavery, women's rights, diseases, technology, etc. The world is a better place because people strive to change "the way things are". You make fun of them for being what you see as idealist while I'll applaud them for actually trying to do something good instead of relying on the fact that they were lucky enough to be born in a place that doesn't suck.
    Ironically, all of those things were eventually set right without flying any planes into buildings. Wierd, huh?
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066892 wrote:Ironically, all of those things were eventually set right without flying any planes into buildings. Wierd, huh?
    When the fuck did I suggest anything like that?

    I was speaking about a separate topic from 9/11 there which was obviously majorspark's and your idea that "it's just the way the world works" is a valid excuse to do things that even majorsparks said he doesn't always agree with.

    Those things were not fixed by saying "not worth getting upset about, it's just the way things are even if we disagree". That is a cowardly way to go about problems.

    And slavery wasn't exactly set right peacefully. Or really set right at all for hundreds of years.
  • fish82
    sleeper;1066865 wrote:Your intellectual integrity has been ruined. I don't know how that feels, but it must be terrible.
    LOL...coming from you, I'll consider that a badge of honor. Go back and caption some more photos...rest your brain a little.
  • fish82
    I Wear Pants;1066900 wrote:When the **** did I suggest anything like that?

    I was speaking about a separate topic from 9/11 there which was obviously majorspark's and your idea that "it's just the way the world works" is a valid excuse to do things that even majorsparks said he doesn't always agree with.

    Those things were not fixed by saying "not worth getting upset about, it's just the way things are even if we disagree". That is a cowardly way to go about problems.

    And slavery wasn't exactly set right peacefully. Or really set right at all for hundreds of years.
    The point is that those seeking to right perceived injustices did so through largely non-violent means. C'mon man...it wasn't that vague.
  • I Wear Pants
    fish82;1066910 wrote:The point is that those seeking to right perceived injustices did so through largely non-violent means. C'mon man...it wasn't that vague.
    When in the fuck did I say violence was the answer?