USA - General discussion (Part 1)

[haku]

Originally Posted by spyretto

Iraq will be a free country

Iraq won't be a free country, come on. The future elections will be a farce.

Shiites are the large majority in Iraq, if the elections are really "free", Shiites will gain power and create an Islamic Republic just as Iran.

The US won't let that happen, it doesn't want *two* Shiite Islamic Republics.

[thegurgi]

Originally Posted by spyretto

No, but you why are you always critical of America's good-natured intentions? Us soldiers are losing their lives as we speak for the freedom of the Iraqui people. Are you not greatful about that?

thanks for that spyretto, you said something that i've been trying to say in a sentence. (i'm really bad at on-line debating, can't you tell?)

[Unplugged]

Originally Posted by thegurgi

everyone HATES us, we sacrifice SO MUCH and you aren't doing anything about it except TALK, but there's very little action...

Originally Posted by thegurgi

the United States gives out more foriegn aid than any other country

Originally Posted by thegurgi

I love it when my words are twisted, i didn't say that other countries didn't do anything. Just that we did the most

I didn't twist anything, that was quite clear: "Everyone hates us [America], we sacrifice so much [...] You [other countries] aren't doing anything except TALK, but there's very little action".

You do "the most" because you have the most. At what cost you have the most, that is another story, and it's not a pretty one.

And I don't hate America or Americans. I love America for all the good things it has created, but I cannot ignore the bad ones, which are horrifying.

Originally Posted by spyretto

When did the US support the Saddam regime?

Hello, the US gave weapons to Saddam so he could fight his war against Iran. If that's not support, than what is?

Originally Posted by haku

Shiites are the large majority in Iraq, if the elections are really "free", Shiites will gain power and create an Islamic Republic just as Iran.

The US won't let that happen, it doesn't want *two* Shiite Islamic Republics.

I absolutely agree!

Originally Posted by spyretto

His statements are directly related to the security question in Iraq. If such areas are not secure, election might not take place there. Nothing to do with what you claim

How the hell do you know? He has lied in other situations, why wouldn't he give the excuse of it not being secure enough to allow voting in those areas? I'm sorry my friend, but stating "it has nothing to do with that" is pure speculation as well.

[spyretto]

How the hell do you know? He has lied in other situations, why wouldn't he give the excuse of it not being secure enough to allow voting in those areas? I'm sorry my friend, but stating "it has nothing to do with that" is pure speculation as well.

I don't think you have a grasp of the efforts America is putting towards securing peace and prosperity around the world. I'll give you an example. In two situations - one in the late 80's, the second in 1999 - Greece was in the brink of war with Turkey; US intervention prevented the war in both cases. In 1999, the prime minister of Greece, leader of the socialist party came into parliament and declared word by word that he'd " like to personally thank the government of the United States of America for their intervention in defusing the crisis". Yes, there were wild protest from members of the communist party. He had no bloody interest in expessing those thanks, he later said however that he felt a sense of responsibility on the fact that the the United States government used diplomacy to do everything they could on their part to prevent a catastropic war.
Now if you want to say that GW Bush is a liar and Clinton was not, is your own right. I do not personally think that US policy in general differs considerably. according to what party is in power.

Originally Posted by staringelf

And I don't hate America or Americans. I love America for all the good things it has created, but I cannot ignore the bad ones, which are horrifying.

Not as horrifying as it would be if America wasn't there to save your butt all the time, then give you the luxury to criticise them freely.

[Kate]

spyretto, I wanted to ask you about your exact stand-point on this metter. Do you support Bush or Kerry? I know you think Bush will win, but I got the impression that you don't really support him...

[Unplugged]

Originally Posted by spyretto

Not as horrifying as it would be if America wasn't there to save your butt all the time, then give you the luxury to criticise them freely.

What do you mean with that exactly except to provoke me?

America didn't give me luxury to have freedom of speech, I have it because my own people did a revolution and stopped a dictatorship. The democracy and freedom I have is 99,9% because of my own people.

America is not good to everyone and the World doesn't owe freedom of speech to America. That's insulting and I hope you were joking.

