JerrySeinfeld Posted November 9, 2007 Report Posted November 9, 2007 Well there you go lol - apparently you haven't heard of the "cold war"? Quote
Higgly Posted November 9, 2007 Report Posted November 9, 2007 (edited) lol - apparently you haven't heard of the "cold war"? No. What is this thing, 'Cold War'? Edited November 9, 2007 by Higgly Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
JerrySeinfeld Posted November 9, 2007 Report Posted November 9, 2007 No. What was that? It was a period when the west's primary enemy was the USSR. That was right after the period when they were our ALLY!!! Politics make strange bedfellows. Sure - you'd like it if we all lumped the complex events of the 20th century into one big broad brush (you love thos big broad brushes eh?) called "american foreign policy wouldn't ya there scamp? Now that I've squashed your red herring we can get back to talking about troop surges smashing the enemy of TODAY. The point was, today's wars are overanalyzed and fought with bleeding hearts. We need to go back to the strategies of WWII: pulverise, then build from scratch!!! SURGE I SAY!!! Quote
Higgly Posted November 10, 2007 Report Posted November 10, 2007 ... smashing the enemy of TODAY.... We need to go back to the strategies of WWII: pulverise, then build from scratch!!! Now wait just a minute. Aren't we your friends? Why are you spening all this money on your enemies? Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
JerrySeinfeld Posted November 10, 2007 Report Posted November 10, 2007 Now wait just a minute. Aren't we your friends? Why are you spening all this money on your enemies? Let me clarify. We pulverise. They rebuild. Quote
Higgly Posted November 10, 2007 Report Posted November 10, 2007 (edited) Let me clarify. We pulverise. They rebuild. Ah. So you have the big guns and we should just kiss your ass. Yahz bozz. Right 'way bozz. Chitlins with that gravy bozz...? Edited November 10, 2007 by Higgly Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
Moxie Posted November 10, 2007 Report Posted November 10, 2007 Ah. So you have the big guns and we should just kiss your ass.Yahz bozz. Right 'way bozz. Chitlins with that gravy bozz...? Who do you think transports our troops to Afghanistan Higgly? Who gives us air support during fire fights Higgly? Who buys are goods and services Higgly? The US doesn't ask us to kiss her ass, she provides vital services that Canada to be correct services the Liberals cut to pay for "Ad Scam". Without the US our troops would still be in Ottawa. Your disrespect is duly noted, biting off you nose to spite your face is rather funny. Then again you'll be noseless for a lifetime, behold the new hardleftest. They look like pigs. Quote Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy
ScottSA Posted November 10, 2007 Report Posted November 10, 2007 Ah. So you have the big guns and we should just kiss your ass.Yahz bozz. Right 'way bozz. Chitlins with that gravy bozz...? Y'know, I always heard that someone ought to be smart, and not dumb, if they want to mock other folks. No names mentioned, of course, but it's just that dumb people are soooo tedious when they try to be smart, don't you agree? Now of course a dumb person would see that last question as an opening, and gleefully rush in with the baton "yeah, you're dumb!" held proudly aloft, and imagine that they scored a point... But anyway, Jerry is actually right. Japan and germany are what they are today precisely because they were destroyed and then rebuilt. Not just defeated, but utterly destroyed. Had they not been, had the sovs not raped Berlin, and had both the sovs and allies not slaughtered a good part of the Wehrmacht and all of the SS out of hand, and bombed both Germany and Japan into a state of civil collapse, they would not be where they are today. In all likelyhood they would be troublesome world powers. Had the US been as ruthless in Iraq as it was in WW II, there simply wouldn't have ben a problem. The reason seems to be that societies are malleable if they are severely traumatized, but not so malleable if they're not. That seems to be true throughout history, perhaps first with the Alexandrian campaigns, but the Carthaginian wars are probably the starkest example in ancient history. It may not be a pleasant fact, but it's a fact nonetheless. Quote
trex Posted November 10, 2007 Report Posted November 10, 2007 Y'know, I always heard that someone ought to be smart, and not dumb, if they want to mock other folks. No names mentioned, of course, but it's just that dumb people are soooo tedious when they try to be smart, don't you agree? Now of course a dumb person would see that last question as an opening, and gleefully rush in with the baton "yeah, you're dumb!" held proudly aloft, and imagine that they scored a point... The irony of this statement coming from you does not escape me! Quote
kuzadd Posted November 12, 2007 Author Report Posted November 12, 2007 Because the pretext for war was necessary. Nobody is forcing you to read anything. The pretext for war was necessary? Tell the posters here why? I have a real good idea of why, but dish BC dish. Oh and I mostly scroll by the BS don't worry, as I roll my eyes . And laugh. Quote Insults are the ammunition of the unintelligent - do not use them. It is okay to criticize a policy, decision, action or comment. Such criticism is part of healthy debate. It is not okay to criticize a person's character or directly insult them, regardless of their position or actions. Derogatory terms such as "loser", "idiot", etc are not permitted unless the context clearly implies that it is not serious. Rule of thumb: Play the ball, not the person (i.e. tackle the argument, not the person making it).
