Several days ago I witnessed CTV Canada AM offer to the public what they are touting as the Christmas present to buy this year that is a monocular (as opposed to binocular) night vision glass.
Don't these fools realize that we are at war in Afghanistan? How many Canadians, British, Americans or others are going to die because of their loose lips sinking ships is OK mentality.
Please do something about this terrible thing that they are offering our enemies.
If, during WWII, some aspiring entrepreneur decided that they would sell radar to anyone that wanted to have it, then, where would we be today?
Selling night vision glasses during these times of war should be looked upon as the same as selling radar. What is there in place to make sure that they do not fall into the wrong hands? What is there to make sure that the mass manufacture of these items won't start in the neighbouring countries that will then be flooded into the market known as the hands of our adversaries?
To hide from this is both reprehensible and irresponsible. Is this the manner in which the torch of Freedom, handed to us by those that had died for our cause, will be handled by this and future generations?
Iraq today
Iraq today
Several days ago I witnessed CTV Canada AM offer to the public what they are touting as the Christmas present to buy this year that is a monocular (as opposed to binocular) night vision glass.
Don't these fools realize that we are at war in Afghanistan? How many Canadians and Americans are going to die because of their loose lips sinking ships is OK mentality.
Please do something about this terrible thing that they are offering our enemies.
If, during WWII, some aspiring entrepreneur decided that they would sell radar to anyone that wanted to have it, then, where would we be today?
Selling night vision glasses during these times of war should be looked upon as the same as selling radar. What is there in place to make sure that they do not fall into the wrong hands? What is there to make sure that the mass manufacture of these items won't start in the neighbouring countries that will then be flooded into the market known as the hands of our adversaries?
To hide from this is both reprehensible and irresponsible. Is this the manner in which the torch of Freedom, handed to us by those that had died for our cause, will be handled by this and future generations?
Don't these fools realize that we are at war in Afghanistan? How many Canadians and Americans are going to die because of their loose lips sinking ships is OK mentality.
Please do something about this terrible thing that they are offering our enemies.
If, during WWII, some aspiring entrepreneur decided that they would sell radar to anyone that wanted to have it, then, where would we be today?
Selling night vision glasses during these times of war should be looked upon as the same as selling radar. What is there in place to make sure that they do not fall into the wrong hands? What is there to make sure that the mass manufacture of these items won't start in the neighbouring countries that will then be flooded into the market known as the hands of our adversaries?
To hide from this is both reprehensible and irresponsible. Is this the manner in which the torch of Freedom, handed to us by those that had died for our cause, will be handled by this and future generations?
Iraq today
Get a grip these things have been on the market for years as have GPS systems, you even get those in family cars nowadays. It's hardly secret technology any more. Radar was not that big a secret both the germans and the japanese had forms of radar at the start of the war. We had better scientists-at least in that area than the germans and won the technological war.
Iraq today
Yes, you are quite right when you state that these tools are quite commonplace. GPS is old hat just as night vision glasses are to be had by going to where they are sold. But this is the Western culture and we can do these things because that is what we do.
However, the rest of the world does not have that capacity. The rest of the world does not have the ability, let alone the wherewithal, to be able to get these objects into their armouries without being told where to get them or manufacture them.
Bullets have been around for a long time, but, in order to allow your rifle or gun to fire properly you must have the right caliber otherwise you'll find yourself spitting further than the bullet will travel or the weapon will blow up in your face.
When these people are our friends we will be able to go off with them into the night and discover the many things that you can't see. Until then, it is advisable to not let them have it because if they have it, under present conditions, it will be your friends and family that will suffer losses that shouldn't be happening.
Only God knows how many ships were lost by loose talk. The fact is that only up until people shut their mouths did the numbers decrease. As it is, we have lost too many people. Civilians and soldiers alike. The point of the exercise is to stop having to live this way!
Even with the technological and scientific advantages that we have, they will come to nought if we give them to those that are opposed to our way of living.
However, the rest of the world does not have that capacity. The rest of the world does not have the ability, let alone the wherewithal, to be able to get these objects into their armouries without being told where to get them or manufacture them.
Bullets have been around for a long time, but, in order to allow your rifle or gun to fire properly you must have the right caliber otherwise you'll find yourself spitting further than the bullet will travel or the weapon will blow up in your face.
When these people are our friends we will be able to go off with them into the night and discover the many things that you can't see. Until then, it is advisable to not let them have it because if they have it, under present conditions, it will be your friends and family that will suffer losses that shouldn't be happening.
Only God knows how many ships were lost by loose talk. The fact is that only up until people shut their mouths did the numbers decrease. As it is, we have lost too many people. Civilians and soldiers alike. The point of the exercise is to stop having to live this way!
Even with the technological and scientific advantages that we have, they will come to nought if we give them to those that are opposed to our way of living.
Iraq today
I think you need to get out more if you think the rest of the world is that unsophisticated. Maybe if the west hadn't sold Iran nuclear reactors in the first place you wouldn't have to worry about them making nuclear weapons. Maybe if the west hadn't supported repressive regimes and encouraged democracy in countries like Saudi Arabia Osama would have remained a discontented nutter. Maybe if the US forced israel to obey united nations rulings they might get support from the rest of the world and seem less like people operating with double standards.
The only reason to change the way we live is if you want to give in to the terrorists. They want us to change the way we live and be afraid all the time. In reality the odds of the everage citizen getting caught up in a terrorist attack are pretty long. If you bothers you stay away from the big cities.
You do not fight terrorists with a conventional army, if you try all you do is get them more recruits. By changing the way we live we hand them a victory because what they want to do is make us afraid and people like you are helping them win because they have you convinced there is some mass plot out there.
You can't have it both ways. Maybe CNN should stop running proigrammes about the threat from nuclear weapons being sneaked in on container ships, gosh terrorists would never think of that would they.
They don't need to do anything, how about just putting something in the water supply? They don't actually have to do it just the report that they had would be enough to cause mass panic. The fact that there have nbeen very few terroirist attacks since rather suggests that tyhe massnetwork is a figment of somebody's imagination. The reality is that going in to Iraq has made such attacks more likely not less.
Personally I felt more at risk living in London at the height of the IRA compaign than I do now. Terrorism is not a new phenomenon it's only new to americans.
The only reason to change the way we live is if you want to give in to the terrorists. They want us to change the way we live and be afraid all the time. In reality the odds of the everage citizen getting caught up in a terrorist attack are pretty long. If you bothers you stay away from the big cities.
You do not fight terrorists with a conventional army, if you try all you do is get them more recruits. By changing the way we live we hand them a victory because what they want to do is make us afraid and people like you are helping them win because they have you convinced there is some mass plot out there.
You can't have it both ways. Maybe CNN should stop running proigrammes about the threat from nuclear weapons being sneaked in on container ships, gosh terrorists would never think of that would they.
They don't need to do anything, how about just putting something in the water supply? They don't actually have to do it just the report that they had would be enough to cause mass panic. The fact that there have nbeen very few terroirist attacks since rather suggests that tyhe massnetwork is a figment of somebody's imagination. The reality is that going in to Iraq has made such attacks more likely not less.
Personally I felt more at risk living in London at the height of the IRA compaign than I do now. Terrorism is not a new phenomenon it's only new to americans.
Iraq today
Touchez.
I remember years ago when one of my American employers couldn't believe his ears when I said that I was against the Viet Mam war. He was concerned that I was going to lose all that society had to offer me. His rationale was that I was only one person so what could I do?
My response to him was that he was wrong. I was two people. One in the anti-war movement and now there would be one less on his side. It stunned him.
I didn't believe in the war because I felt and knew that it was wrong. America has always gotten itself into trouble in international politics because they seemed to be backing the bad guys around the world. I sensed that if America had its way they would have moved these despots and the like out of office. Had they done that then they would have been seen as Imperialists. Their naivety led them to make a lot of wrong choices but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque.
The Vietnamese never attacked or staged attacks against America in America. America was led down the garden path by corrupt regime after corrupt regime. I never saw the American withdrawl from Viet Nam as a loss and when my Canadian contemporaries would strut around talking about how "we" were kicking their butts, I would look them in the eye and tell them straight up that they were talking about my family who could have, if they wanted, wiped the Vietnamese off the face of the earth and would have were it not for their belief in humanity that kept them from delivering the fatal blow.
The Al-quaeda attacked Democracy while they foolishly believed that they were safe from retribution.
Living in Montreal when the Quebec Liberation Front was planting bombs all over the city in English speaking enclaves wasn't very scary although we knew that it was supposed to be. It didn't force us to run or to hide from living our lives on a day to day basis. We knew, as did a lot of French speaking people, that we were good citizens. The only thing that they did was bring us closer together. The restaurant where we used to hang out in as teenagers had the mailbox in front of the premises blown up along with its windows by this factioin of terrorists.
As to scare-mong people about having the water poisoned is a well known phenomenon in America when the Hippies were, allegedly, going to fill the resevoirs with LSD.
Prejudging me and trying to belittle what is being said will achieve nothing except suggest that maybe you ought to get out more. Believe me I don't spend my winters in an igloo. It has been suggested to me that my opining this fact is akin to trying to stop the sale of rifles.
To say that it is like stopping the sale of rifles is all well and good but to know where these monoculars are is akin to knowing where the guns are. If you know where they are then you can make sure that they won't be used to kill your, brothers, sisters, cousins or friends. Canadian journalists, in their naiveity, forget that we are in an offensive mode and think that everything is hunky-dory all over the world. That they should get out is more precise.
Keeping an eye on where this equipment goes is paramount to keeping people we love...alive! Besides if these sleepers start to gather these things then perhaps we will be able catch them in the act and deter their ability to disrupt and destroy the lives of the multitudes as they are presently doing. To sell these things on the open market after the war is over is the Capitalist way. Ther are two kinds of capitalism. Exploitive and capitalistic. The key is that the war be over and not stretched out or prolonged because we don't have the time to be vigilant.
The Dalai Lama when he was in Canada earlier this year was being interviewed by a female correspondent who was fawning over him because of his Nobel Peace Prize, his striving to liberate his homeland peacefully, yadda- yadda -yadda etc.
The Dalai Lama then explained to the woman that peace is all well and good but if you are atacked by a wild beast that is intent on killing you then you will have to fight or you will be dead. He then went into being thankful that the the world that we live in today is a result of the valour and honour of those that fought against the fascim and nazism of the day. The reporter was both astounded and enlightened at the same time. So were many that saw the interview.
Standing around saying that you can do nothing is the Al-Quaeda's greatest weapon. I hope that is not where you are at.
For generations the Iraqis and others have toiled under these despots and they are unable to get out from beneath this onerous political system. When an attempt is made there are wholesale slaughters of people, unarmed people. Men, women or children didn't matter to those firing the guns. After the first Gulf War we saw what these people would do in order to keep their power and money,
Now the world is saying that enough is enough. Let's stop blaming the Jews for everything that is going on in the region. I am sure that if the Iraqis were under the stewardship of the Jews they would be a lot healthier and happier than they were under Saddam and his crew of killers. These people that are running around killing wantonly are living numbered days and they will continue to fight as ferociously as they have been because they know that there is the possibility that there will be no Desmond Tutu or Mandela to keep the masses from avenging for those that are no longer on this planet. They have torured, raped, murdered and plundered for years and those that suffered beneath their yoke are about to taste Freedom. In theory the U.N. is good but in practice it has proven itself time and again to be ineffective. Look ar Rwanda. Sudan. And any other number of hot spots in the world.
Perhaps you should go and live there for a while to get a taste of what it is all about.
I remember years ago when one of my American employers couldn't believe his ears when I said that I was against the Viet Mam war. He was concerned that I was going to lose all that society had to offer me. His rationale was that I was only one person so what could I do?
My response to him was that he was wrong. I was two people. One in the anti-war movement and now there would be one less on his side. It stunned him.
I didn't believe in the war because I felt and knew that it was wrong. America has always gotten itself into trouble in international politics because they seemed to be backing the bad guys around the world. I sensed that if America had its way they would have moved these despots and the like out of office. Had they done that then they would have been seen as Imperialists. Their naivety led them to make a lot of wrong choices but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque.
The Vietnamese never attacked or staged attacks against America in America. America was led down the garden path by corrupt regime after corrupt regime. I never saw the American withdrawl from Viet Nam as a loss and when my Canadian contemporaries would strut around talking about how "we" were kicking their butts, I would look them in the eye and tell them straight up that they were talking about my family who could have, if they wanted, wiped the Vietnamese off the face of the earth and would have were it not for their belief in humanity that kept them from delivering the fatal blow.
The Al-quaeda attacked Democracy while they foolishly believed that they were safe from retribution.
Living in Montreal when the Quebec Liberation Front was planting bombs all over the city in English speaking enclaves wasn't very scary although we knew that it was supposed to be. It didn't force us to run or to hide from living our lives on a day to day basis. We knew, as did a lot of French speaking people, that we were good citizens. The only thing that they did was bring us closer together. The restaurant where we used to hang out in as teenagers had the mailbox in front of the premises blown up along with its windows by this factioin of terrorists.
As to scare-mong people about having the water poisoned is a well known phenomenon in America when the Hippies were, allegedly, going to fill the resevoirs with LSD.
Prejudging me and trying to belittle what is being said will achieve nothing except suggest that maybe you ought to get out more. Believe me I don't spend my winters in an igloo. It has been suggested to me that my opining this fact is akin to trying to stop the sale of rifles.
To say that it is like stopping the sale of rifles is all well and good but to know where these monoculars are is akin to knowing where the guns are. If you know where they are then you can make sure that they won't be used to kill your, brothers, sisters, cousins or friends. Canadian journalists, in their naiveity, forget that we are in an offensive mode and think that everything is hunky-dory all over the world. That they should get out is more precise.
Keeping an eye on where this equipment goes is paramount to keeping people we love...alive! Besides if these sleepers start to gather these things then perhaps we will be able catch them in the act and deter their ability to disrupt and destroy the lives of the multitudes as they are presently doing. To sell these things on the open market after the war is over is the Capitalist way. Ther are two kinds of capitalism. Exploitive and capitalistic. The key is that the war be over and not stretched out or prolonged because we don't have the time to be vigilant.
The Dalai Lama when he was in Canada earlier this year was being interviewed by a female correspondent who was fawning over him because of his Nobel Peace Prize, his striving to liberate his homeland peacefully, yadda- yadda -yadda etc.
The Dalai Lama then explained to the woman that peace is all well and good but if you are atacked by a wild beast that is intent on killing you then you will have to fight or you will be dead. He then went into being thankful that the the world that we live in today is a result of the valour and honour of those that fought against the fascim and nazism of the day. The reporter was both astounded and enlightened at the same time. So were many that saw the interview.
Standing around saying that you can do nothing is the Al-Quaeda's greatest weapon. I hope that is not where you are at.
For generations the Iraqis and others have toiled under these despots and they are unable to get out from beneath this onerous political system. When an attempt is made there are wholesale slaughters of people, unarmed people. Men, women or children didn't matter to those firing the guns. After the first Gulf War we saw what these people would do in order to keep their power and money,
Now the world is saying that enough is enough. Let's stop blaming the Jews for everything that is going on in the region. I am sure that if the Iraqis were under the stewardship of the Jews they would be a lot healthier and happier than they were under Saddam and his crew of killers. These people that are running around killing wantonly are living numbered days and they will continue to fight as ferociously as they have been because they know that there is the possibility that there will be no Desmond Tutu or Mandela to keep the masses from avenging for those that are no longer on this planet. They have torured, raped, murdered and plundered for years and those that suffered beneath their yoke are about to taste Freedom. In theory the U.N. is good but in practice it has proven itself time and again to be ineffective. Look ar Rwanda. Sudan. And any other number of hot spots in the world.
Perhaps you should go and live there for a while to get a taste of what it is all about.
Iraq today
posted by kenloft
The Al-quaeda attacked Democracy while they foolishly believed that they were safe from retribution.
That's the point it was a terrorist group of saudi origin, not iraqui and not a nation state. A bunch of nutters attacking something they blame for all their troubles as they see them.
Their naivety led them to make a lot of wrong choices but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque.
I would agree with you there. except a lot of americans seem to believe everything their government did idsin the interests of freedom.
Standing around saying that you can do nothing is the Al-Quaeda's greatest weapon. I hope that is not where you are at.
Nope it's not where I'm at but going after al queda has somewhere been forgotten. There are rather dubious reports flying around that osama was cornered in afghanistan but was allowed to escape, if they had got him the rationale for invading iraq would have been harder to put across.
Prejudging me and trying to belittle what is being said will achieve nothing except suggest that maybe you ought to get out more.
Perhaps I did prejudge you in that my first reading seemed to suggest that you thought the sale of such things should not be allowed in case terorists got hold of them, which is a bit ludicrous.
America was led down the garden path by corrupt regime after corrupt regime.
I think they have been led down the garden path again, not so much by a corrupt regime as by one convinced it is right regardless of any evidence to the contrary. What really galls is we got suckered as well :-5 In the sixties we had the sense to stay out of vietnam although we did fight, successfuly, a communist insurgency in Malaysia which gets forgotten about.
http://www.myfareast.org/Malaysia/emergency.html
Getting out of Iraq successfully will not be easy
Now the world is saying that enough is enough. Let's stop blaming the Jews for everything that is going on in the region.
If only it were that simple.
The Al-quaeda attacked Democracy while they foolishly believed that they were safe from retribution.
That's the point it was a terrorist group of saudi origin, not iraqui and not a nation state. A bunch of nutters attacking something they blame for all their troubles as they see them.
Their naivety led them to make a lot of wrong choices but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque.
I would agree with you there. except a lot of americans seem to believe everything their government did idsin the interests of freedom.
Standing around saying that you can do nothing is the Al-Quaeda's greatest weapon. I hope that is not where you are at.
Nope it's not where I'm at but going after al queda has somewhere been forgotten. There are rather dubious reports flying around that osama was cornered in afghanistan but was allowed to escape, if they had got him the rationale for invading iraq would have been harder to put across.
Prejudging me and trying to belittle what is being said will achieve nothing except suggest that maybe you ought to get out more.
Perhaps I did prejudge you in that my first reading seemed to suggest that you thought the sale of such things should not be allowed in case terorists got hold of them, which is a bit ludicrous.
America was led down the garden path by corrupt regime after corrupt regime.
I think they have been led down the garden path again, not so much by a corrupt regime as by one convinced it is right regardless of any evidence to the contrary. What really galls is we got suckered as well :-5 In the sixties we had the sense to stay out of vietnam although we did fight, successfuly, a communist insurgency in Malaysia which gets forgotten about.
http://www.myfareast.org/Malaysia/emergency.html
Getting out of Iraq successfully will not be easy
Now the world is saying that enough is enough. Let's stop blaming the Jews for everything that is going on in the region.
If only it were that simple.
