Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell
New member
I for one am very glad that we (the US) is liberating Iraq, and when it's all over we'll have a nice big base of operation to topple the next terrorist regime (like Iran, Syria, etc. etc.)
War in Iraq: Show or clout, or get the **** out?
- Thread starter Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell
- Start date
jokersarewild
New member
There are analysts saying this could go horribly wrong and turn into a civil war in Iraq.
Hugh G. Rekshun
New member
Crispy Critter
New member
I think we need to kill some bad guys to make examples and if a bad guy comes from Iran or Syria then do one of their cities to get their attention. We need to take the attention off of our body count and put it on the bad guys body count. **** PC!
Outlaw2747
New member
ROTFLMAO!!!
Hugh G. Rekshun
New member
.
Last edited by a moderator:
If there is anyone in this erstwhile group who does NOT believe that the invasion of Iraq was the Worlds Greatest Hissy Fit, and was executed merely because SOMEONE had to be slapped for 9/11, please PM me to negotiate the sale of a very large bridge at an extremely favourable price.
Any bridge.
Any bridge.
Hugh G. Rekshun
New member
Hugh G. Rekshun
New member
And again, this means what to me?
Hugh G. Rekshun
New member
You know as well as I , mate, that your gov is just as ****** up. So then again it begs the question; "whats the point"?
I'm struggling to see the relevance of the CIA instigated and inspired coup the restored the Shah, and the invasion of Iraq.
True, there is common ground in terms of motive: expanding US influence etc, but to compare the world of 1953 to the world of 2003 is erroneous. The US is no longer able to cloak its activities to the same extent, and is far more accountable for the consequences of its act.
The reality is, and always was, that there is NO net benefit to the US in terms of oil, influence or dried figs.
There IS a possibility that countries who harbour terrorists, or offer aid, succour or resources may be somewhat discouraged in pursuing those activities, but as the chief combatant against the US is not a country but an ideal steeped in religion, I suspect that any discouragement has been short lived if London is any guide.
America, as usual, has severely miscalculated in the same way as it did in Vietnam. The invasion demonstrates, yet again, that despite a flock of spy satellites, an array of supercomputers, and an Intelligence Agency bigger than any other, America is incapable of evaluating cultural implications and basic human nature.
The average American has less knowledge of the cultures, national imperatives and social strictures of other countries than a fruitbat. They hold fewer passports per capita than Russia.
America only sees the world through American eyes. What country, other than the US, would plant its major cultural icon on the outskirts of Paris? America respects other countries insofar as they can turn a buck from them, or secrete a few listening posts or ICBM's.
America is the most dangerous of nations - armed and ignorant to ludicrous levels. America believes in violence the way other nations believe in living harmoniously. America believes in war as a means to peace. And at each occasion that it has attempted to enforce their doctrine, it has been humiliated. As it will do in Iraq.
All it has achieved is to get thousands of civilians killed, several hundred young American soldiers slaughtered, and paved the way for extremists to snipe away with bombs and beligerency for as many years as it takes for the US to back away in embarrassment.
The patience of extremism will far outweight the patience of American mothers and fathers. And their idiot politicians just...dont....get....it.
True, there is common ground in terms of motive: expanding US influence etc, but to compare the world of 1953 to the world of 2003 is erroneous. The US is no longer able to cloak its activities to the same extent, and is far more accountable for the consequences of its act.
The reality is, and always was, that there is NO net benefit to the US in terms of oil, influence or dried figs.
There IS a possibility that countries who harbour terrorists, or offer aid, succour or resources may be somewhat discouraged in pursuing those activities, but as the chief combatant against the US is not a country but an ideal steeped in religion, I suspect that any discouragement has been short lived if London is any guide.
America, as usual, has severely miscalculated in the same way as it did in Vietnam. The invasion demonstrates, yet again, that despite a flock of spy satellites, an array of supercomputers, and an Intelligence Agency bigger than any other, America is incapable of evaluating cultural implications and basic human nature.
The average American has less knowledge of the cultures, national imperatives and social strictures of other countries than a fruitbat. They hold fewer passports per capita than Russia.