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by katbeidar

spyretto, I wanted to ask you about your exact stand-point on this metter. Do you support Bush or Kerry? I know you think Bush will win, but I got the impression that you don't really support him...

But I don't think the current situation in Iraq would change much should either one were to come in power. As for domestic US issues, they really don't concern me; and as to who I like better, I slightly prefer the pacifying physiognomy of Kerry over GW; that doesn't mean it makes any difference as to who will be more suitable for a president.
As to who I think will win, well, I made my point clear from the start, didn't I?

[Kate]

Originally Posted by spyretto

As to who I think will win, well, I made my point clear from the start, didn't I?

Yeeessssssssssss, you Bush-mocking avatar says it all.

[spyretto]

Offtop:

Originally Posted by staringelf

What do you mean with that exactly except to provoke me?

America didn't give me luxury to have freedom of speech, I have it because my own people did a revolution and stopped a dictatorship. The democracy and freedom I have is 99,9% because of my own people.

America is not good to everyone and the World doesn't owe freedom of speech to America. That's insulting and I hope you were joking.

To tell you the truth, I haven't heard of a country named "Nippleland" before If I knew where that is, I'd tell you what America has done for you. Perhaps that must be the reason, Americans are also unaware of the exact location of "Nippleland", that's why they couldn't help you....btw, did we beat "Nippleland's ass in the Euro? Or is it not that "Nippleland"?

The port was nice tho...

Originally Posted by katbeidar

Yeeessssssssssss, you Bush-mocking avatar says it all.

what mocking avatar? oh you mean the one that shows the true nature of the two candidates? just kiddin...

[Unplugged]

Offtop:
Spyretto, was that supposed to be funny or offend me? Oops, sorry, you'll have to try better next time

[spyretto]

Offtop:

Originally Posted by staringelf

Spyretto, was that supposed to be funny or offend me? Oops, sorry, you'll have to try better next time

I think it was funny, but we wouldn't expect you to admit it, would we ?
So how's things in Nippleland?

[Kate]

Update on the current poll!

If the election were held today, would you vote for Bush, Kerry or Nader?

Published: Oct. 21

Bush 46%
Kerry 49%
Nader 2%
Error 3%
Polled 976
Source: Associated Press-Ipsos

[Unplugged]

Offtop:

Originally Posted by spyretto

So how's things in Nippleland?

If you're so interested, why don't you create a thread about Nippleland and maybe I'll tell you all about it.

[Kate]

Offtop:

Originally Posted by spyretto

So how's things in Nippleland?

I betcha there're lots of nipples around! Right, Miguel?

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by katbeidar

Update on the current poll!

If the election were held today, would you vote for Bush, Kerry or Nader?

Published: Oct. 21

Bush 46%
Kerry 49%
Nader 2%
Error 3%
Polled 976
Source: Associated Press-Ipsos

Bush will have the last laugh, not to worry


Offtop:

Originally Posted by katbeidar

I betcha there're lots of nipples around! Right, Miguel?

I bet Nippleland is not the only country where America don't have influence. There's also Jupiter, Harmonia and Middle Earth ( amongst others )


haku: spyretto, please edit your posts instead of double posting, thanks.

Now, let's get back to the topic of the US Elections (or at least US international policy), shall we? Thank you.

[thegurgi]

Originally Posted by staringelf

but I cannot ignore the bad ones, which are horrifying.

You actually think what we're doing is horrifying? HORRIFYING?? wow. you obviously have no clue what horrifying is... maybe you should take a train to Poland and visit Auschwitz to get a good grasp on the word you're comparing us to. THAT was horrifying.

As for what i meant, i meant that if what we're doing is so bad, why don't you ACTUALLY do something! Take up arms against the united states, intervene in Iraq, Help the insurgents and restore Iraq to how it was before we arrived. If what we're doing is horrifying, than do something about it. But i guess that'd just be getting involved, and that'd be too much work, now wouldn't it?

[luxxi]

Originally Posted by spyretto

Oh common. Their brutal/copycat methods shows that they would. Lets watch this space. So which ones do you classify as freedom fighters and which ones as terrorists? Lets say Al Queda/Jawhid & Jihad are terrorists. How about the other copycat groups?