Iraq today
Hoo boy, I feel like I’m about to dance naked through a briar patch, however I guess that kind of behavior is not unexpected from a crazy American. So, Mr. conductor, a chorus of “Tip Toe Through The Tulipsâ€Â, please. :yh_sweat
I find it curious that you consider us simultaneously naïve, and seeking resources in Afghanistan, and Iraq, also that “a lot of americans seem to believe everything their government did is in the interests of freedomâ€Â
If our intent was to acquire mid eastern oil assets, there are several better ways to accomplish that. For example, in our pre 9/11 military configuration, a takeover of Saudi Arabia would have made more sense then invading Afghanistan, and Iraq. And if we were the greedy, rapacious, cretins that some believe, (now bear with me guys, this is not about mine’s bigger than yours} as the worlds only superpower, we could have said humanity be damned and started tossing nukes. The real proof is that Afghanistan has no resources, and unlike France, Germany, and Russia, we have not touched a drop of Iraqi oil.
As to American intentions in global affairs, I challenge you to find one case where our post WWII military actions have been the result of our quest for the resources of another country.
Hope you guys got something soothing in your first aid kit, cause them briar’s are redecorating my oversize Yankee behind.
Naïve ? Yeah guilty, but with extenuating circumstances. We tend to be like the miserable sinner who just got converted, we think that what we have is so great that we just hafta share it with everybody. We partner up with bad guy’s cause we sincerely think we can convert them. Most seriously, we are far too trusting; We go through political cycles were we feel good (like after the fall of the Berlin wall) and reduce our intelligence assets, and become careless. We are going through the agonies of reasserting cynicism, and rebuilding our intelligence services now. And like good predictable Americans, we’ll over do it initially.
Finally, I think any misunderstanding between the people and our leaders is grossly overstated by a media that is much more interested in controversy than news, and by those who would benefit from such a situation. We are a messy but vigorous democracy, we fight among ourselves but when the chips are down, it’s difficult to find a better friend than the U.S.
Ok I’m scratched and bloody, ya gonna rub salt in my wounds, give me a soothing salve, or let me wander into the mists, left to my own devices? :-3
I find it curious that you consider us simultaneously naïve, and seeking resources in Afghanistan, and Iraq, also that “a lot of americans seem to believe everything their government did is in the interests of freedomâ€Â
If our intent was to acquire mid eastern oil assets, there are several better ways to accomplish that. For example, in our pre 9/11 military configuration, a takeover of Saudi Arabia would have made more sense then invading Afghanistan, and Iraq. And if we were the greedy, rapacious, cretins that some believe, (now bear with me guys, this is not about mine’s bigger than yours} as the worlds only superpower, we could have said humanity be damned and started tossing nukes. The real proof is that Afghanistan has no resources, and unlike France, Germany, and Russia, we have not touched a drop of Iraqi oil.
As to American intentions in global affairs, I challenge you to find one case where our post WWII military actions have been the result of our quest for the resources of another country.
Hope you guys got something soothing in your first aid kit, cause them briar’s are redecorating my oversize Yankee behind.
Naïve ? Yeah guilty, but with extenuating circumstances. We tend to be like the miserable sinner who just got converted, we think that what we have is so great that we just hafta share it with everybody. We partner up with bad guy’s cause we sincerely think we can convert them. Most seriously, we are far too trusting; We go through political cycles were we feel good (like after the fall of the Berlin wall) and reduce our intelligence assets, and become careless. We are going through the agonies of reasserting cynicism, and rebuilding our intelligence services now. And like good predictable Americans, we’ll over do it initially.
Finally, I think any misunderstanding between the people and our leaders is grossly overstated by a media that is much more interested in controversy than news, and by those who would benefit from such a situation. We are a messy but vigorous democracy, we fight among ourselves but when the chips are down, it’s difficult to find a better friend than the U.S.
Ok I’m scratched and bloody, ya gonna rub salt in my wounds, give me a soothing salve, or let me wander into the mists, left to my own devices? :-3
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill 
Iraq today
I am starting off mad because after sitting here and reponding to your thread I pushed the wrong button and lost what I was sending to you. So, now I will try to re-do what I wrote. :-6 One point, it is my main point, is that if 1,000 of these night vision instruments made it into the hands of the insurgents then we would multiply the casualties and deaths as well as prolong the war.
As a Canadian I was all for going into the war against Iraq because I realized that there was a possibility that if Canada was not on side then we would find that America would, in all probabilities, be facing another Viet Nam. The media, as I suspect we all know, are there to tell the story that wil sell papers. It is just too bad that GW didn't do as his dad had done, and waited for the U.N. to declare against Saddam.
If America had all the resources that it needed within its boundaries then there would be no need for them to go to other countries to seek their resources. But, the world being what it is means that there are resources that are needed and have to be sought in other parts of the world in order to keep the machine going.
I really think that you shouldn't take the "us against them" attitude by implying the we (gmc&I) were saying something that we weren't. I don't recall that I suggested or said that America was out to score the resources of these countries. America, like Canada, is a free-trader and it has to go to where the wares are.
"Finally, I think any misunderstanding between the people and our leaders is grossly overstated by a media that is much more interested in controversy than news, and by those who would benefit from such a situation. We are a messy but vigorous democracy, we fight among ourselves but when the chips are down, it’s difficult to find a better friend than the U.S."
Ditto for Canada. :guitarist GMC can talk for himself.
Finally. Will you Americans stop aking us for drugs?
Iraq today
posted by der wulf
As to American intentions in global affairs, I challenge you to find one case where our post WWII military actions have been the result of our quest for the resources of another country.
Not that simple and not just open miilitary actions, more about protecting petrceived american interests hence the plolicy towards allende in chile (although copper had a lot o do with that did it not), against left wing governments in nicaragua supporting, in saudi and iran, repressive regimes against democratic movements that have now become perverted into fundamentalist movements. supporting saddam hussein in his war against iran and turning a blind eye to his excesses when it suited. Backing Israel in creating palestinian ghettoes and condemning people who resort to terrorism out of despair. Allowing financial aid to be given to terrorist organisations like the IRA.
It is actually a charge i would lay at the door of the west as a whole not just america. UK governments and european governments have been just as hypocritical.
Something seems to have changed in america though, in that those who want to use american might to promote their interests seem to have a hold of government in the us and amongst othet things now suggest pre-emotive warfare to promote american interests. The very kind of thing the UN was set up to prevent happening.
Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mind. One of the reasons i was attracted to this forum was a chance to talk to people of diverse opinions, however, most of the attempts flounder in petty you are just anti-american jibes because a lot of people seem unable to discuss things dispassionately. or incapable of understanding that you can disagree with someone without it being personal. It's no fun debating with people with the same world view.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/state ... ciples.htm
It's the signatories to this and where they are now that make it interesting.
from der speigel
http://smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/07/1 ... click=true
from the above article
Saddam's fall was planned in 1998
In this liberal climate there came, nearly unnoticed, a 1997 proposal of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) that forcefully mapped out "America's global leadership". On 28 Jan 1998 the PNAC project team wrote to President Clinton demanding a radical change in dealings with the UN and the end of Saddam.
While it was not clear whether Saddam was developing WMD, he was, they said, a threat to the US, Israel, the Arab States and "a meaningful part of the world's oil reserves". They put their case as follows:
"In the short term this means being ready to lead military action, without regard for diplomacy. In the long term it means disarming Saddam and his regime. We believe that the US has the right under existing Security Council resolutions to take the necessary steps, including war, to secure our vital interests in the Gulf. In no circumstances should America's politics be crippled by the misguided insistence of the Security Council on unanimity." (clintonletter)
http://www.pnac.info/blog/archives/000036.html
http://www.pnac.info/
Groups small in number can be incredibley influential in the right set of circumstances. What is different now is things like the internet and the mass media so it is harder to shape opinion than at any time in history
posted by kensloft
Finally. Will you Americans stop aking us for drugs?
What is it about north america and all these spam e-mails selling viagra and other stuff, all you all hypochondriacs or what? I would e-mail back saying we have the NHS but I think that would only encourage them.
As to American intentions in global affairs, I challenge you to find one case where our post WWII military actions have been the result of our quest for the resources of another country.
Not that simple and not just open miilitary actions, more about protecting petrceived american interests hence the plolicy towards allende in chile (although copper had a lot o do with that did it not), against left wing governments in nicaragua supporting, in saudi and iran, repressive regimes against democratic movements that have now become perverted into fundamentalist movements. supporting saddam hussein in his war against iran and turning a blind eye to his excesses when it suited. Backing Israel in creating palestinian ghettoes and condemning people who resort to terrorism out of despair. Allowing financial aid to be given to terrorist organisations like the IRA.
It is actually a charge i would lay at the door of the west as a whole not just america. UK governments and european governments have been just as hypocritical.
Something seems to have changed in america though, in that those who want to use american might to promote their interests seem to have a hold of government in the us and amongst othet things now suggest pre-emotive warfare to promote american interests. The very kind of thing the UN was set up to prevent happening.
Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mind. One of the reasons i was attracted to this forum was a chance to talk to people of diverse opinions, however, most of the attempts flounder in petty you are just anti-american jibes because a lot of people seem unable to discuss things dispassionately. or incapable of understanding that you can disagree with someone without it being personal. It's no fun debating with people with the same world view.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/state ... ciples.htm
It's the signatories to this and where they are now that make it interesting.
from der speigel
http://smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/07/1 ... click=true
from the above article
Saddam's fall was planned in 1998
In this liberal climate there came, nearly unnoticed, a 1997 proposal of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) that forcefully mapped out "America's global leadership". On 28 Jan 1998 the PNAC project team wrote to President Clinton demanding a radical change in dealings with the UN and the end of Saddam.
While it was not clear whether Saddam was developing WMD, he was, they said, a threat to the US, Israel, the Arab States and "a meaningful part of the world's oil reserves". They put their case as follows:
"In the short term this means being ready to lead military action, without regard for diplomacy. In the long term it means disarming Saddam and his regime. We believe that the US has the right under existing Security Council resolutions to take the necessary steps, including war, to secure our vital interests in the Gulf. In no circumstances should America's politics be crippled by the misguided insistence of the Security Council on unanimity." (clintonletter)
http://www.pnac.info/blog/archives/000036.html
http://www.pnac.info/
Groups small in number can be incredibley influential in the right set of circumstances. What is different now is things like the internet and the mass media so it is harder to shape opinion than at any time in history
posted by kensloft
Finally. Will you Americans stop aking us for drugs?
What is it about north america and all these spam e-mails selling viagra and other stuff, all you all hypochondriacs or what? I would e-mail back saying we have the NHS but I think that would only encourage them.
Iraq today
To kensloft, [I will respond to gmc after I have completed the “homework†he assigned me.]
“I really think that you shouldn't take the "us against them" attitude by implying the we (gmc&I) were saying something that we weren't. I don't recall that I suggested or said that America was out to score the resources of these countries. America, like Canada, is a free-trader and it has to go to where the wares are.â€Â
From your 12/11 9AM post :†America has always gotten itself into trouble in international politics because they seemed to be backing the bad guys around the world. I sensed that if America had its way they would have moved these despots and the like out of office. Had they done that then they would have been seen as Imperialists. Their naivety led them to make a lot of wrong choices but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque.â€Â
The “briar patch†analogy was intended to convey my specific desire not to take the "us against them†attitude. I would like this to be an exchange of perspectives amongst friends.
“It is just too bad that GW didn't do as his dad had done, and waited for the U.N. to declare against Saddamâ€Â
France declared they would veto any use of force, and it’s clear now they had every intention to follow through. If you look at the entire 12 years after the conclusion of the Gulf war, and the facts known so far about the “oil for food scandalâ€Â, it’s very clear the UN had too many conflicts to involve themselves in a meaningful way with Iraq.
The policy of preemption has become the object of derision from many quarters, remember however, it came about only as the result of our being convinced that the UN would not seriously involve it self in the fight against terrorism.
I am sympathetic to your thoughts about the night vision devices, however given the choice of more government prohibitions or unrestrained sales, I suggest a uniquely democratic solution. Tax them at about 10 times the rate of cigarettes :rolleyes:
About the drugs, some things about my government even I can’t defend, however I think we have a fix for this one, - invade Canada.:yh_rotfl
BTW: gmc’s query about North American drugs; do you think it’s significant that the one he mentions is Viagra? :sneaky:
“I really think that you shouldn't take the "us against them" attitude by implying the we (gmc&I) were saying something that we weren't. I don't recall that I suggested or said that America was out to score the resources of these countries. America, like Canada, is a free-trader and it has to go to where the wares are.â€Â
From your 12/11 9AM post :†America has always gotten itself into trouble in international politics because they seemed to be backing the bad guys around the world. I sensed that if America had its way they would have moved these despots and the like out of office. Had they done that then they would have been seen as Imperialists. Their naivety led them to make a lot of wrong choices but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque.â€Â
The “briar patch†analogy was intended to convey my specific desire not to take the "us against them†attitude. I would like this to be an exchange of perspectives amongst friends.
“It is just too bad that GW didn't do as his dad had done, and waited for the U.N. to declare against Saddamâ€Â
France declared they would veto any use of force, and it’s clear now they had every intention to follow through. If you look at the entire 12 years after the conclusion of the Gulf war, and the facts known so far about the “oil for food scandalâ€Â, it’s very clear the UN had too many conflicts to involve themselves in a meaningful way with Iraq.
The policy of preemption has become the object of derision from many quarters, remember however, it came about only as the result of our being convinced that the UN would not seriously involve it self in the fight against terrorism.
I am sympathetic to your thoughts about the night vision devices, however given the choice of more government prohibitions or unrestrained sales, I suggest a uniquely democratic solution. Tax them at about 10 times the rate of cigarettes :rolleyes:
About the drugs, some things about my government even I can’t defend, however I think we have a fix for this one, - invade Canada.:yh_rotfl
BTW: gmc’s query about North American drugs; do you think it’s significant that the one he mentions is Viagra? :sneaky:
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
posted by der wulf
To kensloft, [I will respond to gmc after I have completed the “homework†he assigned me.]
I'm just curious to get an american perspective on this. I am not given to conspiracy theories but it does seem that a small group of narrow interests has got itself in a position of considerable influence. We have a crisis in the UK as well in that the bulk of the population are effectively disenfranchised, we always do best when the checks on power work properly.
BTW: gmc’s query about North American drugs; do you think it’s significant that the one he mentions is Viagra?
It's either that or porn sites. Have you any idea the temptation to make jokes about why North americans feel the need to drive big cars?
To kensloft, [I will respond to gmc after I have completed the “homework†he assigned me.]
I'm just curious to get an american perspective on this. I am not given to conspiracy theories but it does seem that a small group of narrow interests has got itself in a position of considerable influence. We have a crisis in the UK as well in that the bulk of the population are effectively disenfranchised, we always do best when the checks on power work properly.
BTW: gmc’s query about North American drugs; do you think it’s significant that the one he mentions is Viagra?
It's either that or porn sites. Have you any idea the temptation to make jokes about why North americans feel the need to drive big cars?
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Iraq today
gmc wrote: That's the point it was a terrorist group of saudi origin, not iraqui and not a nation state. A bunch of nutters attacking something they blame for all their troubles as they see them.
it was a terrorist group of extremist, fundamentalist islamic origin. their nationalities are irrelevant. most were saudi, i would assume, because osama bin laden is saudi. that doesn't make it a 'saudi group'.
I would agree with you there. except a lot of americans seem to believe everything their government did idsin the interests of freedom.
and a lot don't.
Nope it's not where I'm at but going after al queda has somewhere been forgotten. There are rather dubious reports flying around that osama was cornered in afghanistan but was allowed to escape, if they had got him the rationale for invading iraq would have been harder to put across.
i'm of the opinion that osama is in reality in a gigantic jail now. i believe the intent of 'allowing him to escape' was actually a very crafty way to neuter his effectiveness. he's stuck, in the middle of nowhere, essentially surrounded. he surely isn't running terrorist training camps any more, as we used to see in those captured videos. the powers that be know that if osama is capture or killed, he then becomes a powerful tool for more terrorism - he become either a more public figure (if he is captured, his face will be plastered on front pages around the world, and he'll be paraded around for the world to see- only reinforcing the 'evil west' feelings in the extremists), or if he is killed, he instantly becomes a martyr - and we all know the power of the martyr.
i suspect we will never ultimately know the fate of osama. his little 'life with osama' videos that rarely pop up any more will quietly stop and be forgotten. he will 'vanish' as it were. and won't be able to be a lightning rod for the extremists any longer.
it was a terrorist group of extremist, fundamentalist islamic origin. their nationalities are irrelevant. most were saudi, i would assume, because osama bin laden is saudi. that doesn't make it a 'saudi group'.
I would agree with you there. except a lot of americans seem to believe everything their government did idsin the interests of freedom.
and a lot don't.
Nope it's not where I'm at but going after al queda has somewhere been forgotten. There are rather dubious reports flying around that osama was cornered in afghanistan but was allowed to escape, if they had got him the rationale for invading iraq would have been harder to put across.
i'm of the opinion that osama is in reality in a gigantic jail now. i believe the intent of 'allowing him to escape' was actually a very crafty way to neuter his effectiveness. he's stuck, in the middle of nowhere, essentially surrounded. he surely isn't running terrorist training camps any more, as we used to see in those captured videos. the powers that be know that if osama is capture or killed, he then becomes a powerful tool for more terrorism - he become either a more public figure (if he is captured, his face will be plastered on front pages around the world, and he'll be paraded around for the world to see- only reinforcing the 'evil west' feelings in the extremists), or if he is killed, he instantly becomes a martyr - and we all know the power of the martyr.
i suspect we will never ultimately know the fate of osama. his little 'life with osama' videos that rarely pop up any more will quietly stop and be forgotten. he will 'vanish' as it were. and won't be able to be a lightning rod for the extremists any longer.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Iraq today
I will go back to stating that America has always been interested in the resources that it was after in any region of the world that they went into to do business. As to propping up governments of varied backgrounds, it can be attributed to the fact that it is better for them to kill each other as opposed to us sending in the proverbial "troops".
Gmc you make a good point about the IRA but being half Irish (my mother was from Kerry) I was from a very early age taught that the British should get out of Ireland. The repression and devastation wrought by the British rule caused many to go to America where they flourished.
They did not forget why they arrived in America, so, when the revolutions took place they more than willingly fed the coffers that would undermine and overturn the rule of British law. Ireland belongs to the Irish. The six Northern provinces would be brought back into the fold. It seemed only right that this would be the end of it, but, unfortunately, the guns spoke differently. Three centuries of rule was made to seem as if it caused some inherent right to dominate the region with the wilful desecration of belief with the we're better than you are attitudes of the mid twentieth century Briton.
The nouveau fascists of the day(both sides) ruled supreme and they had the backing of one of the biggest arsenals in the world. Rather than do the right thing they went full throttle into trying to subjugate those under their wings into doing what they thought best. Britain does not have any piece of America or Canada as it does with Ireland.
Much as the Irish may have wanted the full value of the American arsenal unleashed against the British they didn't get it. There was the thought that peaceful negotiations would be able to succeed where guns had failed which was a predominant American thought. They were given enough weaponry to let the British know that there was a capability to cause destruction.
Communism or socialism were and are anathema to America. When it gets into their backyard they tend to get a little uppity. It is akin to knowing that a rapist has moved in down the street and you will have to be ever vigilant from thereon in with your family. Moving them out of the neighbourhood is the best means by which to do this. New shades of Communism or Socialism would not do. Although the point of the socialists was to empower the poor the fact remained that we are only seeing new forms of Orwell's 'Animal Farm'. In the end the piggies would take over and use the dogs of war to get rid of anyone that got in their way.