America only sees the world through American eyes. What country, other than the US, would plant its major cultural icon on the outskirts of Paris? America respects other countries insofar as they can turn a buck from them, or secrete a few listening posts or ICBM's.
America is the most dangerous of nations - armed and ignorant to ludicrous levels. America believes in violence the way other nations believe in living harmoniously. America believes in war as a means to peace. And at each occasion that it has attempted to enforce their doctrine, it has been humiliated. As it will do in Iraq.
All it has achieved is to get thousands of civilians killed, several hundred young American soldiers slaughtered, and paved the way for extremists to snipe away with bombs and beligerency for as many years as it takes for the US to back away in embarrassment.
The patience of extremism will far outweight the patience of American mothers and fathers. And their idiot politicians just...dont....get....it.
builder
New member
Well then, you'd be struggling, full stop. It might be fifty years ago, but put your own **** in the picture. Iran's secret service funded and arranged a political coup to replace your president, with one of their yes-men, and propped up this "new democracy" for 25 years, incarcerating and often murdering any dissidents, and keeping your former democratically elected president under house arrest until he died a natural death.
You think that you, or anyone in your country, would, after even fifty years, forget that a foriegn country ousted your president, installed one of their puppets, and persecuted and killed anyone who had the audacity to protest these actions?
Bullshit. The invasion of Afghanistan, (this time) resulted in 8000 Taliban surrendering. They were loaded into sealed containers, driven into the desert, and under the cover of darkness, bulleted to death and buried. A freak storm uncovered the remains, and the UN are currently guarding that site, pending a war crimes hearing.
Dream on. The original coup, deposing Mossadegh, and implanting the Shah puppet. was all about control of the supply of the only asset they have, and it ain't ******* dried dates.
You're talking about the Koran? The CIA had that wonderfully sedate tome translated into languages that it had not been read in before, and distributed it, along with text outlining the atrocities that the Soviet Union had done in the past. The CIA also trained those same people in bomb-making techniques, and supplied them with the chemicals for making explosives.
London was nothing to do with Al Queda. They were amateur hacks, who failed dismally. The result was, to make Londoners psychotically paranoid, hence the murder of that innocent Brazilian.
Vietnam had been at "war" for half a century. Surrender was not on the agenda.
War in itself is not a bankable commodity. Think about this; Bush is spending over a million bucks a day in Iraq. Do you think this money comes out of his pocket? Bush is making a million bucks a month in profits from the sale of munitions and bombs from the massive share-holdings he has in factories in the US and South Korea.
Blame the education system. Our plebs are not so bright either.
So what? Most Australians think they've been overseas when they visit Bali, which is just one hour north of our shores.
A~greed.
Irrelevant.
Profit. The "free trade" agreement is what you are discussing now. Stick to the topic.
Yes, and despite claims to the contrary, US people, particularly the Cleetus's amongst them, love the fact that they "have the bombs". Well guess what? That attitude is what is gonna bring them all down.
No. Your decision makers believe that if diplomacy does not work, heavy-handedness will. They are reaping what they sow right about now.
Don't be dragging the whole country into this. The US military, and the US gov, not Congress, not the people, believe that if they spread enough lies, and kill off their detractors, they will end up getting what they want.
You're stretching it. Name these occasions.
I'm not for Iraq invasion. But it's too ******* late. Best to fix what you've ******, or be forever haunted by your mistakes.
Independent sources put that figure at around 100,000, not to mention the ongoing incidences of cancer from the tonnes of depleted uranium used in almost all of the projectiles, from bullets up to bombs.
The public has little idea of the real numbers of allied deaths. Remember, US soldiers are not there on their pat malone.
The civil war will happen whether the allied forces remain or not.
I agree. Osama Bin Laden outlayed 400,000 dollars to start this ****. Bush has just about bankrupted the US for what? Osama has claimed that the only way to beat a superpower, is to financially cripple it. Did you know that the US is currently heavily in debt to China? The last great red nation in the world is financing the US? Yep?
No, the idiotic plebs allow this to happen. If enough public dissent happens, that is when the pollies have to do something. Handing over your power to some fictional characters, and lumping them under the heading "idiot politicians" points to you not having the ***** to excercise your right to free speech.