Germans used combined arms doctrine in WW2. Germans were nazis in WW2. Israelis use combined arms doctrine. Ergo Israelis are Nazis.

Just because you copy somebody's MO it doesn't mean you copy everything they do.

As for freedom fighters. I don't like to use that term because it's subjective. I prefer term insurgents. Insurgents are peopel who target occupation troops, representatives of Iraqi regime and infrastructure (which are legitimate targets in war). Those who target civilians are terrorists.

Originally Posted by spyretto

Sunni resistence? The Sunnis will support the elections and not you or anybody else can change that. Iraq will be a free country, whether you like it or not. Iraq will eventually be pacified.

Doy ou even watch the news? Sunnis are main force in insurgency. Until recently it was onyl sunnis that fought US. Now shi'ias are joining as well, but it's still mostly sunnis.

Originally Posted by spyretto

His statements are directly related to the security question in Iraq. If such areas are not secure, election might not take place there. Nothing to do with what you claim. Elections will be free and legitimate give or take a few mishaps, in the same fashion they were held in Afghanistan.

even f they will be held only in parts of Iraq? Like holding US elections only in Texas and inowhere else. But hey, at least there were elections in parts of US, right?

Originally Posted by spyretto

Pure speculation. So far the US/coalition forces are acting for the benefit of the Iraqui people. If you think they want to control Iraq for their own interests it's your prerogative. Time will tell.

The statement that politicians lie is speculation?

Originally Posted by spyretto

The US have not been idle as far as the North Korean issue is concerned. But as I said they do not pose a serious threat to world security at the moment. Their efforts are more towards putting pressure on the US/ South Korea for their own intererests. I don't think the North Korean regime poses a thread, if you do, well, it's your right. But you can't ignore the facts, nor deny reality.

So country with bunker mentality, totaly isolated formt he world, possesing long range ballistic missiles and up to 10 nukes is not a threat to world peace? Well, if you say so....

Originally Posted by spyretto

NATO's intervention was vital for the Balkan issue, and they didn't even have a visible goal other than to stop genocide. Are you going to blame the Us for that too?

No, but they fact that US didn't do anything for 4 years doesn't exactlly agree with your statement that US cares for people, does it?

Originally Posted by spyretto

What other country would make such sacrifice now? France? Germany? gimme a break. They don't want to be involved.

Ah, so that's why they are increasing forces in Bosnia and Kosovo. Because they don't want to get involved. Thanks for clearing that one.

Originally Posted by spyretto

No, but why are you always critical of America's good-natured intentions? US soldiers are losing their lives as we speak for the freedom of the Iraqui people. Are you not greatful for that?

And which actions would that be?

As for US troops dying for Iraqis.... Us is doing a lot of killing there and a lot less dying than Iraqis.

Originally Posted by spyretto

So what's your point? When did the US support the Saddam regime? Are you referring to the Iraq/Iran war?

Yes.

Originally Posted by spyretto

Are you aware of the fact that Homeini's regime posed a 10 times greater threat than Saddam's at that time?

How?

Originally Posted by spyretto

Are you now going to blame the US for the fact that Saddam Hussein later turned against his own people with mass murders, tortunes, genocide and posed a threat for the security of the whole region?

To a degree. When Iraqis began using gas on Iranians (peopel who were defending their country from Iraqi invasion) US president sent envoy to meet with Saddam and assured him of US support. that envoy was Donald rumsfeld.

In 1988 when Iraqis gassed Kurdish town of Halabya US increased agricultural aide to Iraq by 100%. In previous years Iraq purchased crop spraying planes with this aid. When those planes arrived in Iraq they were given to military which used them to spray CW, with full US knowledge.

Originally Posted by spyretto

Find me a free Iraqui who can claim Saddam Hussein was better for Iraq and I'll rest my case. You won't find them.

No. But that doesn't mean they are thrileld with US being there.

[luxxi]

Originally Posted by haku

Iraq won't be a free country, come on. The future elections will be a farce.

Shiites are the large majority in Iraq, if the elections are really "free", Shiites will gain power and create an Islamic Republic just as Iran.