America knowing full well that there are oppressed living in the regions that are Central and South America didn't want to see the famous 'Domino Effect' take root so close to home. By stealing the resources that America had bankrolled meant that these bank robbers would meet the fate that all bank robbers meet being incarceration or death.
America did not put these(dictators, religious zealots, left or right leaning politicos etc) people in charge when they arrived in whatever region it was that they were in, they simply did business with them. Like all people they pursued their policies with the hope that the Americans -aka- the sleeping giant... would be used to make those around them fear them. The problem with little bullies is that there are always big bullies lurking in the background that are allied with them. Let them duke it out is the rallying cry of the Americans because after all if they aren't smart enough to liberate themselves, as the Americans did, then they are to blame and not America for the situatiion that they find themselves in today.
Der Wulf is quite right when he states his case that the American armed forces did not intervene anywhere in the world with their troops to grab the resources. America did, when opportunity presented itself, align themselves with those that were closest to their thinking. It is semantics but it is true.
Were it the Americans that killed Allende then you could be sure that they would meet the wrath of 'American Justice' but it was a case of them against them so they had little to say other than they thought the best guy won.
As to the spam and emails that mark this day and age let us not forget that for the first time in man's history we are able to contact and speak to anyone, anywhere in the world, in virtual real time. I'm sitting a thousand miles away from Arizona, 5,000 miles from the UK yet we are communicating almost instantaneously.
Spam is the result of people trying to make a buck. Sex sells so if you have a sexual product you are going to promote it by any means available.
Only 60% of americans voted in the last election means that 40% didn't. There are 2 reasons for that. The first is that they are disenchanted and the second is that they are satisfied with the way things are.
For the books in North America bus loads of American senoirs are flooding into Canada to buy theirlife saving, prolonging drugs at half the price that they would pay in the U.S. Canada is also on the verge of decriminalizing pot so you get a lot of cross border trade for that too. The market is being fed by the Chinese who come into Canada looking for a way to get rich. Unbeknownst to them is the tacit understanding between Canadians and their government that debating the issue and not growing the product is the way that it should be resolved.
One final note. GNC when you write about America or any other nation you seem to always spell their names in lower case except when it comes to the UK which is usually capitalized. This, I would point out, is an Americanism with a British cant. No offense but it reminds me of that wise saying put out a couple of millennia ago about throwing stones only if you are perfect enough to do so.
Gmc you make a good point about the IRA but being half Irish (my mother was from Kerry) I was from a very early age taught that the British should get out of Ireland. The repression and devastation wrought by the British rule caused many to go to America where they flourished.
They did not forget why they arrived in America, so, when the revolutions took place they more than willingly fed the coffers that would undermine and overturn the rule of British law. Ireland belongs to the Irish. The six Northern provinces would be brought back into the fold. It seemed only right that this would be the end of it, but, unfortunately, the guns spoke differently. Three centuries of rule was made to seem as if it caused some inherent right to dominate the region with the wilful desecration of belief with the we're better than you are attitudes of the mid twentieth century Briton.
The nouveau fascists of the day(both sides) ruled supreme and they had the backing of one of the biggest arsenals in the world. Rather than do the right thing they went full throttle into trying to subjugate those under their wings into doing what they thought best. Britain does not have any piece of America or Canada as it does with Ireland.
Much as the Irish may have wanted the full value of the American arsenal unleashed against the British they didn't get it. There was the thought that peaceful negotiations would be able to succeed where guns had failed which was a predominant American thought. They were given enough weaponry to let the British know that there was a capability to cause destruction.
Communism or socialism were and are anathema to America. When it gets into their backyard they tend to get a little uppity. It is akin to knowing that a rapist has moved in down the street and you will have to be ever vigilant from thereon in with your family. Moving them out of the neighbourhood is the best means by which to do this. New shades of Communism or Socialism would not do. Although the point of the socialists was to empower the poor the fact remained that we are only seeing new forms of Orwell's 'Animal Farm'. In the end the piggies would take over and use the dogs of war to get rid of anyone that got in their way.
America knowing full well that there are oppressed living in the regions that are Central and South America didn't want to see the famous 'Domino Effect' take root so close to home. By stealing the resources that America had bankrolled meant that these bank robbers would meet the fate that all bank robbers meet being incarceration or death.
America did not put these(dictators, religious zealots, left or right leaning politicos etc) people in charge when they arrived in whatever region it was that they were in, they simply did business with them. Like all people they pursued their policies with the hope that the Americans -aka- the sleeping giant... would be used to make those around them fear them. The problem with little bullies is that there are always big bullies lurking in the background that are allied with them. Let them duke it out is the rallying cry of the Americans because after all if they aren't smart enough to liberate themselves, as the Americans did, then they are to blame and not America for the situatiion that they find themselves in today.
Der Wulf is quite right when he states his case that the American armed forces did not intervene anywhere in the world with their troops to grab the resources. America did, when opportunity presented itself, align themselves with those that were closest to their thinking. It is semantics but it is true.
Were it the Americans that killed Allende then you could be sure that they would meet the wrath of 'American Justice' but it was a case of them against them so they had little to say other than they thought the best guy won.
As to the spam and emails that mark this day and age let us not forget that for the first time in man's history we are able to contact and speak to anyone, anywhere in the world, in virtual real time. I'm sitting a thousand miles away from Arizona, 5,000 miles from the UK yet we are communicating almost instantaneously.
Spam is the result of people trying to make a buck. Sex sells so if you have a sexual product you are going to promote it by any means available.
Only 60% of americans voted in the last election means that 40% didn't. There are 2 reasons for that. The first is that they are disenchanted and the second is that they are satisfied with the way things are.
For the books in North America bus loads of American senoirs are flooding into Canada to buy theirlife saving, prolonging drugs at half the price that they would pay in the U.S. Canada is also on the verge of decriminalizing pot so you get a lot of cross border trade for that too. The market is being fed by the Chinese who come into Canada looking for a way to get rich. Unbeknownst to them is the tacit understanding between Canadians and their government that debating the issue and not growing the product is the way that it should be resolved.
One final note. GNC when you write about America or any other nation you seem to always spell their names in lower case except when it comes to the UK which is usually capitalized. This, I would point out, is an Americanism with a British cant. No offense but it reminds me of that wise saying put out a couple of millennia ago about throwing stones only if you are perfect enough to do so.
Iraq today
Years ago there was a group in America known as the S.D.S. Students for a democratic society. They were the underground of America. They expressed a thought that they should also invade Canada.
I went to New York City to where I knew that they hung out and suggested to them that they would be welcome to invade.They'd probably be able to do it easily but it was just the fact that they would have to contend with 20 million Canadians with their guns hiding behind snowbanks that could prove to be unsettling. The idea that this would be the result stopped them from pursuing that tact and from that point on there was silence on this issue. I know that you added the smiley that was regaling itself with laughter but...
"but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque"
I had implied that America did not move in its armed forces to take the resources. They would have been there because they were doing business.
:driving: The french have always been renowned for changing their minds. Remember they get their oil from there and being capitalists they don't want their supplier to up the price because they have decided to back an invasion against them. An analogy would be if the British decided that they wanted Canadian resources and went to the U.N. to get permission to take Canada back under its wing. What would America do in this case?
:-5 Taxing is a good idea but I feel sure that Americans would do the right thing by taking them off the shelves until further notice. To me this is an oversight that precluded the enemy as being possible purchasers of these wares. That this oversight is occurring should be brought to their attention and the attention of the Homeland Security. I had attempted to contact the Homelland Security but because I am not an American I couldn't get into the "contact us ' part of the web?
"Go Figger dat?"
:-4 If you can figure out how these taxes can bring someone back to life then I will, wholeheartedly, propound this suggestion. If not, then I would appreciate it if you told your friends to tell their friends who will tell their friends... until these things are safely sequestered away until they can be put back on the shelves.
I went to New York City to where I knew that they hung out and suggested to them that they would be welcome to invade.They'd probably be able to do it easily but it was just the fact that they would have to contend with 20 million Canadians with their guns hiding behind snowbanks that could prove to be unsettling. The idea that this would be the result stopped them from pursuing that tact and from that point on there was silence on this issue. I know that you added the smiley that was regaling itself with laughter but...
"but they were there for the resources not the democratization of the country. Whoever was in command got the cheque"
I had implied that America did not move in its armed forces to take the resources. They would have been there because they were doing business.:driving: The french have always been renowned for changing their minds. Remember they get their oil from there and being capitalists they don't want their supplier to up the price because they have decided to back an invasion against them. An analogy would be if the British decided that they wanted Canadian resources and went to the U.N. to get permission to take Canada back under its wing. What would America do in this case?
:-5 Taxing is a good idea but I feel sure that Americans would do the right thing by taking them off the shelves until further notice. To me this is an oversight that precluded the enemy as being possible purchasers of these wares. That this oversight is occurring should be brought to their attention and the attention of the Homeland Security. I had attempted to contact the Homelland Security but because I am not an American I couldn't get into the "contact us ' part of the web?
"Go Figger dat?"
:-4 If you can figure out how these taxes can bring someone back to life then I will, wholeheartedly, propound this suggestion. If not, then I would appreciate it if you told your friends to tell their friends who will tell their friends... until these things are safely sequestered away until they can be put back on the shelves.
Iraq today
Having finished my homework, and read through the subsequent posts, I think the following preparatory remarks are appropriate. I am firmly of the opinion that humor is a necessary component of meaningful dialogue, and intend to use it liberally. I consider we Americans to be “immediate familyâ€Â, other friendly countries “extended familyâ€Â, and as with all family’s, I expect us to be free to argue, discuss, and perhaps toss a barb or two without requiring “political correctnessâ€Â, yet still respect each other in the morning.
So cousin gmc, I had never heard of the PNAC before, I do however agree completely with their “statement of principles†exactly as written, not as interpreted by PNAC.info.
Politically, I am fiercely independent, with a pronounced conservative leaning. Frankly I consider anyone with the notion of “running or commanding the world†to be imbecilic and deserving of immediate, permanent dressing in a nice straight jacket.
Quote from Der Spiegel "In the short term this means being ready to lead military action, without regard for diplomacy. In the long term it means disarming Saddam and his regime. We believe that the US has the right under existing Security Council resolutions to take the necessary steps, including war, to secure our vital interests in the Gulf. In no circumstances should America's politics be crippled by the misguided insistence of the Security Council on unanimity." (clintonletter)
I am convinced history will conclude that our intervention in Iraq was the “right†thing to do. For the record, the hostilities of the gulf war were suspended on condition that the Iraqi’s comply with a set of conditions, they never complied. Several resolutions and 12 yr’s. Later they had not only refused compliance, but 4 internationally respected intel. Agency,s concluded that they were in possession of WMD, the primary concern being that these weapons could be transferred to Al Queda or some other terrorist group.
Just to get it off my chest, we now know what the problem in the UN security council was, I expect the WMD will be found in Syria, I am also convinced that a fight with Islamic terrorist’s was inevitable.
Your quote to kensloft 12/11 2pm “ I think they have been led down the garden path again, not so much by a corrupt regime as by one convinced it is right regardless of any evidence to the contraryâ€Â
What did we do wrong, we overestimated the “gratitude†of the Iraqi’s, we underestimated the organizational skills and tenacity of the terrorists. I fail to see what “evidence to the contrary†indicates we are “wrong†in our decision.
You posted “Maybe if the US forced israel to obey united nations rulings they might get support from the rest of the world and seem less like people operating with double standardsâ€Â
This one I really have trouble with, this situation must be viewed in the perspective of the last 75 years of history. When the area was portioned in 47?, it was a totally barren waste land. The Palestinians had done nothing but whine and wander, they were in fact disparaged by the entire Arabic world. The Israeli’s worked, planted, irrigated, and worked some more, they created first an agricultural wonder, then an industrial one. They offered friendship, and assistance to the Palestinian’s who instead attacked them, this situation remained status quo until the 6 day war.
http://www.uncommonknowledge.org/800/806.html is a fantastic, accurate account of the war with excellent insights into all the participants, plus the US. So much of this event is relative today, but was overshadowed by the Vietnam war. [I have this marked in my favorites to refresh my perspective, I really urge you to check it out.] yes the US has protected Israel in the security council, until Afghanistan, it’s been the only democracy in the region. If you look at the entire picture, I don’t see how our actions can be termed a double standard.
you commented about not feeling threatened, I’m about 50 mi from a nuclear plant, but my concern is more for the loss of a great way of life, and the physical safety of my grandkids.
My old body only allows me so much ‘puter’ time, call this a work in progress, finish tomorrow. Good on ya:)
So cousin gmc, I had never heard of the PNAC before, I do however agree completely with their “statement of principles†exactly as written, not as interpreted by PNAC.info.
Politically, I am fiercely independent, with a pronounced conservative leaning. Frankly I consider anyone with the notion of “running or commanding the world†to be imbecilic and deserving of immediate, permanent dressing in a nice straight jacket.
Quote from Der Spiegel "In the short term this means being ready to lead military action, without regard for diplomacy. In the long term it means disarming Saddam and his regime. We believe that the US has the right under existing Security Council resolutions to take the necessary steps, including war, to secure our vital interests in the Gulf. In no circumstances should America's politics be crippled by the misguided insistence of the Security Council on unanimity." (clintonletter)
I am convinced history will conclude that our intervention in Iraq was the “right†thing to do. For the record, the hostilities of the gulf war were suspended on condition that the Iraqi’s comply with a set of conditions, they never complied. Several resolutions and 12 yr’s. Later they had not only refused compliance, but 4 internationally respected intel. Agency,s concluded that they were in possession of WMD, the primary concern being that these weapons could be transferred to Al Queda or some other terrorist group.
Just to get it off my chest, we now know what the problem in the UN security council was, I expect the WMD will be found in Syria, I am also convinced that a fight with Islamic terrorist’s was inevitable.
Your quote to kensloft 12/11 2pm “ I think they have been led down the garden path again, not so much by a corrupt regime as by one convinced it is right regardless of any evidence to the contraryâ€Â
What did we do wrong, we overestimated the “gratitude†of the Iraqi’s, we underestimated the organizational skills and tenacity of the terrorists. I fail to see what “evidence to the contrary†indicates we are “wrong†in our decision.
You posted “Maybe if the US forced israel to obey united nations rulings they might get support from the rest of the world and seem less like people operating with double standardsâ€Â
This one I really have trouble with, this situation must be viewed in the perspective of the last 75 years of history. When the area was portioned in 47?, it was a totally barren waste land. The Palestinians had done nothing but whine and wander, they were in fact disparaged by the entire Arabic world. The Israeli’s worked, planted, irrigated, and worked some more, they created first an agricultural wonder, then an industrial one. They offered friendship, and assistance to the Palestinian’s who instead attacked them, this situation remained status quo until the 6 day war.
http://www.uncommonknowledge.org/800/806.html is a fantastic, accurate account of the war with excellent insights into all the participants, plus the US. So much of this event is relative today, but was overshadowed by the Vietnam war. [I have this marked in my favorites to refresh my perspective, I really urge you to check it out.] yes the US has protected Israel in the security council, until Afghanistan, it’s been the only democracy in the region. If you look at the entire picture, I don’t see how our actions can be termed a double standard.
you commented about not feeling threatened, I’m about 50 mi from a nuclear plant, but my concern is more for the loss of a great way of life, and the physical safety of my grandkids.
My old body only allows me so much ‘puter’ time, call this a work in progress, finish tomorrow. Good on ya:)
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
I demand that you change your name from Der Wulf to Br'er Rabbit! I saw it comin'. :yh_rotfl
Iraq today
posted by anastrophe
it was a terrorist group of extremist, fundamentalist islamic origin. their nationalities are irrelevant. most were saudi, i would assume, because osama bin laden is saudi. that doesn't make it a 'saudi group'.
Most were saudi because it was a dissident group of suadis attacking a country they saw as supporting a regime they objected to. If you think the fact they are saudi and that there is tremendous opposition to an undemocritic regime is irrelevant then I begin to understand why so many anericans are convinced iraq was behind the 911 attacks. It was saudi dissidents, saudi money, saudi perpetrators how big a clue do you need. They are a bunch of fundamentalist nutters but they are gaining support because there is no outlet for political protest. Can't ecscape the fact they are religious nutters but you need to wonder why such an extreme is gaining support.
posted by der wulf
So cousin gmc, I had never heard of the PNAC before, I do however agree completely with their “statement of principles†exactly as written, not as interpreted by PNAC.info.
Politically, I am fiercely independent, with a pronounced conservative leaning. Frankly I consider anyone with the notion of “running or commanding the world†to be imbecilic and deserving of immediate, permanent dressing in a nice straight jacket.
That's why I posted the different opinions
der wulf
This one I really have trouble with, this situation must be viewed in the perspective of the last 75 years of history. When the area was portioned in 47?, it was a totally barren waste land. The Palestinians had done nothing but whine and wander, they were in fact disparaged by the entire Arabic world. The Israeli’s worked, planted, irrigated, and worked some more, they created first an agricultural wonder, then an industrial one. They offered friendship, and assistance to the Palestinian’s who instead attacked them, this situation remained status quo until the 6 day war.
Actually it goes back further than that, palestine was a british protectorate after ww1 so was iraq. The arab world as yopu put it has been a football for imperialist powers for a very long time. There is no point rerunning history and apportioning blame, the problem is how to deal with the consequences now. It's not a simple problem and simple military solutions won't work, nor will seeing it in black and white terms.
posted by der wulf
I am also convinced that a fight with Islamic terrorist’s was inevitable.
You cannot fight terrorism with conventional armies and you do end up talking to what were once terrorists at some point. Case in point the first israeli cabinet were all former terrorists. LIKUD started out as a terrorist organisation just like HAMAS, some day they will have to make peace with each other neither side will win unless they do.
posyed by der wulf
[QUOTE]you commented about not feeling threatened, I’m about 50 mi from a nuclear plant, but my concern is more for the loss of a great way of life, and the physical safety of my grandkids.
I'm about 25 miles away from one of the biggest chemical plants in europe, which so dar hasn't blown up.
Terrorists win when you change your way of life as a response to their activities
it was a terrorist group of extremist, fundamentalist islamic origin. their nationalities are irrelevant. most were saudi, i would assume, because osama bin laden is saudi. that doesn't make it a 'saudi group'.
Most were saudi because it was a dissident group of suadis attacking a country they saw as supporting a regime they objected to. If you think the fact they are saudi and that there is tremendous opposition to an undemocritic regime is irrelevant then I begin to understand why so many anericans are convinced iraq was behind the 911 attacks. It was saudi dissidents, saudi money, saudi perpetrators how big a clue do you need. They are a bunch of fundamentalist nutters but they are gaining support because there is no outlet for political protest. Can't ecscape the fact they are religious nutters but you need to wonder why such an extreme is gaining support.
posted by der wulf
So cousin gmc, I had never heard of the PNAC before, I do however agree completely with their “statement of principles†exactly as written, not as interpreted by PNAC.info.