JerrySeinfeld Posted November 12, 2007 Report Posted November 12, 2007 Y'know, I always heard that someone ought to be smart, and not dumb, if they want to mock other folks. No names mentioned, of course, but it's just that dumb people are soooo tedious when they try to be smart, don't you agree? Now of course a dumb person would see that last question as an opening, and gleefully rush in with the baton "yeah, you're dumb!" held proudly aloft, and imagine that they scored a point...But anyway, Jerry is actually right. Japan and germany are what they are today precisely because they were destroyed and then rebuilt. Not just defeated, but utterly destroyed. Had they not been, had the sovs not raped Berlin, and had both the sovs and allies not slaughtered a good part of the Wehrmacht and all of the SS out of hand, and bombed both Germany and Japan into a state of civil collapse, they would not be where they are today. In all likelyhood they would be troublesome world powers. Had the US been as ruthless in Iraq as it was in WW II, there simply wouldn't have ben a problem. The reason seems to be that societies are malleable if they are severely traumatized, but not so malleable if they're not. That seems to be true throughout history, perhaps first with the Alexandrian campaigns, but the Carthaginian wars are probably the starkest example in ancient history. It may not be a pleasant fact, but it's a fact nonetheless. Exactly, Scott. Your most important comment is that they would be troublesome powers today had we not pulverised them. This is precisly the lesson of the fist gulf war. And more broaly, the lesson of today's wstern mentality: we are self loathers. We don't go to war as nations with the intent to win. W send troops in harms way, then publically despis what we'e doing, then argue about how best to rush to defeat. Big difference. We need the proper outlook on war: we ar thee to win victory, to thottle the underlying ideology which was behind the 9-11 declaration o war on the west. SO let's do it! SURGE I SAY, SURGE! Quote
GostHacked Posted November 12, 2007 Report Posted November 12, 2007 We need the proper outlook on war: we ar thee to win victory, to thottle the underlying ideology which was behind the 9-11 declaration o war on the west. SO let's do it! SURGE I SAY, SURGE! The ideology behind 9-11 did not come from Iraq. See the problem there with that? That idology came from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (where all the hijackers came from) but please feel free to ignore that fact. Iraq is a freak side show at the big circus. If the US was out to win this war, it would have been done the first year. We all know the US can win this war, but it simply chooses not too. They have proven that time and time again since the initial invasion. Millions of money lost, Iraqi government is not comming up to speed. (Step down as they step up? haha) US officials refusing to go serve civil positions in Iraq, ect ect. Failed leadership means a failed attempt at reshaping the Middle East. NEXT. Quote
JerrySeinfeld Posted November 13, 2007 Report Posted November 13, 2007 The ideology behind 9-11 did not come from Iraq. See the problem there with that? That idology came from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (where all the hijackers came from) but please feel free to ignore that fact. Iraq is a freak side show at the big circus.If the US was out to win this war, it would have been done the first year. We all know the US can win this war, but it simply chooses not too. They have proven that time and time again since the initial invasion. Millions of money lost, Iraqi government is not comming up to speed. (Step down as they step up? haha) US officials refusing to go serve civil positions in Iraq, ect ect. Failed leadership means a failed attempt at reshaping the Middle East. NEXT. As far as your comment about Iraq...To quote a fornmer CIA operative in the mid-east: anyone who thinks actions in one country in the mid-east are isolated and unrelated to the whole region is a fool and out of touch with reality. The second part of your argument is basically what I have been saying: the prosecution of the war has paid far too much attention to the western bleeding hearts. This whole business of helping them "rebuild", or tenderly avoiding the bombing of certain "civilian" areas is nonsense. Anywhere we know to be even remotely the source of insurgency has to be pulverised - flattened. That might even include parts of syria and especially Iran. I'm not talking about occupation. I'm talking about annihalation. Quote
Black Dog Posted November 14, 2007 Report Posted November 14, 2007 Let me clarify. We pulverise. They rebuild. I suppose you're right if one forgets the billions of dollars time and personnel the U.S. devoted to rebuilding to Germany and Japan after the war. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted November 14, 2007 Report Posted November 14, 2007 I suppose you're right if one forgets the billions of dollars time and personnel the U.S. devoted to rebuilding to Germany and Japan after the war. I'm glad to see you recognize that we did that. Quote
JerrySeinfeld Posted November 14, 2007 Report Posted November 14, 2007 I'm glad to see you recognize that we did that. The difference is you didn't have defeatists at home demanding that you do it before we stormed the beaches at normandy Quote
Black Dog Posted November 14, 2007 Report Posted November 14, 2007 (edited) The difference is you didn't have defeatists at home demanding that you do it before we stormed the beaches at normandy Yeah. That's the difference. AW: I'm glad to see you recognize that we did that Kinda hard to deny, innit? Edited November 14, 2007 by Black Dog Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.