The US won't let that happen, it doesn't want *two* Shiite Islamic Republics.

Not necesarry. Shi'ias aren't solid block and majority don't want islamic republic, specially not one modelled after Iran.

[spyretto]

Originally Posted by luxxi

Germans used combined arms doctrine in WW2. Germans were nazis in WW2. Israelis use combined arms doctrine. Ergo Israelis are Nazis.

Just because you copy somebody's MO it doesn't mean you copy everything they do.

As for freedom fighters. I don't like to use that term because it's subjective. I prefer term insurgents. Insurgents are peopel who target occupation troops, representatives of Iraqi regime and infrastructure (which are legitimate targets in war). Those who target civilians are terrorists.

You said it very well.

Doy ou even watch the news? Sunnis are main force in insurgency. Until recently it was onyl sunnis that fought US. Now shi'ias are joining as well, but it's still mostly sunnis.

My bad. That doesn't change the fact that US forces will prevail in Iraq, and democracy will be installed. I know it, and you know it. You may prefer anarchy, or the law "you use hand to steal, I cut hand" but unfortunately that won't happen.

even f they will be held only in parts of Iraq? Like holding US elections only in Texas and inowhere else. But hey, at least there were elections in parts of US, right?

If there's a risk that your highly-esteemed insurgents carry out blind and deadly attacks just to disrupt the elections, it's preferrable not to take place in those areas. Security comes first.

The statement that politicians lie is speculation?

No, just the fact that you take for granted that Bush is lying in that particular situation.

So country with bunker mentality, totaly isolated formt he world, possesing long range ballistic missiles and up to 10 nukes is not a threat to world peace? Well, if you say so....

Absolutely, as there are no links of North Korea with Al Qaeda or any other terrorist outfit.

No, but they fact that US didn't do anything for 4 years doesn't exactlly agree with your statement that US cares for people, does it?

Ah, so that's why they are increasing forces in Bosnia and Kosovo. Because they don't want to get involved. Thanks for clearing that one.

What did your country do about it? As thegurgi very rightly said, better do something as well rather than bitching about the US not doing enough...or not doing anything...or if they do enough it's for their own self-interest. You can't have an omelette without breaking some eggs.

As for US troops dying for Iraqis.... Us is doing a lot of killing there and a lot less dying than Iraqis.

Does this mean that if there were more American casualties than Iraqui casulaties, that would be ok, and now it's not?

How?

How...lets see how. By adopting a hard-line anti-Western, anti American stance, collaborating with terrorists, further repressing their people with the implementation of extreme islamic law, killing and torturing, pretty much what Saddam was doing.

To a degree. When Iraqis began using gas on Iranians (peopel who were defending their country from Iraqi invasion) US president sent envoy to meet with Saddam and assured him of US support. that envoy was Donald rumsfeld.

In 1988 when Iraqis gassed Kurdish town of Halabya US increased agricultural aide to Iraq by 100%. In previous years Iraq purchased crop spraying planes with this aid. When those planes arrived in Iraq they were given to military which used them to spray CW, with full US knowledge.

There have been many errors in terms of American foreign policy in the past. Does this mean we are to accuse Rumsfeld for carrying out these attacks personally? And what did the rest of the world do about it...and finally...do you expect the US intelligence to have knowledge of everything that Saddam Hussein was doing? If you accuse them of incompetence or wrong decisions, that's another matter.

No. But that doesn't mean they are thrileld with US being there.

I don't blame them.

[/quote]

[Unplugged]

Offtop:

Originally Posted by thegurgi

why don't you ACTUALLY do something!

I have demonstrated peacefully against this war 3 times and I also wrote a letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs criticizing the Portuguese Government's ass-kissing position of support. For someone who is concentrating hard on his studies and profession, that is what I could do. Nonetheless, I do not have to do justify myself to you, and neither do you to me, because the topic is not your actions or my actions, we are discussing politics and politicians' work and policies. Maybe for you the temptation is high, but please do not take this personal and start with personal attacks on other members just because they don't agree with you. It is childish and leads the discussion to nowhere.