Politically, I am fiercely independent, with a pronounced conservative leaning. Frankly I consider anyone with the notion of “running or commanding the world†to be imbecilic and deserving of immediate, permanent dressing in a nice straight jacket.
That's why I posted the different opinions
der wulf
This one I really have trouble with, this situation must be viewed in the perspective of the last 75 years of history. When the area was portioned in 47?, it was a totally barren waste land. The Palestinians had done nothing but whine and wander, they were in fact disparaged by the entire Arabic world. The Israeli’s worked, planted, irrigated, and worked some more, they created first an agricultural wonder, then an industrial one. They offered friendship, and assistance to the Palestinian’s who instead attacked them, this situation remained status quo until the 6 day war.
Actually it goes back further than that, palestine was a british protectorate after ww1 so was iraq. The arab world as yopu put it has been a football for imperialist powers for a very long time. There is no point rerunning history and apportioning blame, the problem is how to deal with the consequences now. It's not a simple problem and simple military solutions won't work, nor will seeing it in black and white terms.
posted by der wulf
I am also convinced that a fight with Islamic terrorist’s was inevitable.
You cannot fight terrorism with conventional armies and you do end up talking to what were once terrorists at some point. Case in point the first israeli cabinet were all former terrorists. LIKUD started out as a terrorist organisation just like HAMAS, some day they will have to make peace with each other neither side will win unless they do.
posyed by der wulf
[QUOTE]you commented about not feeling threatened, I’m about 50 mi from a nuclear plant, but my concern is more for the loss of a great way of life, and the physical safety of my grandkids.
I'm about 25 miles away from one of the biggest chemical plants in europe, which so dar hasn't blown up.
Terrorists win when you change your way of life as a response to their activities
Iraq today
"I demand that you change your name from Der Wulf to Br'er Rabbit! I saw it comin'." :yh_rotfl
My friend kensloft, obviously you are getting a distorted view through one of those cheap night vision monoculars. Der wulf and Brer' rabbit were in the brambles together, however, Der Wulf was hungry, Der Bunny was lunch.
My friend kensloft, obviously you are getting a distorted view through one of those cheap night vision monoculars. Der wulf and Brer' rabbit were in the brambles together, however, Der Wulf was hungry, Der Bunny was lunch.
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
You know I should never have taken them off ( the monoculars) to look at them because, apparently, when I looked into them I must have had some reaction to the infrared rays?
Damn things don't know their own strength!
Seeing as how gmc likes to get into historical fact I thought that I would offer this observation:
Back a couple of thousand years ago, around the time of the Israeli diaspora, the land they were forced to vacate was taken over by their cousins. The present-day Arabs, who kept the lands for 2,000 years or so, were not apprecative of their cousins returning home.
They were so adamant against their return that they imposed upon themselves a ruler that told them not to believe that those people had ever lived here! They are liars. They have come to steal land that had never belonged to them or their ancestors. Ever! The rallying cry was heard throughout the lands surrounding where the cousins , as they saw it, staked their claim.
The continual denial of the facts by the miffed cousins led people in the areas that were not in the geographical neighbourhood to wonder why they would deny reality. Looking for conclusive truth there must be some relationship between their intransigence and whatever it is that, as a rule, they all believe in as an intrinsic aspect of their lives.
Truth and lies usually suggests some kind of moral fabric and the closest thing to that was religion. Are their religious leaders also liars? If they don't believe what is historical fact then what do they believe?
In the mean time people are getting killed. They are not only being killed, they are being, literally, butchered. To the outsiders, having been through a few wars, it is the popular opinion that you do not desecrate the sanctity of life by mutilating and torturing the person while they are still living. You blow them up real good but you can't hold them as dissecting experiments. A step back and you see that their beliefs are those of a person that has been taught by an implacable, 1500 year old religion. Unchanged and solid as a rock.
It is based on the "macho Man" theory of the day, then. Battling amongst themselves the only weaponery that they had were the sword and spear for close contact battle, so, a lot of the literature details what you can do with the sweaons of the day. You can kill your foe by beheading him. If you are in a good mood you can just take off his arm or leg. Better a one-legged slave than no slave at all.
Who was your foe? It was the guys over there that were against your side. Because they don't belive the way that you have been told to behave they must be infidels! If they have not seen the true light then they must perish. To prove your civility, you don'y just up and kill them just because you may think that they are infidels. You can't run around killing your own by mistake. So. You ask them if they are true believers in ...?
Not having a sword to stand your ground meant that you acquiesced to their demand by saying that you believed. Besides you saw and heard what happened to your neighbour a few doors down the way, a few months ago, when they didn't give the questioner the right answer. One of the upshots of the situation was that you were able to get more girls because there weren't enough guys to go around to service the race.
Don't lie. Don't steal. Don't steal the other guys wife. Do these things and you will get punished accordingly. Steal once, you lose one hand. Steal twice and you lose the other. After all, it is written in the Bible of the Christians and Jews that "if thine eye offend thee, then pluck it out" etc. Sure as hell, if people would only do as they should, then there wouldn't have to be people making them do what they should have done in the first place.
This duty fell upon the guys that had the most swords and according to what they had been told by their leader's God inspired talk. If the wife goes out and cheats on her husband because... stone her. Some things just can't be tolerated. There is a list of things that you can and can't do. You don't need your neighbours to know that you used to kick the bejeezus out of her as something to do to amuse yourself? She's your property and you can do anything you want to do with your property. Conservatism carried to the extreme.
The books are wriiten and now the job is to keep them just as God had given them to Mohammed.
Fifteen centuries of relative peace in the valley or desert and the books are still basically the same text. Interpretations and updates abound. It looks like it could go on forever As to the rest of the infidel world, it is only a matter of time before they convert. Or we will chop off their heads! They get plenty of practice what with all these Christian infidels trying reclaim that heretics gravesite.
Meanwhile slavery has been abolished and anyone that keeps them is sub-human. Women's rights has evolved to where they are no longer chattels and demand their place in the human race. It is all wrong by the muslims' perception and they aren't about to let outsiders disrupt their, apparently, idyllic lives. Circle the wagons... er... camels folks. Its time to give the infidels a little what for? "We'll take our direction from our holy men," they say. They wouldn't do us wrong. They know whereof I speak because they should know, they told me how to behave with holiness, so?
Strike out as you see your foe. If his back is to you it's OK to smite. They are less than human. Feel no compunction about doing it. They don't deserve to live anyways. We don't believe in swinging door penal systems. We'll take care of our problems our way and if you don't understand then that only proves that you are an infidel. The thief will be known to everyone and his life will be one of being under constant supervision. Others may see the wrath of God as executed by his host on earth.
:-5 Were the world so simple and black and white? Were there no grey area then... .
It reminds me of another battle between cousins that happened in the European theatre. The French and the English. Centuries of death and destruction, all in the name of the "We were here first and your scooping my property" syndrome.
Every once in a while they would cease their fighting to go and tangle with the dudes that were keeping them from JC's gravesite. When they came back home they continued their warring ways. One thing was for sure and that was the incursions into Araby were a welcome diversion. You can learn through history or you can continue to repeat the error of your interpretation of the way things are.
If these guys don't get it together and democratize then we are going to be witness to these stupidities for a long time to come if we view family contests in the light of the Anglo/French scenario.
Whatever the causes it has only been the past hundred years that has seen them live peaceably side by side!
With the communications as we know them to be in this day and age we may not have to endure centuries of these constant rounds of muderous, hatred-inspired atrocities againsy human beings. I, personally, think that we should be talking before we start fighting. We should be talking while we are fighting too. I hate fighting because the end result is that someone is going to get hurt and it is not necessarily right that wins. The bad guys do get to be the winners, sometimes. Look at Hitler. How long they stay in control is entirely up to the people that are beneath them. They will either free themselves or be liberated by those that see and understand their predicament.
Fortunately, this talk is not cheap because we have to pay for this service. Seeing as how it is worth something then maybe it'll be listened to by those that we are, allegedly, against. Mistrust and misunderstanding seem to be the refuge of those that sow their seeds of irrational behaviour in order to maintain the stature and status in life. A friend of mine recently returned from Iran and he was astonished by the fact that it seemed as if the only people that looked into the sky were the clerics. Everyone else, he bemoaned, kept their eyes looking down towards the ground.
I know that I'll be a lot happier when I hear about the Iraqis going home after work to watch the Simpsons.
Damn things don't know their own strength!
Seeing as how gmc likes to get into historical fact I thought that I would offer this observation:
Back a couple of thousand years ago, around the time of the Israeli diaspora, the land they were forced to vacate was taken over by their cousins. The present-day Arabs, who kept the lands for 2,000 years or so, were not apprecative of their cousins returning home.
They were so adamant against their return that they imposed upon themselves a ruler that told them not to believe that those people had ever lived here! They are liars. They have come to steal land that had never belonged to them or their ancestors. Ever! The rallying cry was heard throughout the lands surrounding where the cousins , as they saw it, staked their claim.
The continual denial of the facts by the miffed cousins led people in the areas that were not in the geographical neighbourhood to wonder why they would deny reality. Looking for conclusive truth there must be some relationship between their intransigence and whatever it is that, as a rule, they all believe in as an intrinsic aspect of their lives.
Truth and lies usually suggests some kind of moral fabric and the closest thing to that was religion. Are their religious leaders also liars? If they don't believe what is historical fact then what do they believe?
In the mean time people are getting killed. They are not only being killed, they are being, literally, butchered. To the outsiders, having been through a few wars, it is the popular opinion that you do not desecrate the sanctity of life by mutilating and torturing the person while they are still living. You blow them up real good but you can't hold them as dissecting experiments. A step back and you see that their beliefs are those of a person that has been taught by an implacable, 1500 year old religion. Unchanged and solid as a rock.
It is based on the "macho Man" theory of the day, then. Battling amongst themselves the only weaponery that they had were the sword and spear for close contact battle, so, a lot of the literature details what you can do with the sweaons of the day. You can kill your foe by beheading him. If you are in a good mood you can just take off his arm or leg. Better a one-legged slave than no slave at all.
Who was your foe? It was the guys over there that were against your side. Because they don't belive the way that you have been told to behave they must be infidels! If they have not seen the true light then they must perish. To prove your civility, you don'y just up and kill them just because you may think that they are infidels. You can't run around killing your own by mistake. So. You ask them if they are true believers in ...?
Not having a sword to stand your ground meant that you acquiesced to their demand by saying that you believed. Besides you saw and heard what happened to your neighbour a few doors down the way, a few months ago, when they didn't give the questioner the right answer. One of the upshots of the situation was that you were able to get more girls because there weren't enough guys to go around to service the race.
Don't lie. Don't steal. Don't steal the other guys wife. Do these things and you will get punished accordingly. Steal once, you lose one hand. Steal twice and you lose the other. After all, it is written in the Bible of the Christians and Jews that "if thine eye offend thee, then pluck it out" etc. Sure as hell, if people would only do as they should, then there wouldn't have to be people making them do what they should have done in the first place.
This duty fell upon the guys that had the most swords and according to what they had been told by their leader's God inspired talk. If the wife goes out and cheats on her husband because... stone her. Some things just can't be tolerated. There is a list of things that you can and can't do. You don't need your neighbours to know that you used to kick the bejeezus out of her as something to do to amuse yourself? She's your property and you can do anything you want to do with your property. Conservatism carried to the extreme.
The books are wriiten and now the job is to keep them just as God had given them to Mohammed.
Fifteen centuries of relative peace in the valley or desert and the books are still basically the same text. Interpretations and updates abound. It looks like it could go on forever As to the rest of the infidel world, it is only a matter of time before they convert. Or we will chop off their heads! They get plenty of practice what with all these Christian infidels trying reclaim that heretics gravesite.
Meanwhile slavery has been abolished and anyone that keeps them is sub-human. Women's rights has evolved to where they are no longer chattels and demand their place in the human race. It is all wrong by the muslims' perception and they aren't about to let outsiders disrupt their, apparently, idyllic lives. Circle the wagons... er... camels folks. Its time to give the infidels a little what for? "We'll take our direction from our holy men," they say. They wouldn't do us wrong. They know whereof I speak because they should know, they told me how to behave with holiness, so?
Strike out as you see your foe. If his back is to you it's OK to smite. They are less than human. Feel no compunction about doing it. They don't deserve to live anyways. We don't believe in swinging door penal systems. We'll take care of our problems our way and if you don't understand then that only proves that you are an infidel. The thief will be known to everyone and his life will be one of being under constant supervision. Others may see the wrath of God as executed by his host on earth.
:-5 Were the world so simple and black and white? Were there no grey area then... .
It reminds me of another battle between cousins that happened in the European theatre. The French and the English. Centuries of death and destruction, all in the name of the "We were here first and your scooping my property" syndrome.
Every once in a while they would cease their fighting to go and tangle with the dudes that were keeping them from JC's gravesite. When they came back home they continued their warring ways. One thing was for sure and that was the incursions into Araby were a welcome diversion. You can learn through history or you can continue to repeat the error of your interpretation of the way things are.
If these guys don't get it together and democratize then we are going to be witness to these stupidities for a long time to come if we view family contests in the light of the Anglo/French scenario.
Whatever the causes it has only been the past hundred years that has seen them live peaceably side by side!
With the communications as we know them to be in this day and age we may not have to endure centuries of these constant rounds of muderous, hatred-inspired atrocities againsy human beings. I, personally, think that we should be talking before we start fighting. We should be talking while we are fighting too. I hate fighting because the end result is that someone is going to get hurt and it is not necessarily right that wins. The bad guys do get to be the winners, sometimes. Look at Hitler. How long they stay in control is entirely up to the people that are beneath them. They will either free themselves or be liberated by those that see and understand their predicament.
Fortunately, this talk is not cheap because we have to pay for this service. Seeing as how it is worth something then maybe it'll be listened to by those that we are, allegedly, against. Mistrust and misunderstanding seem to be the refuge of those that sow their seeds of irrational behaviour in order to maintain the stature and status in life. A friend of mine recently returned from Iran and he was astonished by the fact that it seemed as if the only people that looked into the sky were the clerics. Everyone else, he bemoaned, kept their eyes looking down towards the ground.
I know that I'll be a lot happier when I hear about the Iraqis going home after work to watch the Simpsons.
Iraq today
Gmc posted : “There is no point rerunning history and apportioning blame, the problem is how to deal with the consequences now. It's not a simple problem and simple military solutions won't work, nor will seeing it in black and white termsâ€Â
“Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mindâ€Â
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
I’ve been trying to ease slowly through the briar patch, but you’ve tossed a couple firecrackers, I suppose to either change my course, or speed me up. So, I’ll sharpen my points and speed up.
The examples of Iraq, and the Israeli’s are not the problem, they are symptoms of the problem and what I will term “European discomfortâ€Â.
Ø For at least the last 15 years the UN has been a corrupt, and impotent institution.
Ø The US role in protecting Israel is in large part, the consequence of European appeasement of their oil suppliers. –or more accurately, knowing that the US will protect Israeli interests, the European’s are allowed to ignore conscience and appease the Arab states.
Ø The coalition’s unilateral action in Iraq is the direct result of UN impotence and corruption.
Ø The terrorists of 911 were not poor and abused, they all were from financially comfortable family’s, and had good educations. That they were Saudi’s, is not as relevant as the fact that they were members of a radical Islamic organization, lavishly financed by wealthy people, and represented in every country with a large Islamic population.
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
Ø To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
Yes, there have been profound changes, more however with the world order than with us. Since you don’t like long walks down history lane, I’ll make this quick, but not as precise as the long version.
Prior to WWI, the world power centers were the UK, Spain, and France. America was an isolationist sleeping giant, the Soviet union, and China were huge but basically closed third world countries.
After WWII, the power centers were Russia, and the US. Europe was in ruins, concerned primarily with survival and physically rebuilding. The UN was born, and though scary, the policies of mutually assured destruction was accepted because we all knew that no society was so depraved as to willingly commit suicide.
1989 Soviet Union collapses, US becomes the sole superpower. UN is becoming ineffective. In spite of our 200 year reputation, the world becomes increasingly suspicious of, and hostile to the US, primarily because there is no “balanceâ€Â, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful military, and significant financial power is under the control of, “oh my god, those American cowboysâ€Â.
9/11/2001, destruction of world trade center by Islamic fundamentalists, who are delighted to commit suicide in order to harm their enemy.
03/20/2003, US coalition invades Iraq without UN “permissionâ€Â, in a “pre-emotiveâ€Â; : marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself attack> After months of negotiating at the UN, blocked in the security counsel by what we now know were votes purchased by Iraq’s dictator, the US exercised it’s sovereignty and led a coalition into Iraq.
This of course was, in the view of many, the final perfidy, the evidence that the US had morphed into an international bully.
So were there changes, yeah, a few by the US, in the face of quantum, deadly changes to world politics.
Finally, you asked if this action represented our leaders being out of step with the people.
There has been a consistent 70-80% approval rate for taking the action, and then after a bruising campaign, the man and the party that made these decisions was re-elected. Most things political here are pretty evenly split, but that’s a whole nuther quandary.
I think that covers everything, wulf ate a bunny today, now he needs a nap.
Good on ya
“Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mindâ€Â
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
I’ve been trying to ease slowly through the briar patch, but you’ve tossed a couple firecrackers, I suppose to either change my course, or speed me up. So, I’ll sharpen my points and speed up.
The examples of Iraq, and the Israeli’s are not the problem, they are symptoms of the problem and what I will term “European discomfortâ€Â.
Ø For at least the last 15 years the UN has been a corrupt, and impotent institution.
Ø The US role in protecting Israel is in large part, the consequence of European appeasement of their oil suppliers. –or more accurately, knowing that the US will protect Israeli interests, the European’s are allowed to ignore conscience and appease the Arab states.
Ø The coalition’s unilateral action in Iraq is the direct result of UN impotence and corruption.
Ø The terrorists of 911 were not poor and abused, they all were from financially comfortable family’s, and had good educations. That they were Saudi’s, is not as relevant as the fact that they were members of a radical Islamic organization, lavishly financed by wealthy people, and represented in every country with a large Islamic population.
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
Ø To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
Yes, there have been profound changes, more however with the world order than with us. Since you don’t like long walks down history lane, I’ll make this quick, but not as precise as the long version.
Prior to WWI, the world power centers were the UK, Spain, and France. America was an isolationist sleeping giant, the Soviet union, and China were huge but basically closed third world countries.
After WWII, the power centers were Russia, and the US. Europe was in ruins, concerned primarily with survival and physically rebuilding. The UN was born, and though scary, the policies of mutually assured destruction was accepted because we all knew that no society was so depraved as to willingly commit suicide.
1989 Soviet Union collapses, US becomes the sole superpower. UN is becoming ineffective. In spite of our 200 year reputation, the world becomes increasingly suspicious of, and hostile to the US, primarily because there is no “balanceâ€Â, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful military, and significant financial power is under the control of, “oh my god, those American cowboysâ€Â.
9/11/2001, destruction of world trade center by Islamic fundamentalists, who are delighted to commit suicide in order to harm their enemy.
03/20/2003, US coalition invades Iraq without UN “permissionâ€Â, in a “pre-emotiveâ€Â; : marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself attack> After months of negotiating at the UN, blocked in the security counsel by what we now know were votes purchased by Iraq’s dictator, the US exercised it’s sovereignty and led a coalition into Iraq.
This of course was, in the view of many, the final perfidy, the evidence that the US had morphed into an international bully.
So were there changes, yeah, a few by the US, in the face of quantum, deadly changes to world politics.
Finally, you asked if this action represented our leaders being out of step with the people.
There has been a consistent 70-80% approval rate for taking the action, and then after a bruising campaign, the man and the party that made these decisions was re-elected. Most things political here are pretty evenly split, but that’s a whole nuther quandary.
I think that covers everything, wulf ate a bunny today, now he needs a nap.
Good on ya
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
Ah my frozen, northern cousin extremly well said:)
I do however need to speak with you bout a coupla things, so to the table and a cold one.
YOU SEZ:"She's your property and you can do anything you want to do with your property.Conservatism carried to the extreme.
ME: As a natural born conservative, I implore you, PLEASE do not send a statement like that into my house, should mamma wulf find that, all 100 pounds of her would likely take offense, I could wake up to find myself (well maybe not find myself) but anyway in a condition that not even your fine canadian viagra could fix.
YOU SEZ: re: SDS, they wanted to invade you??
ME: You musta heard wrong, they were a bunch of socialists, they wanted to join ya!!!!! couple of em even turned down our offer of all expenses paid at the lovely San Quenten resort and spa, said they'd rather live up in your north woods.
YOU SEZ: Canadian guys with guns behind sno bank is scary.
ME: Been up there, memory is of big strong bearded dudes with guns that could select target, then actually hit it. not scary. This scary, be in US forest opening day of deer season. See city type yahoo's with orange vest, an Gucci boots, brown straw hat with big white feather. These guys convinced that white tails is 5'-6' tall, makes big crashing noise when sneaking through woods, and needs min of 20 shots ta bag. Yahoo's got hands aroun big gun that aint been shot since last day of last season when he found junk car. 15 rounds from 50 feet, at speedy rate of fire, yellin like "dirty Harry" . car not even scratched. now that my fine frosty friend, is scary. (I'm originally from Michigan, story is biographical):D
I do however need to speak with you bout a coupla things, so to the table and a cold one.
YOU SEZ:"She's your property and you can do anything you want to do with your property.Conservatism carried to the extreme.
ME: As a natural born conservative, I implore you, PLEASE do not send a statement like that into my house, should mamma wulf find that, all 100 pounds of her would likely take offense, I could wake up to find myself (well maybe not find myself) but anyway in a condition that not even your fine canadian viagra could fix.
YOU SEZ: re: SDS, they wanted to invade you??
ME: You musta heard wrong, they were a bunch of socialists, they wanted to join ya!!!!! couple of em even turned down our offer of all expenses paid at the lovely San Quenten resort and spa, said they'd rather live up in your north woods.
YOU SEZ: Canadian guys with guns behind sno bank is scary.
ME: Been up there, memory is of big strong bearded dudes with guns that could select target, then actually hit it. not scary. This scary, be in US forest opening day of deer season. See city type yahoo's with orange vest, an Gucci boots, brown straw hat with big white feather. These guys convinced that white tails is 5'-6' tall, makes big crashing noise when sneaking through woods, and needs min of 20 shots ta bag. Yahoo's got hands aroun big gun that aint been shot since last day of last season when he found junk car. 15 rounds from 50 feet, at speedy rate of fire, yellin like "dirty Harry" . car not even scratched. now that my fine frosty friend, is scary. (I'm originally from Michigan, story is biographical):D
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
Tell the 100 pound she wulf that the fingers of the writer were near frozen and he couldn't erase or rewrite the line. Could've/should've made it longer but... . Last you heard he had complications and the doctors are telling you his standin did it. I hear tell that Lorena Bobbit was refused entry to a local rabbinical college.
As to the S.D.S. it was the mainstream media, the underground media and their writings that told us that they wanted to invade. I just wanted to tell them that their ill conceived plan had reprecussions. I think they got the message.
As to the hunters I am too busy laughing to come up with a good "I got a better one than that" routine. :yh_cry
As to the S.D.S. it was the mainstream media, the underground media and their writings that told us that they wanted to invade. I just wanted to tell them that their ill conceived plan had reprecussions. I think they got the message.
As to the hunters I am too busy laughing to come up with a good "I got a better one than that" routine. :yh_cry
Iraq today
posted by kensloft
Seeing as how gmc likes to get into historical fact I thought that I would offer this observation:
If these guys don't get it together and democratize then we are going to be witness to these stupidities for a long time to come if we view family contests in the light of the Anglo/French scenario.
Whatever the causes it has only been the past hundred years that has seen them live peaceably side by side!
With the communications as we know them to be in this day and age we may not have to endure centuries of these constant rounds of muderous, hatred-inspired atrocities againsy human beings. I, personally, think that we should be talking before we start fighting. We should be talking while we are fighting too. I hate fighting because the end result is that someone is going to get hurt and it is not necessarily right that wins. The bad guys do get to be the winners, sometimes. Look at Hitler. How long they stay in control is entirely up to the people that are beneath them. They will either free themselves or be liberated by those that see and understand their predicament.
I quite like your observations
posted by der wulf
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
There is also an old roman saying which is something like those who fail to study the past are doomed forever to repeat the same mistakes. If I could remember the latin I would use it in a feeble attempt to impress.
All I meant was that we can spend ages going over who did what and if they hadn't done this then that wouldn't have happened and europe was badder than the US. As to Ireland-let's just blame the English
Actually Ireland is a good example of the kind of harm religon causes maybe because it is by nature irrational that the hatreds that result are irrational. When you look at the history if ireland you end up thinking why are people still killing each other over this. I know perfectly normal intelligent people that are rabid anti catholics, it's like a switch goes in their brain and they are ready to kick the head in of somebody they were friendly with five minutes before. Then we have daft things like trial interdenominational schools not going ahead in lanarkshire because the adults can agree to have joint lessons but seperate religious education but then the catholics want seperate entrances to the school. It was suggested they hand out free condoms in case any protestant male is successful in contaminating the girls but that suggesdtion was not welcomed. Now the muslims want seperate faith schools because they are worried about their girls learning that they can make their own decisions. Ban religon from schools. Anyway I digress.
posted by der wulf
To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
Islam is not the only religon with extremists, you don't have to look very far to find the same kind of mentality amongst christian sects and there have been times in the past when they gained control with nightmare consequences for those of a liberal disposition (liberal in the real meaning of the word as in favouring liberty and free speech)
The real question is why are they gaining more support now? it's not as if there was no imperialism or impression in the past. I do not think you can defeat fundamentalism with clubs, the more you hit the more support they gain as everybody loves a martyr. I hope going in to iraq turns out to be the right thing as well, what I think is more likely is iraq splitting in to seperate parts sunni, sufi and possibly the kurds, which should get the turks going. Rather than destroying their support base they are gaining recruits all the time.
posted by der wulf
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
That is based on supposed surveys that suggest around 60% of americans believe Iraq was behind the 911 attacks, cant find a link just now but will find it if you are interested. Bear in mind most of my sources are not US based. which may or may not make them more accurate. It has rather cynically been suggested that most americans in the bible belt don't know where the middle east is.
posted by der wulf
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
I'm curious, what is different now is the mass media, whereas before leaders could on the whole get away with a lot now they have press at them all the time, but there seems to be an attitude that the US press is liberal therefore unreliable. You have a power grouping that could take america down a very unpleasant route and will if they can. I am just very curious to find out what americans think and hope for a rational reply rather than a rant.
(the L word again, it's one of my pet hates, in UK terms the liberals are soft and cuddly and want everybody to like them and labour and tories keep telling everybody they are unlikely to get power so don't waste your vote which has the effect of making people who weren't going to vote for them interested to see what they are worried about)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections20 ... 81,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,5860,1327656,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections20 ... 68,00.html
In a UK context the guardian would be a liberal paper but not in the american sense
in the interests of balance
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/
Posted by kenloft
One final note. GNC when you write about America or any other nation you seem to always spell their names in lower case except when it comes to the UK which is usually capitalized. This, I would point out, is an Americanism with a British cant. No offense but it reminds me of that wise saying put out a couple of millennia ago about throwing stones only if you are perfect enough to do so.
Must admit you had me puzzled. So far as i can see it is completely indiscriminate an dprobably moe to do with my crap yping-I spell, I type but both together I can't always manage. As to it being americanism with a british cant? what do you expect I am not american for which I no doubt have to thank an ancester too poor to afford the fare.
see here pal, ye should be awfy glad i tak the time to write proper english an no write the wye I normlly speak ken, or ye wid be awfy confused would ye no? Dinnae fash yerself pal it's no worth the bother, nae offence intended.
Seeing as how gmc likes to get into historical fact I thought that I would offer this observation:
If these guys don't get it together and democratize then we are going to be witness to these stupidities for a long time to come if we view family contests in the light of the Anglo/French scenario.
Whatever the causes it has only been the past hundred years that has seen them live peaceably side by side!
With the communications as we know them to be in this day and age we may not have to endure centuries of these constant rounds of muderous, hatred-inspired atrocities againsy human beings. I, personally, think that we should be talking before we start fighting. We should be talking while we are fighting too. I hate fighting because the end result is that someone is going to get hurt and it is not necessarily right that wins. The bad guys do get to be the winners, sometimes. Look at Hitler. How long they stay in control is entirely up to the people that are beneath them. They will either free themselves or be liberated by those that see and understand their predicament.
I quite like your observations
posted by der wulf
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
There is also an old roman saying which is something like those who fail to study the past are doomed forever to repeat the same mistakes. If I could remember the latin I would use it in a feeble attempt to impress.
All I meant was that we can spend ages going over who did what and if they hadn't done this then that wouldn't have happened and europe was badder than the US. As to Ireland-let's just blame the English
Actually Ireland is a good example of the kind of harm religon causes maybe because it is by nature irrational that the hatreds that result are irrational. When you look at the history if ireland you end up thinking why are people still killing each other over this. I know perfectly normal intelligent people that are rabid anti catholics, it's like a switch goes in their brain and they are ready to kick the head in of somebody they were friendly with five minutes before. Then we have daft things like trial interdenominational schools not going ahead in lanarkshire because the adults can agree to have joint lessons but seperate religious education but then the catholics want seperate entrances to the school. It was suggested they hand out free condoms in case any protestant male is successful in contaminating the girls but that suggesdtion was not welcomed. Now the muslims want seperate faith schools because they are worried about their girls learning that they can make their own decisions. Ban religon from schools. Anyway I digress.
posted by der wulf
To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
Islam is not the only religon with extremists, you don't have to look very far to find the same kind of mentality amongst christian sects and there have been times in the past when they gained control with nightmare consequences for those of a liberal disposition (liberal in the real meaning of the word as in favouring liberty and free speech)
The real question is why are they gaining more support now? it's not as if there was no imperialism or impression in the past. I do not think you can defeat fundamentalism with clubs, the more you hit the more support they gain as everybody loves a martyr. I hope going in to iraq turns out to be the right thing as well, what I think is more likely is iraq splitting in to seperate parts sunni, sufi and possibly the kurds, which should get the turks going. Rather than destroying their support base they are gaining recruits all the time.
posted by der wulf
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
That is based on supposed surveys that suggest around 60% of americans believe Iraq was behind the 911 attacks, cant find a link just now but will find it if you are interested. Bear in mind most of my sources are not US based. which may or may not make them more accurate. It has rather cynically been suggested that most americans in the bible belt don't know where the middle east is.
posted by der wulf
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
I'm curious, what is different now is the mass media, whereas before leaders could on the whole get away with a lot now they have press at them all the time, but there seems to be an attitude that the US press is liberal therefore unreliable. You have a power grouping that could take america down a very unpleasant route and will if they can. I am just very curious to find out what americans think and hope for a rational reply rather than a rant.
(the L word again, it's one of my pet hates, in UK terms the liberals are soft and cuddly and want everybody to like them and labour and tories keep telling everybody they are unlikely to get power so don't waste your vote which has the effect of making people who weren't going to vote for them interested to see what they are worried about)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections20 ... 81,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,5860,1327656,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections20 ... 68,00.html
In a UK context the guardian would be a liberal paper but not in the american sense
in the interests of balance
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/
Posted by kenloft
One final note. GNC when you write about America or any other nation you seem to always spell their names in lower case except when it comes to the UK which is usually capitalized. This, I would point out, is an Americanism with a British cant. No offense but it reminds me of that wise saying put out a couple of millennia ago about throwing stones only if you are perfect enough to do so.
Must admit you had me puzzled. So far as i can see it is completely indiscriminate an dprobably moe to do with my crap yping-I spell, I type but both together I can't always manage. As to it being americanism with a british cant? what do you expect I am not american for which I no doubt have to thank an ancester too poor to afford the fare.
see here pal, ye should be awfy glad i tak the time to write proper english an no write the wye I normlly speak ken, or ye wid be awfy confused would ye no? Dinnae fash yerself pal it's no worth the bother, nae offence intended.
Iraq today
Posted by kenloft
"One final note. GNC when you write about America or any other nation you seem to always spell their names in lower case except when it comes to the UK which is usually capitalized. This, I would point out, is an Americanism with a British cant. No offense but it reminds me of that wise saying put out a couple of millennia ago about throwing stones only if you are perfect enough to do so."
Sez Wulf:
The only thing that saves my sorry behind, is that I compose in "word", puter either changes it for me, or if the spelling is too bad, it slaps me upside head. I keep plenty a that good Canadian asprin for sore head.:yh_sigh
"One final note. GNC when you write about America or any other nation you seem to always spell their names in lower case except when it comes to the UK which is usually capitalized. This, I would point out, is an Americanism with a British cant. No offense but it reminds me of that wise saying put out a couple of millennia ago about throwing stones only if you are perfect enough to do so."
Sez Wulf:
The only thing that saves my sorry behind, is that I compose in "word", puter either changes it for me, or if the spelling is too bad, it slaps me upside head. I keep plenty a that good Canadian asprin for sore head.:yh_sigh
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
wulf said
Sez Wulf:
The only thing that saves my sorry behind, is that I compose in "word", puter either changes it for me, or if the spelling is too bad, it slaps me upside head. I keep plenty a that good Canadian asprin for sore head.
Used to use word but it kept telling me words like colour and humour were wrong when they weren't now I use star office which for some reason I have not yet sussed thinks I am writing in spanish.
Sez Wulf:
The only thing that saves my sorry behind, is that I compose in "word", puter either changes it for me, or if the spelling is too bad, it slaps me upside head. I keep plenty a that good Canadian asprin for sore head.
Used to use word but it kept telling me words like colour and humour were wrong when they weren't now I use star office which for some reason I have not yet sussed thinks I am writing in spanish.
Iraq today
gmc wrote: You have a power grouping that could take america down a very unpleasant route and will if they can. I am just very curious to find out what americans think and hope for a rational reply rather than a rant.
I've not gone back to count, however you've expressed yourself this way at least twice. :yh_questn
Q: Could you expand on the "power grouping" "unpleasant route" thought, I can better discuss it if I have a clearer understanding of the point(s).
Q: The three of us have communicated together for some time, I'm unaware of any rants, or irrational responses. Why the repetition? Maybe we don't understand your definition of rants, and irrational.
The links you supplied merit some study, I'll get on it.:yh_think
good on ya
I've not gone back to count, however you've expressed yourself this way at least twice. :yh_questn
Q: Could you expand on the "power grouping" "unpleasant route" thought, I can better discuss it if I have a clearer understanding of the point(s).
Q: The three of us have communicated together for some time, I'm unaware of any rants, or irrational responses. Why the repetition? Maybe we don't understand your definition of rants, and irrational.
The links you supplied merit some study, I'll get on it.:yh_think
good on yaOld age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
posted by der wulf
I've not gone back to count, however you've expressed yourself this way at least twice.
Q: Could you expand on the "power grouping" "unpleasant route" thought, I can better discuss it if I have a clearer understanding of the point(s).
Q: The three of us have communicated together for some time, I'm unaware of any rants, or irrational responses. Why the repetition? Maybe we don't understand your definition of rants, and irrational.
The links you supplied merit some study, I'll get on it.
My apologies I didn't actually mean you, and I did not express myself terribly well. it's just in one or two other posts when I have asked similar questions people seem to have taken offence, Any criticism of american policy in the middle east seems to be taken personallyand people lay in with charges of being anti american without actually looking at what i said, or i thought i said. The most common one is you should be grateful to the US for saving the western world which really irritates.
What seems to have happened is your political system has allowed a narrow interest group to get power. What might be described as the christian right that feel they have the moral authority to use the chance to change america to the way they think it should be and are set about doing it. On the face of it they seem quite up front about what they intend in the way of reforming rules on abortion gay rights and bringing religon back in to the state schools and doing away with the division between state and church. You read stories about the teaching of evolution being banned in some areas or the insistence that creationism be taught as well. The grand canyon visitor centre for example seems to have a display explaining the canyon was created by the flood. we get that kind of thing here as well here but the general response is believe that if you want but don't be so bloody daft as to expect anybody else.
I think they may get away with it but eventually people will vote against it. In terms of foreign policy they seem to think that since the US is the most powerful nation it is quite legitimate to use force in americas interest. Taking on syria and Iran in the breathtaking assumption that the peoples in those countries will not fight back and will be grateful to have freedom delivered to them is imo ever so slightly daft. It seem americans have difficulty understanding that other nations are every bit as patriotic they just go about it differently. extreme nationalism in europe we tend to associate to some extent with nazism and militarism so patriotism is played down except maybe at football matches
When I looked at the pnac site it was like the old sentiments of manifest destiny being expressed in modern guise. In another age it would be blatant imperialism. As an outsider I looked at it and thought they have got to be kidding then realised where some of the signatories now were. It is a world view that completely ignores the human dimension and treats foreign policy and the people involved like chess pieces that can be moved about and changes made that people will just accept. I don't understand american politics it is an alien culture becoming increasingly so it seems. Your gun culture is amazing the more so because you seem to think it's everybody else that's odd.
It's after midnight here, maybe I should not do this late at night.
I've not gone back to count, however you've expressed yourself this way at least twice.
Q: Could you expand on the "power grouping" "unpleasant route" thought, I can better discuss it if I have a clearer understanding of the point(s).
Q: The three of us have communicated together for some time, I'm unaware of any rants, or irrational responses. Why the repetition? Maybe we don't understand your definition of rants, and irrational.
The links you supplied merit some study, I'll get on it.
My apologies I didn't actually mean you, and I did not express myself terribly well. it's just in one or two other posts when I have asked similar questions people seem to have taken offence, Any criticism of american policy in the middle east seems to be taken personallyand people lay in with charges of being anti american without actually looking at what i said, or i thought i said. The most common one is you should be grateful to the US for saving the western world which really irritates.
What seems to have happened is your political system has allowed a narrow interest group to get power. What might be described as the christian right that feel they have the moral authority to use the chance to change america to the way they think it should be and are set about doing it. On the face of it they seem quite up front about what they intend in the way of reforming rules on abortion gay rights and bringing religon back in to the state schools and doing away with the division between state and church. You read stories about the teaching of evolution being banned in some areas or the insistence that creationism be taught as well. The grand canyon visitor centre for example seems to have a display explaining the canyon was created by the flood. we get that kind of thing here as well here but the general response is believe that if you want but don't be so bloody daft as to expect anybody else.
I think they may get away with it but eventually people will vote against it. In terms of foreign policy they seem to think that since the US is the most powerful nation it is quite legitimate to use force in americas interest. Taking on syria and Iran in the breathtaking assumption that the peoples in those countries will not fight back and will be grateful to have freedom delivered to them is imo ever so slightly daft. It seem americans have difficulty understanding that other nations are every bit as patriotic they just go about it differently. extreme nationalism in europe we tend to associate to some extent with nazism and militarism so patriotism is played down except maybe at football matches
When I looked at the pnac site it was like the old sentiments of manifest destiny being expressed in modern guise. In another age it would be blatant imperialism. As an outsider I looked at it and thought they have got to be kidding then realised where some of the signatories now were. It is a world view that completely ignores the human dimension and treats foreign policy and the people involved like chess pieces that can be moved about and changes made that people will just accept. I don't understand american politics it is an alien culture becoming increasingly so it seems. Your gun culture is amazing the more so because you seem to think it's everybody else that's odd.
It's after midnight here, maybe I should not do this late at night.
Iraq today
hi gmc.
The purpose of this forum is debate. In this particular case it is about Iraq. In a debate you say something and I say something. You state your views and I'll state my views. With a little bit of luck I'll learn something from you and you'll learn something from me. We'll find a little bit bit of common ground that is either for or against the issue. This we have been doing.
I am making comments. I am in no way trying to belittle you. Trying to belittle your arguments? Most definitely. I am not trying to get to you on a personal level. Personal attacks are no fun as all they do is distance the focus of debate. What I was suggesting about the UK and american is that your are subconsciously making sure that your country is capital, all others are less than capital. Your spelling is fine and you are right... using Word for spelling sucks. The Americans have their spelling structure and we have ours. You will note that I use the 'ou' instead of the American 'o'. Whenever it says ou is not right you know you are right. You can be sure that der wulf has picked up on this point.
Much as I would like to just blame Britain for Ireland and leave it at that, I know that there are the Irish that allowed these outrages to happen because they were more intent on feathering their own nests than looking out for the welfare of their fellow countrymen. It is a sad but true fact of the human condition.
As to religioin being the root cause of the problem, I would beg to differ. In all religions it is the priest, imam or what have you that , allegedly, speaks for the people. The clergy is secondary and the intellectual abilities of the Church are such that they have stopped anyone who may have reason on their side from speaking. They all do it.
I live in Kensington Market in Toronto. It is the number 8 of historical public spaces out of 20 in North America. It is the kind of place where, on any given day, you can see the panoply of humankind walk before your eyes while they do their shopping. It is a working man's market where the prices are such that they can afford to feed and clothe themselves and have change left over to enjoy other things in life. There is not a race or creed that does not go there and if you ever want to enjoy yourself you just sit there, sip a coffee or "cuppa" and enjoy the people. I've lost count of how many times I've watched people become mesmerized by what is before them. Girl watching at its best. People watching at the max. There is no I am better than you attitudes that are prevalent because we all realize that we are all here together, hence, we are all the same.
Schools are meant to teach. Not a place to stake out the turf for your religion or beliefs to the detriment of others. If you want to school in your religion then you build your own school with those that are of your beliefs. If there is religion to be brought in for prayers then spaces are allotted to conduct these activities. Everyone has that right.
If there is one thing that Canadians realize it is that racism comes in all sizes, shapes and colours. With that in mind we don't have to paint everybody with the same brush. It works fine and we are busy reaping the rewards of this insight into the human condition. As to the nutters that can turn on you five minutes after having been happily in your company... ? ... they're everywhere and their petty little minds do nothing but stop them from being who they wish to be.
We like what we have and we aren't about to let some idiot come in and impose how they see the world on us. To say that we are colour blind is not true. It is not the colour but the intent and integrity of the person that counts. Integrity has no colour.
The real question about where they are getting the new recruits is that they aren't. What they have is a base of conscripts to their cause. Once upon a time this fiefdom ruled the region. The mass of the corps did not have to be brought into the fray because anyone that was against them was quickly subjugated, hence, they didn't have to be called up, so to speak.
This is no longer the case and more and more of them are now finding themselves having to join the fray. They cannot terrorize the peoples of the land as they once had done and they are beginning to realize that they are in the fight of their lives. They are not allowed to hide in amongst the non-combatants as they once had done. The only thing that they have left is trying to make the world think that they are growing in numbers against the infidels' incursion into their homeland. Their martyrdom is only applicable to those of their sect.
The others have already tasted the duplicity of the Sunnis as leaders. Dead men tell no tales is an entirely apt comment in this circumstance because the graveyards are filled with people that spoke out of turn.
The media looks for stories that they can sensationalize. It sells papers. You can say that the press is on this side or that side and you will be right but the fact that there are the two sides means that you will get all the information to digest as you will.
If any government official thinks that they can get away from any particular misdeed then they are truly in trouble because someone will find it out and they will expose it to the light of day. A case in point is 'Tricky Dicky Nixon'.
When the Watergate break-in occurred everyone I knew was walking around mumbling that he was going to go scott free. The American press would hide it like they always do with the high and mighty. I would just smile my smug smile and say that he was on his way out if it were proven to be true. People, in this case the Americans, want to live in truth and be led by honourable people that they can trust to do the right thing. The posers are quickly exposed and expelled. It may not happen that fast but it will happen eventually.
The Guardian is a good paper but I belive that it is considered to be a not as rabidly socialist as others.
As a last point I would venture to say that as soon as I am the perfect human being I wil write you and let you know know. Until then don't hold your breath.
The purpose of this forum is debate. In this particular case it is about Iraq. In a debate you say something and I say something. You state your views and I'll state my views. With a little bit of luck I'll learn something from you and you'll learn something from me. We'll find a little bit bit of common ground that is either for or against the issue. This we have been doing.
I am making comments. I am in no way trying to belittle you. Trying to belittle your arguments? Most definitely. I am not trying to get to you on a personal level. Personal attacks are no fun as all they do is distance the focus of debate. What I was suggesting about the UK and american is that your are subconsciously making sure that your country is capital, all others are less than capital. Your spelling is fine and you are right... using Word for spelling sucks. The Americans have their spelling structure and we have ours. You will note that I use the 'ou' instead of the American 'o'. Whenever it says ou is not right you know you are right. You can be sure that der wulf has picked up on this point.
Much as I would like to just blame Britain for Ireland and leave it at that, I know that there are the Irish that allowed these outrages to happen because they were more intent on feathering their own nests than looking out for the welfare of their fellow countrymen. It is a sad but true fact of the human condition.
As to religioin being the root cause of the problem, I would beg to differ. In all religions it is the priest, imam or what have you that , allegedly, speaks for the people. The clergy is secondary and the intellectual abilities of the Church are such that they have stopped anyone who may have reason on their side from speaking. They all do it.
I live in Kensington Market in Toronto. It is the number 8 of historical public spaces out of 20 in North America. It is the kind of place where, on any given day, you can see the panoply of humankind walk before your eyes while they do their shopping. It is a working man's market where the prices are such that they can afford to feed and clothe themselves and have change left over to enjoy other things in life. There is not a race or creed that does not go there and if you ever want to enjoy yourself you just sit there, sip a coffee or "cuppa" and enjoy the people. I've lost count of how many times I've watched people become mesmerized by what is before them. Girl watching at its best. People watching at the max. There is no I am better than you attitudes that are prevalent because we all realize that we are all here together, hence, we are all the same.
Schools are meant to teach. Not a place to stake out the turf for your religion or beliefs to the detriment of others. If you want to school in your religion then you build your own school with those that are of your beliefs. If there is religion to be brought in for prayers then spaces are allotted to conduct these activities. Everyone has that right.
If there is one thing that Canadians realize it is that racism comes in all sizes, shapes and colours. With that in mind we don't have to paint everybody with the same brush. It works fine and we are busy reaping the rewards of this insight into the human condition. As to the nutters that can turn on you five minutes after having been happily in your company... ? ... they're everywhere and their petty little minds do nothing but stop them from being who they wish to be.
We like what we have and we aren't about to let some idiot come in and impose how they see the world on us. To say that we are colour blind is not true. It is not the colour but the intent and integrity of the person that counts. Integrity has no colour.
The real question about where they are getting the new recruits is that they aren't. What they have is a base of conscripts to their cause. Once upon a time this fiefdom ruled the region. The mass of the corps did not have to be brought into the fray because anyone that was against them was quickly subjugated, hence, they didn't have to be called up, so to speak.
This is no longer the case and more and more of them are now finding themselves having to join the fray. They cannot terrorize the peoples of the land as they once had done and they are beginning to realize that they are in the fight of their lives. They are not allowed to hide in amongst the non-combatants as they once had done. The only thing that they have left is trying to make the world think that they are growing in numbers against the infidels' incursion into their homeland. Their martyrdom is only applicable to those of their sect.
The others have already tasted the duplicity of the Sunnis as leaders. Dead men tell no tales is an entirely apt comment in this circumstance because the graveyards are filled with people that spoke out of turn.
The media looks for stories that they can sensationalize. It sells papers. You can say that the press is on this side or that side and you will be right but the fact that there are the two sides means that you will get all the information to digest as you will.
If any government official thinks that they can get away from any particular misdeed then they are truly in trouble because someone will find it out and they will expose it to the light of day. A case in point is 'Tricky Dicky Nixon'.
When the Watergate break-in occurred everyone I knew was walking around mumbling that he was going to go scott free. The American press would hide it like they always do with the high and mighty. I would just smile my smug smile and say that he was on his way out if it were proven to be true. People, in this case the Americans, want to live in truth and be led by honourable people that they can trust to do the right thing. The posers are quickly exposed and expelled. It may not happen that fast but it will happen eventually.
The Guardian is a good paper but I belive that it is considered to be a not as rabidly socialist as others.
As a last point I would venture to say that as soon as I am the perfect human being I wil write you and let you know know. Until then don't hold your breath.
Iraq today
OK guys, first a little humour. The two of you cracked me up with your remarks about “wordâ€Â. Personally, I’ve always thought that using two letters where only one was needed, was simply a British affectation. Apparently you are unaware that word is a very “politically correct†program. You need only to, under “toolsâ€Â, set the language to the version of English that you desire, Australian- Zimbabwe. So, in an unprecedented [for me] magnanimous gesture to my “cousins†sensitivity, I will respond alternately, in UK English, and Canadian English.
Gmc: My other humorous incident was reading the link about Pat Robertson, that caused me literally, to laugh loudly enough to awaken my dog, who then regarded me as having lost my mind. This article frankly sounded like the first interview by a high school reporter who makes the school janitor sound like a space shuttle pilot.
After reading the other links, I sobered up, scratched some body parts, contemplated, and then scratched some more. I was left with the impression that the UK has a pathological obsession with all things American, and especially our politics. As an example, I could never imagine an American news organization caring about the UK’s popularity in the world.
I have been puzzled for over 4 years by the venomous hatred by some, domestically, and abroad, of pres. Bush. I am being forced to the conclusion that part of it is due to his professed Christianity. I am an agnostic, putting political labels aside, my politics are pretty simple, “your rights stop at the boundary’s of my property, or if in public space, at the end of my nose. My rights have the same limitations. Our constitution guarantee’s the freedom of religion, and most would agree the freedom from religion. Pres. Bush was elected with the voters knowing of his beliefs, he has made no overt attempts to force those beliefs on anyone. Further more, our president has no authority to make law, he can only approve or veto laws passed by congress, who with a ¾ majority can override any veto.
With a majority in both the house and senate, the administration will have more clout this term, however no politician is brave enough to vote against his/her constituency. There are some “hot button†issues like abortion that are attributed to the religious crowd but actually are very personal and cut across all religious, political, and age demographics. Every little interest group, and commercial interest, point fingers at each other, the congress, churches, doctors, and the president. This type of story is grist for the mill of a naïve or unscrupulous reporter. Truth is, you really need a score card to sort out the players. I suppose at some time we’ll have to engage in a religious discussion, in the meantime I’ll scratch body parts and ponder the international Jesus phobia.
“Any criticism of american policy in the middle east seems to be taken personallyand people lay in with charges of being anti american without actually looking at what i said, or i thought i said. The most common one is you should be grateful to the US for saving the western world which really irritatesâ€Â
“It seem americans have difficulty understanding that other nations are every bit as patriotic they just go about it differentlyâ€Â.
“I don't understand american politics it is an alien culture becoming increasingly so it seems. Your gun culture is amazing the more so because you seem to think it's everybody else that's odd.â€Â
Now by your own definition, the italicized quotes above, sound like, or very close to a “rantâ€Â. I’m not taking offense, I’ve heard it all before. I point this out only because up to this point I have been very circumspect in what I’ve said. Political correctness does not become me, I have been careful because I truly want a completely honest exchange with a dissident European. An opinionated Scotsman suits me fine. One of my many reasons is because I have 4 grandchildren growing up in England. So, can we stop the circling and sniffing and trust each other enough to get it on?? I’ll give you “American politics being an alien cultureâ€Â, beats my description of it being messy. If you promise to explain your “ingratitude†, I’ll as a legitimate “gun nut†explain that culture after we’ve finished Iraq. :-3
Kensloft: As usual, you make forceful points in a manner that I admire. I hafta admit that I’m a little surprised, most of the Canadians I’ve met on the boards have been ill mannered, ill literate, I in turn may have on occasion suggested that they were also illegitimate. I underlined “boards†because without exception, every Canadian I’ve met personally has been “good peopleâ€Â, with whom a kinship was quickly established. That includes the Mounty who could have busted my stupid, and ignorant behind for a serious but youthful indiscretion many years ago. I thought of that incident while watching our pres being welcomed with the one finger salute. The funny thing is I think some of them would have liked him if they could talk directly, the “stiff, wooden, bumbler†disappears with one on one contact. I’m really hoping for an “official†thaw soon.
Speaking of thaw, I see you’re being blessed with an abundance of snow, I remember well the ravages of “lake effect†snow and 50 mph winds. It was while snowbound in 1976 that I dusted off the resume and sent copies to “snowless†places. You hafta forgive the silly grins we wear while watching weather reports from “back eastâ€Â, you can reciprocate next July while we bake at 112F. :yh_bigsmi
BTW: Thank you both for your patience with my slow posts, I have a physical affliction that limits my typing to 1 of 2 left handed fingers [kinda like a Canadian salute], it also limits the time I can sit up to the computer to roughly 10 mins. At a time. I really appreciate it, if I get too slow, go on without me, I’ll jump in wherever I can. I s’pose it’s good ya can’t see which finger I choose for responding.
Good on y’all
Gmc: My other humorous incident was reading the link about Pat Robertson, that caused me literally, to laugh loudly enough to awaken my dog, who then regarded me as having lost my mind. This article frankly sounded like the first interview by a high school reporter who makes the school janitor sound like a space shuttle pilot.
After reading the other links, I sobered up, scratched some body parts, contemplated, and then scratched some more. I was left with the impression that the UK has a pathological obsession with all things American, and especially our politics. As an example, I could never imagine an American news organization caring about the UK’s popularity in the world.
I have been puzzled for over 4 years by the venomous hatred by some, domestically, and abroad, of pres. Bush. I am being forced to the conclusion that part of it is due to his professed Christianity. I am an agnostic, putting political labels aside, my politics are pretty simple, “your rights stop at the boundary’s of my property, or if in public space, at the end of my nose. My rights have the same limitations. Our constitution guarantee’s the freedom of religion, and most would agree the freedom from religion. Pres. Bush was elected with the voters knowing of his beliefs, he has made no overt attempts to force those beliefs on anyone. Further more, our president has no authority to make law, he can only approve or veto laws passed by congress, who with a ¾ majority can override any veto.
With a majority in both the house and senate, the administration will have more clout this term, however no politician is brave enough to vote against his/her constituency. There are some “hot button†issues like abortion that are attributed to the religious crowd but actually are very personal and cut across all religious, political, and age demographics. Every little interest group, and commercial interest, point fingers at each other, the congress, churches, doctors, and the president. This type of story is grist for the mill of a naïve or unscrupulous reporter. Truth is, you really need a score card to sort out the players. I suppose at some time we’ll have to engage in a religious discussion, in the meantime I’ll scratch body parts and ponder the international Jesus phobia.
“Any criticism of american policy in the middle east seems to be taken personallyand people lay in with charges of being anti american without actually looking at what i said, or i thought i said. The most common one is you should be grateful to the US for saving the western world which really irritatesâ€Â
“It seem americans have difficulty understanding that other nations are every bit as patriotic they just go about it differentlyâ€Â.
“I don't understand american politics it is an alien culture becoming increasingly so it seems. Your gun culture is amazing the more so because you seem to think it's everybody else that's odd.â€Â
Now by your own definition, the italicized quotes above, sound like, or very close to a “rantâ€Â. I’m not taking offense, I’ve heard it all before. I point this out only because up to this point I have been very circumspect in what I’ve said. Political correctness does not become me, I have been careful because I truly want a completely honest exchange with a dissident European. An opinionated Scotsman suits me fine. One of my many reasons is because I have 4 grandchildren growing up in England. So, can we stop the circling and sniffing and trust each other enough to get it on?? I’ll give you “American politics being an alien cultureâ€Â, beats my description of it being messy. If you promise to explain your “ingratitude†, I’ll as a legitimate “gun nut†explain that culture after we’ve finished Iraq. :-3
Kensloft: As usual, you make forceful points in a manner that I admire. I hafta admit that I’m a little surprised, most of the Canadians I’ve met on the boards have been ill mannered, ill literate, I in turn may have on occasion suggested that they were also illegitimate. I underlined “boards†because without exception, every Canadian I’ve met personally has been “good peopleâ€Â, with whom a kinship was quickly established. That includes the Mounty who could have busted my stupid, and ignorant behind for a serious but youthful indiscretion many years ago. I thought of that incident while watching our pres being welcomed with the one finger salute. The funny thing is I think some of them would have liked him if they could talk directly, the “stiff, wooden, bumbler†disappears with one on one contact. I’m really hoping for an “official†thaw soon.
Speaking of thaw, I see you’re being blessed with an abundance of snow, I remember well the ravages of “lake effect†snow and 50 mph winds. It was while snowbound in 1976 that I dusted off the resume and sent copies to “snowless†places. You hafta forgive the silly grins we wear while watching weather reports from “back eastâ€Â, you can reciprocate next July while we bake at 112F. :yh_bigsmi
BTW: Thank you both for your patience with my slow posts, I have a physical affliction that limits my typing to 1 of 2 left handed fingers [kinda like a Canadian salute], it also limits the time I can sit up to the computer to roughly 10 mins. At a time. I really appreciate it, if I get too slow, go on without me, I’ll jump in wherever I can. I s’pose it’s good ya can’t see which finger I choose for responding.
Good on y’all
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
One of the things that I always remember about Arizona is how it stole my wheels, a Quebec car, while driving through its desert. It caused me to spend a week in Gila Bend while we awaited a synopsis of the state of the vehicle.
The person that I was travelling with ventured to a local that the area looked as if it seemed that it wanted to rain but didn't. As to 'word' being politically correct... well... I did go into the tools but I didn't find the UK or British lexicon being offered.
As a Canadian, I could point out that we are, according to der wulf, illiterate, therefore, I can't follow rational or reasonable directions. Regardless, we are from three different nations... not 2... as some would think.
As part of our discourse I entered a paraphrased historical documentation of why we were in the predicament that we were in, in Palestine, based on the role of Arafat's influence. I decided that it was signifigant enough to merit being sent to Arab Women's news agencies. Two days later we have Abbas saying that peaceful negotiations are the way to go. Whether or not it had any influence doesn't matter. What matters is that Abbas is thinking as a person and not an automaton.
The problem with guns is that they add to who you think you are. If I am surrounded by ten menacing individuals you can believe that I want an equalliilzer!
That is the American phenomenon, as I see it. A belief in God making my bullet hit its target while the others, sent courtesy of my enemies, don't hit a vital part of my being. It is what I rely on to keep me walking this earth. George has his God helping him to walk this earth based on this premise of right.
When I was a child King George died. One of my neighbourhood children friends broached the subject and when I didn't give her the answer that she thought should be forthcoming from me she stated that those in power would make me rue the day that I didn't fall on the ground in despair at his demise.
My response was simple. I live in Canada. This is a free country. And they can do their worst because I don't care what they do. I am a free human being.
I can see lots of reasons why GW gets it from people.
Coming from my family, the richest and the poorest in the world (America), it became apparent to me that the rich and the poor would never see eye to eye. The rich can only speak from their vaunted perspective and the poor from theirs. In the words of the infamous, "And ne'er the twain shall meet", I suggest that it is so. Neither of us fully understanding what the other of us is understanding.
If you can buy food whenever you are in need of it, is not the same mindset as if you desire food but can't afford it.
I think that GW should be turfed but I think that he should reign supreme?
The "I want to do what is right whether or not thinking that people think that I am doing the right thing comes into play", scenario doesn't appeal to me because it leaves so many doors and consequences open to me. Yah, if we hung out on the corner, we'd probably be cool, appeals to me because that's the way it is.
In the inimitable vernacular of the North, "the Donde este the snow "Dude" rapport comes into play. I'm ot to find more of thid 7.2 deer... er... beer srtuff "dudes.
Love and Peace.
Blah---Nlah---Yahda=yahda-yahda... etc,
The person that I was travelling with ventured to a local that the area looked as if it seemed that it wanted to rain but didn't. As to 'word' being politically correct... well... I did go into the tools but I didn't find the UK or British lexicon being offered.
As a Canadian, I could point out that we are, according to der wulf, illiterate, therefore, I can't follow rational or reasonable directions. Regardless, we are from three different nations... not 2... as some would think.
As part of our discourse I entered a paraphrased historical documentation of why we were in the predicament that we were in, in Palestine, based on the role of Arafat's influence. I decided that it was signifigant enough to merit being sent to Arab Women's news agencies. Two days later we have Abbas saying that peaceful negotiations are the way to go. Whether or not it had any influence doesn't matter. What matters is that Abbas is thinking as a person and not an automaton.
The problem with guns is that they add to who you think you are. If I am surrounded by ten menacing individuals you can believe that I want an equalliilzer!
That is the American phenomenon, as I see it. A belief in God making my bullet hit its target while the others, sent courtesy of my enemies, don't hit a vital part of my being. It is what I rely on to keep me walking this earth. George has his God helping him to walk this earth based on this premise of right.
When I was a child King George died. One of my neighbourhood children friends broached the subject and when I didn't give her the answer that she thought should be forthcoming from me she stated that those in power would make me rue the day that I didn't fall on the ground in despair at his demise.
My response was simple. I live in Canada. This is a free country. And they can do their worst because I don't care what they do. I am a free human being.
I can see lots of reasons why GW gets it from people.
Coming from my family, the richest and the poorest in the world (America), it became apparent to me that the rich and the poor would never see eye to eye. The rich can only speak from their vaunted perspective and the poor from theirs. In the words of the infamous, "And ne'er the twain shall meet", I suggest that it is so. Neither of us fully understanding what the other of us is understanding.
If you can buy food whenever you are in need of it, is not the same mindset as if you desire food but can't afford it.
I think that GW should be turfed but I think that he should reign supreme?
The "I want to do what is right whether or not thinking that people think that I am doing the right thing comes into play", scenario doesn't appeal to me because it leaves so many doors and consequences open to me. Yah, if we hung out on the corner, we'd probably be cool, appeals to me because that's the way it is.
In the inimitable vernacular of the North, "the Donde este the snow "Dude" rapport comes into play. I'm ot to find more of thid 7.2 deer... er... beer srtuff "dudes.
Love and Peace.
Blah---Nlah---Yahda=yahda-yahda... etc,
Iraq today
Sorry bout your wheels, more than 2/3rds of the vehicle stolen from our state end up in Mexico, the better ones are usually easy to find, but hard to retrieve, - a lot of them are being driven by police and local govt. employees for private use.
Sorry about Word, I have the 2002 office version. About the Canadian “illsâ€Â, musta used the “long†digit.
Hey, I’ll gladly give credit to anybody that can bring reason, and intelligence to Palestine. I’d consider it a fantastic Christmas present if Abbas pulls it off, I was pleasantly surprised that the “mourning†for Arafat was by middle eastern standards, pretty mild. Maybe the radical groups were tired of him too. It infuriates me every time I remember all of the opportunities that arrogant little dimbulb squandered.
What you call the American phenomenon, I call the John Wayne syndrome. You forgot to include the good guy’s weapon with the magazine that never runs out. About guns, I grew up with them on the farm, they were just another tool. Guess I’ve really been lucky, I’ve owned over 100 of them including 2 fully automatic, all were very well behaved, never harmed me or anyone else, never held anyone up, and never left home without me. I’ve had a concealed carry license for side arms since age 19, primarily to assure I didn’t do something stupid like forget, and put a coat on over it.
Question for you and gmc, our courts have declared that the police are to maintain law and order, but have no obligation to protect any individual. What say yours??
Your “My response was simple. I live in Canada. This is a free country. And they can do their worst because I don't care what they do. I am a free human being.†Is elegant in it’s simplicity, I like that.
One of the things I admire about GW is that at one time in his youth he was an irresponsible, wealthy, problem drinker. He attributes his finding “faith†as the reason and method for changing. He could’ve hidden behind daddy, or periodically checked in and out of expensive clinics. My admiration is not for his “faith†per se, but for taking the initiative and solving his own problem. Can’t help but compare that to the life of Teddy from our other wealthy political family.
I guess you’ll hafta educate me on the northern vernacular, I got lost on the “Donde esteâ€Â, or I ‘spose I could find enough ambition to install my interpreter, now where th H is that disc?
Later, Good on ya :-6
Sorry about Word, I have the 2002 office version. About the Canadian “illsâ€Â, musta used the “long†digit.
Hey, I’ll gladly give credit to anybody that can bring reason, and intelligence to Palestine. I’d consider it a fantastic Christmas present if Abbas pulls it off, I was pleasantly surprised that the “mourning†for Arafat was by middle eastern standards, pretty mild. Maybe the radical groups were tired of him too. It infuriates me every time I remember all of the opportunities that arrogant little dimbulb squandered.
What you call the American phenomenon, I call the John Wayne syndrome. You forgot to include the good guy’s weapon with the magazine that never runs out. About guns, I grew up with them on the farm, they were just another tool. Guess I’ve really been lucky, I’ve owned over 100 of them including 2 fully automatic, all were very well behaved, never harmed me or anyone else, never held anyone up, and never left home without me. I’ve had a concealed carry license for side arms since age 19, primarily to assure I didn’t do something stupid like forget, and put a coat on over it.
Question for you and gmc, our courts have declared that the police are to maintain law and order, but have no obligation to protect any individual. What say yours??
Your “My response was simple. I live in Canada. This is a free country. And they can do their worst because I don't care what they do. I am a free human being.†Is elegant in it’s simplicity, I like that.
One of the things I admire about GW is that at one time in his youth he was an irresponsible, wealthy, problem drinker. He attributes his finding “faith†as the reason and method for changing. He could’ve hidden behind daddy, or periodically checked in and out of expensive clinics. My admiration is not for his “faith†per se, but for taking the initiative and solving his own problem. Can’t help but compare that to the life of Teddy from our other wealthy political family.
I guess you’ll hafta educate me on the northern vernacular, I got lost on the “Donde esteâ€Â, or I ‘spose I could find enough ambition to install my interpreter, now where th H is that disc?
Later, Good on ya :-6
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill
Iraq today
I am glad That GW found God(?) but I have and do, occassionaly, remember or read the Book of Revelations. Needless to say the possibility of Satan posing as Christ rings with plenty of possibly true. Just because I don't want to judge doesn't mean that I am going to keep my eyes shut to what is going on in politics.
Arizona stealing my car was meant more in the light humour of the car that was anti-freezed up to the hilt blew its brains out on the desert highway. It was left by a garage where the employess looked happy and relieved that we weren't going to go for the repairs that they thought that they would have to do seemed happy to keep it. That they are still stealing American cars and taking them back to Mexico, is still a problem, is not a surprise. Has the Free Trade Treaty any mechanisms that assure that this does not happen and materials are returned to their rightful owners?
Ah... sometimes human reasoning can go awry when it comes to humour interspersing the conversation. 'Donde este', if you were to ask a Canadian is Spanish for "Where is?"
:driving: The fact remains that the purpose of this dialogue is about weapons that are considered as being toys that could just make it under the radar of our vigilance, the infamous "infrared enhanced, night vision monoculars. The dialogue has been invigourating and the perspectives are diverse only in their phraseology. This begs the question... "Have either of you talked to other people about this dilemma?" and, if so,"What do they think?"
As you can understand I am not interested in creating a furor of sensationalized media stories. That would defeat the purpose of bringing it people's attention. If the media were to come out and state the facts at once, all together in virtually every news organization in the world, then, that would be nice. But, the piecemeal collecting of stories or information would just take too long in order to effectively quash my anxieties about this predicament as well as, possibly, have the wrong kind of people get the idea of getting them. I can pretend that it would just go away if I didn't think about it, but, I can't, in good conscience, do so. There is no stronger power in the U.S. than its people.
So far gmc's government are the only people to have replied. In true British bureaucratic fashion, it has passed the information along to the department/people that are concerned with this issue. Nonetheless, I am glad that they did.
The Canadian Radio and Television Commission also sent my query to the offending broadcaster. I am sure that their gaffe has taken on the reality of what it could manifest if they were to, unthinkingly, go on and on about it with some other similar gadget.
I couln't get into the Homeland Security site because I don' have a zip code. The CIA's 'contact us' button did not work. The message was left on the FBI's site to forward to the CIA because, as I explained, their link wasn't functioning. I know that they are not supposed to have anything to do with the interior of the U.S. but I was emailing from Canada?
The question about whether or not police protect their citizens and are only bound by law enforcement duties needs a little more background in order for me to even begin to understand its case history and ramifications that it could have on the American population. Furthermore this is not the forum to discuss this particular issue and it should be aimed toward the law and crime boards. There is no slight intended. Be sure to send me the link when you post that Question or follow that thread that deals with this subject.
Arizona stealing my car was meant more in the light humour of the car that was anti-freezed up to the hilt blew its brains out on the desert highway. It was left by a garage where the employess looked happy and relieved that we weren't going to go for the repairs that they thought that they would have to do seemed happy to keep it. That they are still stealing American cars and taking them back to Mexico, is still a problem, is not a surprise. Has the Free Trade Treaty any mechanisms that assure that this does not happen and materials are returned to their rightful owners?
Ah... sometimes human reasoning can go awry when it comes to humour interspersing the conversation. 'Donde este', if you were to ask a Canadian is Spanish for "Where is?"
:driving: The fact remains that the purpose of this dialogue is about weapons that are considered as being toys that could just make it under the radar of our vigilance, the infamous "infrared enhanced, night vision monoculars. The dialogue has been invigourating and the perspectives are diverse only in their phraseology. This begs the question... "Have either of you talked to other people about this dilemma?" and, if so,"What do they think?"
As you can understand I am not interested in creating a furor of sensationalized media stories. That would defeat the purpose of bringing it people's attention. If the media were to come out and state the facts at once, all together in virtually every news organization in the world, then, that would be nice. But, the piecemeal collecting of stories or information would just take too long in order to effectively quash my anxieties about this predicament as well as, possibly, have the wrong kind of people get the idea of getting them. I can pretend that it would just go away if I didn't think about it, but, I can't, in good conscience, do so. There is no stronger power in the U.S. than its people.
So far gmc's government are the only people to have replied. In true British bureaucratic fashion, it has passed the information along to the department/people that are concerned with this issue. Nonetheless, I am glad that they did.
The Canadian Radio and Television Commission also sent my query to the offending broadcaster. I am sure that their gaffe has taken on the reality of what it could manifest if they were to, unthinkingly, go on and on about it with some other similar gadget.
I couln't get into the Homeland Security site because I don' have a zip code. The CIA's 'contact us' button did not work. The message was left on the FBI's site to forward to the CIA because, as I explained, their link wasn't functioning. I know that they are not supposed to have anything to do with the interior of the U.S. but I was emailing from Canada?
The question about whether or not police protect their citizens and are only bound by law enforcement duties needs a little more background in order for me to even begin to understand its case history and ramifications that it could have on the American population. Furthermore this is not the forum to discuss this particular issue and it should be aimed toward the law and crime boards. There is no slight intended. Be sure to send me the link when you post that Question or follow that thread that deals with this subject.
Iraq today
January 7,2005
Dear Mr. ,
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) has received your most
recent correspondence in which you provide the broadcast date of
December
8, 2004 concerning an episode of Canada AM broadcast on CTV Network.
By copy of this email, we are asking CTV Network to respond to the
specific
concerns you have raised and to hold a copy of the logger tape of the
broadcast which concerned you. This is always the first step taken by
the
CBSC in pursuing a complaint. You should know that broadcasters who
are
members of the CBSC take their responsibility to respond to audience
concerns very seriously. The dialogue between broadcasters and members
of
their audience is a cornerstone of the CBSC's complaints resolution
process. Concerns are often resolved satisfactorily through this
dialogue
phase. We hope that the response you will receive from CTV Network
within
the next 21 days will resolve the issues you have raised to your
satisfaction. If, however, after you have received and carefully
considered the broadcaster's response you remain concerned, you may
request
a Ruling by a CBSC Panel by filing the form available on our website at
http://www.cbsc.ca/english/complaints/rulingrequest.htm. You should do
so
within 14 days of receiving the broadcaster's response. More
information
on the CBSC complaints process is available on our website in the FAQ
section (http://www.cbsc.ca/english/faqs/index.htm).
Sincerely,
Nicole Lafrance
CBSC Correspondence Officer
MESSAGE RECEIVED
Dear Mr. ,
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) has received your most
recent correspondence in which you provide the broadcast date of
December
8, 2004 concerning an episode of Canada AM broadcast on CTV Network.
By copy of this email, we are asking CTV Network to respond to the
specific
concerns you have raised and to hold a copy of the logger tape of the
broadcast which concerned you. This is always the first step taken by
the
CBSC in pursuing a complaint. You should know that broadcasters who
are
members of the CBSC take their responsibility to respond to audience
concerns very seriously. The dialogue between broadcasters and members
of
their audience is a cornerstone of the CBSC's complaints resolution
process. Concerns are often resolved satisfactorily through this
dialogue
phase. We hope that the response you will receive from CTV Network
within
the next 21 days will resolve the issues you have raised to your
satisfaction. If, however, after you have received and carefully
considered the broadcaster's response you remain concerned, you may
request
a Ruling by a CBSC Panel by filing the form available on our website at
http://www.cbsc.ca/english/complaints/rulingrequest.htm. You should do
so
within 14 days of receiving the broadcaster's response. More
information
on the CBSC complaints process is available on our website in the FAQ
section (http://www.cbsc.ca/english/faqs/index.htm).
Sincerely,
Nicole Lafrance
CBSC Correspondence Officer
MESSAGE RECEIVED
Iraq today
Thank you for your note.
I have changed the attachment to RTF, hopefully this works.
Regards,
Tanya Ostroff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tanya Ostroff
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:17 PM
> To: 'kensloft'
> Cc: CBSC (E-mail)
> Subject: Response to your complaint: CBSC File Number: C04/05-708
>
>
> January 24, 2005
>
>
> RE: CBSC File Number: C04/05-708
>
>
> Sent via e-mail:
>
>
> Dear Mr. Kensloft:
>
> Please find attached, our reply to your e-mail to the Canadian
Broadcast
> Standards Council (CBSC).
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Tanya Ostroff
> CTV News
RE: CBSC File Number: C04/05-708
Dear Mr. Kensloft:
I am responding to your complaint regarding the December 8th broadcast of Canada AM, which was forwarded by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. During the show, there was a demonstration of a variety of items that run on batteries. They included a vacuum cleaner, a toy set of light sabers, a digital camera and a night vision monocular. The monoculars were not sophisticated enough to use in a combat situation and were clearly presented as a consumer gadget. The segment was intended to demonstrate some possible gifts available in the marketplace that our viewers could purchase as Christmas presents.
We believe the segment was in accordance with all applicable industry codes administered by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. It was certainly not meant to endanger any troops in any manner.
Thank you for taking the time to write with your concerns.
Sincerely,
VIA E-MAIL
Lis Travers
Executive Producer
Canada AM
cc. Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC)
I have changed the attachment to RTF, hopefully this works.
Regards,
Tanya Ostroff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tanya Ostroff
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:17 PM
> To: 'kensloft'
> Cc: CBSC (E-mail)
> Subject: Response to your complaint: CBSC File Number: C04/05-708
>
>
> January 24, 2005
>
>
> RE: CBSC File Number: C04/05-708
>
>
> Sent via e-mail:
>
>
> Dear Mr. Kensloft:
>
> Please find attached, our reply to your e-mail to the Canadian
Broadcast
> Standards Council (CBSC).
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Tanya Ostroff
> CTV News
RE: CBSC File Number: C04/05-708
Dear Mr. Kensloft:
I am responding to your complaint regarding the December 8th broadcast of Canada AM, which was forwarded by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. During the show, there was a demonstration of a variety of items that run on batteries. They included a vacuum cleaner, a toy set of light sabers, a digital camera and a night vision monocular. The monoculars were not sophisticated enough to use in a combat situation and were clearly presented as a consumer gadget. The segment was intended to demonstrate some possible gifts available in the marketplace that our viewers could purchase as Christmas presents.
We believe the segment was in accordance with all applicable industry codes administered by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. It was certainly not meant to endanger any troops in any manner.
Thank you for taking the time to write with your concerns.
Sincerely,
VIA E-MAIL
Lis Travers
Executive Producer
Canada AM
cc. Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC)
Iraq today
posted by der wulf
After reading the other links, I sobered up, scratched some body parts, contemplated, and then scratched some more. I was left with the impression that the UK has a pathological obsession with all things American, and especially our politics. As an example, I could never imagine an American news organization caring about the UK’s popularity in the world.
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Hey, I’ll gladly give credit to anybody that can bring reason, and intelligence to Palestine. I’d consider it a fantastic Christmas present if Abbas pulls it off, I was pleasantly surprised that the “mourning†for Arafat was by middle eastern standards, pretty mild. Maybe the radical groups were tired of him too. It infuriates me every time I remember all of the opportunities that arrogant little dimbulb squandered.
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Question for you and gmc, our courts have declared that the police are to maintain law and order, but have no obligation to protect any individual. What say yours??
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
What you call the American phenomenon, I call the John Wayne syndrome. You forgot to include the good guy’s weapon with the magazine that never runs out. About guns, I grew up with them on the farm, they were just another tool. Guess I’ve really been lucky, I’ve owned over 100 of them including 2 fully automatic, all were very well behaved, never harmed me or anyone else, never held anyone up, and never left home without me. I’ve had a concealed carry license for side arms since age 19, primarily to assure I didn’t do something stupid like forget, and put a coat on over it.
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
After reading the other links, I sobered up, scratched some body parts, contemplated, and then scratched some more. I was left with the impression that the UK has a pathological obsession with all things American, and especially our politics. As an example, I could never imagine an American news organization caring about the UK’s popularity in the world.
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Hey, I’ll gladly give credit to anybody that can bring reason, and intelligence to Palestine. I’d consider it a fantastic Christmas present if Abbas pulls it off, I was pleasantly surprised that the “mourning†for Arafat was by middle eastern standards, pretty mild. Maybe the radical groups were tired of him too. It infuriates me every time I remember all of the opportunities that arrogant little dimbulb squandered.
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Question for you and gmc, our courts have declared that the police are to maintain law and order, but have no obligation to protect any individual. What say yours??
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
What you call the American phenomenon, I call the John Wayne syndrome. You forgot to include the good guy’s weapon with the magazine that never runs out. About guns, I grew up with them on the farm, they were just another tool. Guess I’ve really been lucky, I’ve owned over 100 of them including 2 fully automatic, all were very well behaved, never harmed me or anyone else, never held anyone up, and never left home without me. I’ve had a concealed carry license for side arms since age 19, primarily to assure I didn’t do something stupid like forget, and put a coat on over it.
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
Iraq today
gmc wrote: posted by der wulf
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
abcdefg
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
abcdefg
Iraq today
gmc wrote: posted by der wulf
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
abcdefg
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
abcdefg
Iraq today
Der Wulf wrote: Gmc posted : “There is no point rerunning history and apportioning blame, the problem is how to deal with the consequences now. It's not a simple problem and simple military solutions won't work, nor will seeing it in black and white termsâ€Â
“Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mindâ€Â
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
I’ve been trying to ease slowly through the briar patch, but you’ve tossed a couple firecrackers, I suppose to either change my course, or speed me up. So, I’ll sharpen my points and speed up.
The examples of Iraq, and the Israeli’s are not the problem, they are symptoms of the problem and what I will term “European discomfortâ€Â.
Ø For at least the last 15 years the UN has been a corrupt, and impotent institution.
Ø The US role in protecting Israel is in large part, the consequence of European appeasement of their oil suppliers. –or more accurately, knowing that the US will protect Israeli interests, the European’s are allowed to ignore conscience and appease the Arab states.
Ø The coalition’s unilateral action in Iraq is the direct result of UN impotence and corruption.
Ø The terrorists of 911 were not poor and abused, they all were from financially comfortable family’s, and had good educations. That they were Saudi’s, is not as relevant as the fact that they were members of a radical Islamic organization, lavishly financed by wealthy people, and represented in every country with a large Islamic population.
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
Ø To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
Yes, there have been profound changes, more however with the world order than with us. Since you don’t like long walks down history lane, I’ll make this quick, but not as precise as the long version.
Prior to WWI, the world power centers were the UK, Spain, and France. America was an isolationist sleeping giant, the Soviet union, and China were huge but basically closed third world countries.
After WWII, the power centers were Russia, and the US. Europe was in ruins, concerned primarily with survival and physically rebuilding. The UN was born, and though scary, the policies of mutually assured destruction was accepted because we all knew that no society was so depraved as to willingly commit suicide.
1989 Soviet Union collapses, US becomes the sole superpower. UN is becoming ineffective. In spite of our 200 year reputation, the world becomes increasingly suspicious of, and hostile to the US, primarily because there is no “balanceâ€Â, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful military, and significant financial power is under the control of, “oh my god, those American cowboysâ€Â.
9/11/2001, destruction of world trade center by Islamic fundamentalists, who are delighted to commit suicide in order to harm their enemy.
03/20/2003, US coalition invades Iraq without UN “permissionâ€Â, in a “pre-emotiveâ€Â; : marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself attack> After months of negotiating at the UN, blocked in the security counsel by what we now know were votes purchased by Iraq’s dictator, the US exercised it’s sovereignty and led a coalition into Iraq.
This of course was, in the view of many, the final perfidy, the evidence that the US had morphed into an international bully.
So were there changes, yeah, a few by the US, in the face of quantum, deadly changes to world politics.
Finally, you asked if this action represented our leaders being out of step with the people.
There has been a consistent 70-80% approval rate for taking the action, and then after a bruising campaign, the man and the party that made these decisions was re-elected. Most things political here are pretty evenly split, but that’s a whole nuther quandary.
I think that covers everything, wulf ate a bunny today, now he needs a nap.
Good on ya
efghi
“Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mindâ€Â
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
I’ve been trying to ease slowly through the briar patch, but you’ve tossed a couple firecrackers, I suppose to either change my course, or speed me up. So, I’ll sharpen my points and speed up.
The examples of Iraq, and the Israeli’s are not the problem, they are symptoms of the problem and what I will term “European discomfortâ€Â.
Ø For at least the last 15 years the UN has been a corrupt, and impotent institution.
Ø The US role in protecting Israel is in large part, the consequence of European appeasement of their oil suppliers. –or more accurately, knowing that the US will protect Israeli interests, the European’s are allowed to ignore conscience and appease the Arab states.
Ø The coalition’s unilateral action in Iraq is the direct result of UN impotence and corruption.
Ø The terrorists of 911 were not poor and abused, they all were from financially comfortable family’s, and had good educations. That they were Saudi’s, is not as relevant as the fact that they were members of a radical Islamic organization, lavishly financed by wealthy people, and represented in every country with a large Islamic population.
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
Ø To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
Yes, there have been profound changes, more however with the world order than with us. Since you don’t like long walks down history lane, I’ll make this quick, but not as precise as the long version.
Prior to WWI, the world power centers were the UK, Spain, and France. America was an isolationist sleeping giant, the Soviet union, and China were huge but basically closed third world countries.
After WWII, the power centers were Russia, and the US. Europe was in ruins, concerned primarily with survival and physically rebuilding. The UN was born, and though scary, the policies of mutually assured destruction was accepted because we all knew that no society was so depraved as to willingly commit suicide.
1989 Soviet Union collapses, US becomes the sole superpower. UN is becoming ineffective. In spite of our 200 year reputation, the world becomes increasingly suspicious of, and hostile to the US, primarily because there is no “balanceâ€Â, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful military, and significant financial power is under the control of, “oh my god, those American cowboysâ€Â.
9/11/2001, destruction of world trade center by Islamic fundamentalists, who are delighted to commit suicide in order to harm their enemy.
03/20/2003, US coalition invades Iraq without UN “permissionâ€Â, in a “pre-emotiveâ€Â; : marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself attack> After months of negotiating at the UN, blocked in the security counsel by what we now know were votes purchased by Iraq’s dictator, the US exercised it’s sovereignty and led a coalition into Iraq.
This of course was, in the view of many, the final perfidy, the evidence that the US had morphed into an international bully.
So were there changes, yeah, a few by the US, in the face of quantum, deadly changes to world politics.
Finally, you asked if this action represented our leaders being out of step with the people.
There has been a consistent 70-80% approval rate for taking the action, and then after a bruising campaign, the man and the party that made these decisions was re-elected. Most things political here are pretty evenly split, but that’s a whole nuther quandary.
I think that covers everything, wulf ate a bunny today, now he needs a nap.
Good on ya
efghi
Iraq today
Der Wulf wrote: Ah my frozen, northern cousin extremly well said:)
I do however need to speak with you bout a coupla things, so to the table and a cold one.
YOU SEZ:"She's your property and you can do anything you want to do with your property.Conservatism carried to the extreme.
ME: As a natural born conservative, I implore you, PLEASE do not send a statement like that into my house, should mamma wulf find that, all 100 pounds of her would likely take offense, I could wake up to find myself (well maybe not find myself) but anyway in a condition that not even your fine canadian viagra could fix.
YOU SEZ: re: SDS, they wanted to invade you??
ME: You musta heard wrong, they were a bunch of socialists, they wanted to join ya!!!!! couple of em even turned down our offer of all expenses paid at the lovely San Quenten resort and spa, said they'd rather live up in your north woods.
YOU SEZ: Canadian guys with guns behind sno bank is scary.
ME: Been up there, memory is of big strong bearded dudes with guns that could select target, then actually hit it. not scary. This scary, be in US forest opening day of deer season. See city type yahoo's with orange vest, an Gucci boots, brown straw hat with big white feather. These guys convinced that white tails is 5'-6' tall, makes big crashing noise when sneaking through woods, and needs min of 20 shots ta bag. Yahoo's got hands aroun big gun that aint been shot since last day of last season when he found junk car. 15 rounds from 50 feet, at speedy rate of fire, yellin like "dirty Harry" . car not even scratched. now that my fine frosty friend, is scary. (I'm originally from Michigan, story is biographical):D
axisdi
I do however need to speak with you bout a coupla things, so to the table and a cold one.
YOU SEZ:"She's your property and you can do anything you want to do with your property.Conservatism carried to the extreme.
ME: As a natural born conservative, I implore you, PLEASE do not send a statement like that into my house, should mamma wulf find that, all 100 pounds of her would likely take offense, I could wake up to find myself (well maybe not find myself) but anyway in a condition that not even your fine canadian viagra could fix.
YOU SEZ: re: SDS, they wanted to invade you??
ME: You musta heard wrong, they were a bunch of socialists, they wanted to join ya!!!!! couple of em even turned down our offer of all expenses paid at the lovely San Quenten resort and spa, said they'd rather live up in your north woods.
YOU SEZ: Canadian guys with guns behind sno bank is scary.
ME: Been up there, memory is of big strong bearded dudes with guns that could select target, then actually hit it. not scary. This scary, be in US forest opening day of deer season. See city type yahoo's with orange vest, an Gucci boots, brown straw hat with big white feather. These guys convinced that white tails is 5'-6' tall, makes big crashing noise when sneaking through woods, and needs min of 20 shots ta bag. Yahoo's got hands aroun big gun that aint been shot since last day of last season when he found junk car. 15 rounds from 50 feet, at speedy rate of fire, yellin like "dirty Harry" . car not even scratched. now that my fine frosty friend, is scary. (I'm originally from Michigan, story is biographical):D
axisdi
Iraq today
gmc wrote: posted by der wulf
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
askintio
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
askintio
Iraq today
gmc wrote: posted by der wulf
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
dsososl
Bear in mind I am choosing the links selectively. I couild as easily find as many posts about the eec or africa or china or russia. Obviously with what is going on just now there is a preponderance of things american
posted by der wulf
Be interesting to see what the Israelis do as well.
Depends what you mean by protect. Pretty much the same in a way, they can't do anything unless a crime is being or has been committed, in Scots law there has to be corroboration in the form of other witnesses etc, If I accuse someone and there is no opther evisdence nothing can be done as it is not apparet they commited the offence, using threatening behaviour is a public order offence but see above. they can't protect someone indefinitlely without taking them in to police custody. If I'm being attacked and the police turn up I expect then to protect me just as any policemen in any country probably would. but they uphold law and order both have to be briken before they do anything.
posted by der wulf
It is an american thing, it's gets irritating when americans try and transpose it on to others and tell us we are unfortunate because we are unarmed.
Kenloft was looking at your first post again, if you don't mind me saying so it is a trivial thing to worry about, terrorotsts getting night vision goggles is the least of your worries simple things like unguided anti aircraft missiles are more to worry about or prg's one of those at an airport could cause all sorts of problems. The IRA nearly took out the british cabinet with home made mortars on the back of a lorry.
dsososl
Iraq today
Der Wulf wrote: Gmc posted : “There is no point rerunning history and apportioning blame, the problem is how to deal with the consequences now. It's not a simple problem and simple military solutions won't work, nor will seeing it in black and white termsâ€Â
“Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mindâ€Â
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
I’ve been trying to ease slowly through the briar patch, but you’ve tossed a couple firecrackers, I suppose to either change my course, or speed me up. So, I’ll sharpen my points and speed up.
The examples of Iraq, and the Israeli’s are not the problem, they are symptoms of the problem and what I will term “European discomfortâ€Â.
Ø For at least the last 15 years the UN has been a corrupt, and impotent institution.
Ø The US role in protecting Israel is in large part, the consequence of European appeasement of their oil suppliers. –or more accurately, knowing that the US will protect Israeli interests, the European’s are allowed to ignore conscience and appease the Arab states.
Ø The coalition’s unilateral action in Iraq is the direct result of UN impotence and corruption.
Ø The terrorists of 911 were not poor and abused, they all were from financially comfortable family’s, and had good educations. That they were Saudi’s, is not as relevant as the fact that they were members of a radical Islamic organization, lavishly financed by wealthy people, and represented in every country with a large Islamic population.
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
Ø To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
Yes, there have been profound changes, more however with the world order than with us. Since you don’t like long walks down history lane, I’ll make this quick, but not as precise as the long version.
Prior to WWI, the world power centers were the UK, Spain, and France. America was an isolationist sleeping giant, the Soviet union, and China were huge but basically closed third world countries.
After WWII, the power centers were Russia, and the US. Europe was in ruins, concerned primarily with survival and physically rebuilding. The UN was born, and though scary, the policies of mutually assured destruction was accepted because we all knew that no society was so depraved as to willingly commit suicide.
1989 Soviet Union collapses, US becomes the sole superpower. UN is becoming ineffective. In spite of our 200 year reputation, the world becomes increasingly suspicious of, and hostile to the US, primarily because there is no “balanceâ€Â, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful military, and significant financial power is under the control of, “oh my god, those American cowboysâ€Â.
9/11/2001, destruction of world trade center by Islamic fundamentalists, who are delighted to commit suicide in order to harm their enemy.
03/20/2003, US coalition invades Iraq without UN “permissionâ€Â, in a “pre-emotiveâ€Â; : marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself attack> After months of negotiating at the UN, blocked in the security counsel by what we now know were votes purchased by Iraq’s dictator, the US exercised it’s sovereignty and led a coalition into Iraq.
This of course was, in the view of many, the final perfidy, the evidence that the US had morphed into an international bully.
So were there changes, yeah, a few by the US, in the face of quantum, deadly changes to world politics.
Finally, you asked if this action represented our leaders being out of step with the people.
There has been a consistent 70-80% approval rate for taking the action, and then after a bruising campaign, the man and the party that made these decisions was re-elected. Most things political here are pretty evenly split, but that’s a whole nuther quandary.
I think that covers everything, wulf ate a bunny today, now he needs a nap.
Good on ya
ziziziziz
“Rather than go in to a long diatribe about what has been done in the past I am more interested in trying to make sense of where things are going because I can't make up my mindâ€Â
Der Wulf replies: History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are. ……David C. Mccullough
I’ve been trying to ease slowly through the briar patch, but you’ve tossed a couple firecrackers, I suppose to either change my course, or speed me up. So, I’ll sharpen my points and speed up.
The examples of Iraq, and the Israeli’s are not the problem, they are symptoms of the problem and what I will term “European discomfortâ€Â.
Ø For at least the last 15 years the UN has been a corrupt, and impotent institution.
Ø The US role in protecting Israel is in large part, the consequence of European appeasement of their oil suppliers. –or more accurately, knowing that the US will protect Israeli interests, the European’s are allowed to ignore conscience and appease the Arab states.
Ø The coalition’s unilateral action in Iraq is the direct result of UN impotence and corruption.
Ø The terrorists of 911 were not poor and abused, they all were from financially comfortable family’s, and had good educations. That they were Saudi’s, is not as relevant as the fact that they were members of a radical Islamic organization, lavishly financed by wealthy people, and represented in every country with a large Islamic population.
Ø It is totally ridiculous, sophomoric, and condescending to assert that American’s believe the 911 terrorists were from Iraq.
Ø To characterize the Islamic fundamentalist’s as “discontented nutters†is at best disingenuous, and at worst dangerously naïve. This is a well organized social/paramilitary organization with a core of well educated, well traveled individuals who have access to religious, industrial, and government officials at all levels, not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Yeah, that includes the US, UK, and Canada. They recruit well, their candidates are psychotically predisposed to killing in the name of Allah, expecting a glorious hereafter. Whether poor or wealthy, they are brainwashed as a matter of course in the Arabic schools and madras’s. We underestimated them for many years, I fervently hope we have sufficient memory and intelligence to not repeat those mistakes.
You asked what has changed about America, and intimated that our leadership was taking a course against the best interest of the world in general, and more specifically, the American populous.
Yes, there have been profound changes, more however with the world order than with us. Since you don’t like long walks down history lane, I’ll make this quick, but not as precise as the long version.
Prior to WWI, the world power centers were the UK, Spain, and France. America was an isolationist sleeping giant, the Soviet union, and China were huge but basically closed third world countries.
After WWII, the power centers were Russia, and the US. Europe was in ruins, concerned primarily with survival and physically rebuilding. The UN was born, and though scary, the policies of mutually assured destruction was accepted because we all knew that no society was so depraved as to willingly commit suicide.
1989 Soviet Union collapses, US becomes the sole superpower. UN is becoming ineffective. In spite of our 200 year reputation, the world becomes increasingly suspicious of, and hostile to the US, primarily because there is no “balanceâ€Â, for the first time in modern history, the most powerful military, and significant financial power is under the control of, “oh my god, those American cowboysâ€Â.
9/11/2001, destruction of world trade center by Islamic fundamentalists, who are delighted to commit suicide in order to harm their enemy.
03/20/2003, US coalition invades Iraq without UN “permissionâ€Â, in a “pre-emotiveâ€Â; : marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself attack> After months of negotiating at the UN, blocked in the security counsel by what we now know were votes purchased by Iraq’s dictator, the US exercised it’s sovereignty and led a coalition into Iraq.
This of course was, in the view of many, the final perfidy, the evidence that the US had morphed into an international bully.
So were there changes, yeah, a few by the US, in the face of quantum, deadly changes to world politics.
Finally, you asked if this action represented our leaders being out of step with the people.
There has been a consistent 70-80% approval rate for taking the action, and then after a bruising campaign, the man and the party that made these decisions was re-elected. Most things political here are pretty evenly split, but that’s a whole nuther quandary.
I think that covers everything, wulf ate a bunny today, now he needs a nap.
Good on ya
ziziziziz
Iraq today
kensloft wrote: askintio
akakakakaak
akakakakaak
Iraq today
kensloft wrote: ziziziziz
akalalalaalal
akalalalaalal