eyeball Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 So the American government sided with Nazi Germany? I don't think so. If you're refering to individuals, then sure. It wasn't illegal for the moment to do business with Germany. Then why did the American government try to cover up that business after the fact? Plus, America is a country that values individual freedom more than the rest of us. What a crock of shite that is. But, this is somehow supposed to cancel-out Iran and Iraq's move to join the Nazi fun...after the war started I'll point out. How so? It just is what it is. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
dre Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 Denial as usual. Perhaps it is time for you to laugh at the Mufti's connection to the Holocaust...again. Im not denying anything at all. Im pointing out your confused and tortured logic. It doesnt matter how many links you can find between Iran and fascists or nazis, it still has no bearing on whether or not Iran uses the fascist political and economic model today. The nazis had links to and alliances with dozens and dozens of countries.... that isnt proof those those countries are fascist today. Amazing how you cant seem to grasp such a straight forward logical concept. I dont deny any of your claims. Theres no need to either affirm them or deny them because they arent relevant. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
eyeball Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 dre continuously denies the Nazi-Arab connection. So what about the Freedom-Tyranny connection between us and oh lets say...Saddam Hussein for example? Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Jack Weber Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 dre continuously denies the Nazi-Arab connection. It's was not just NAZI's... The Ba'Athist's loved European Fascism.The entire hierarchy of every Pan-Arab Nationalist state could be easily transpored to,or looked (s)like it came from: Hitler's Germany... Mussolini's Italy... Franco's Spain... Salazar's Portugal... And seeing as these brutal authoritarian regimes in the Arab world stunted the economic and educational growth of the countries they ruled,it stands to rason that many went inward into their chosen faith and became equally insular.It also stands to reason that this lead to a co-opting of certain "fascistic" principles and istalling them into that faith and "tenets"... Hence Islamofascism...Iran being a fairly good example. So the question is: Should we try to reason with Fascists (of any stripe) and try to find some common ground and coexist... Or,as history tells us... Wipe them out because they will not stop??? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
DogOnPorch Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 So what about the Freedom-Tyranny connection between us and oh lets say...Saddam Hussein for example? Canada never supported Saddam Hussein. Plus we sat Iraq out. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 Then why did the American government try to cover up that business after the fact? For the same reasons Canada did! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
DogOnPorch Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 For a cover-up, they did a rather poor job keeping it out of the history books. Perhaps they were just keeping it from you. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Jack Weber Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 Im not denying anything at all. Im pointing out your confused and tortured logic. It doesnt matter how many links you can find between Iran and fascists or nazis, it still has no bearing on whether or not Iran uses the fascist political and economic model today. The nazis had links to and alliances with dozens and dozens of countries.... that isnt proof those those countries are fascist today. Amazing how you cant seem to grasp such a straight forward logical concept. I dont deny any of your claims. Theres no need to either affirm them or deny them because they arent relevant. How not??? They have a group of leaders who have spouted NAZIlike rhetoric about wiping out Jews,Holocaust denial etc.... They actively fund,through Syria and directly,Hezbollah Islamic Jihad,and,Hamas...All organizations that want,not just Israel,but Jews wiped out (check out the Hamas Manifesto..It's like Adolph Hitler and Rudolph Hess were ghost writers).. When do you Chamberlian types face up to reality??? Fascism can come in many forms.It can come in political and economic forms,but it can also come in an even more insidious form...Namely,and falsely in this case,in the name of God... You don't reason with people like this because there is no reasoning with them.Because,if given the chance,they will kill you because you simply are'nt like them.And no acquiescence or live and let live attitude will change that. History is unequivocal on this point... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Moonlight Graham Posted February 25, 2012 Author Report Posted February 25, 2012 Oh! So your position is that Canada = Iran. Well done. No my position is that the west tortures and kills, so in that regard we aren't saints compared to middle-eastern states, though most and probably all of them suck way more. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
dre Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 How not??? They have a group of leaders who have spouted NAZIlike rhetoric about wiping out Jews,Holocaust denial etc.... They actively fund,through Syria and directly,Hezbollah Islamic Jihad,and,Hamas...All organizations that want,not just Israel,but Jews wiped out (check out the Hamas Manifesto..It's like Adolph Hitler and Rudolph Hess were ghost writers).. When do you Chamberlian types face up to reality??? Fascism can come in many forms.It can come in political and economic forms,but it can also come in an even more insidious form...Namely,and falsely in this case,in the name of God... You don't reason with people like this because there is no reasoning with them.Because,if given the chance,they will kill you because you simply are'nt like them.And no acquiescence or live and let live attitude will change that. History is unequivocal on this point... Fascism can come in many forms.It can come in political and economic forms,but it can also come in an even more insidious form...Namely,and falsely in this case,in the name of God... Not really. Fascism is used to describe many things its true, but thats only because its the most misused word in history. Like I said its a universal epithet for everything bad, and its used as an umbrella term to describe all kinds of authoritarianism. They have a group of leaders who have spouted NAZIlike rhetoric about wiping out Jews,Holocaust denial etc....They actively fund,through Syria and directly,Hezbollah Islamic Jihad,and,Hamas...All organizations that want,not just Israel,but Jews wiped out (check out the Hamas Manifesto..It's like Adolph Hitler and Rudolph Hess were ghost writers).. Ok, thats all fine, but none of those things are proof that Iran uses the facist political or economic model. Facism is a political/economic systems defined by a number of distinct concepts.... things like corporatism, integral nationalism, revolutionary syndicalism, Maurassian nationalism etc. Its actually quite a distinct ideology and its a lot different than what practices in conservative theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran. Like I said before... I get why its convenient to label your adversaries with terms like that, but its no more meaningfull then when people were calling George Bush a fascist. Iran is a garden variety conservative theocracy. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Moonlight Graham Posted February 25, 2012 Author Report Posted February 25, 2012 Not really. Fascism is used to describe many things its true, but thats only because its the most misused word in history. Like I said its a universal epithet for everything bad, and its used as an umbrella term to describe all kinds of authoritarianism. Ding-Ding! We have a winner. Agreed. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
August1991 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Beyond the propoganda, what do you really have? A country that has for the most part been the TARGET of aggression, and fought brutal defensive wars against a neighbor that wanted to conquer it. Some typical support for proxies in countries where lots of Shia live, etc. Dre, you view Iranians as "victims" because you side with "victims" in political debates. You're a Maple Leaf fan and you see the US as the Montreal Canadiens. Westerners (North Americans in particular) too often view foreign policy through the prism of domestic debate. This is not about America. Iran is Iran. America is America. ---- Let me offer a comparison: We in Canada have had our differences. Should Americans intervene? Would Americans even understand the complexity of the French/English, Catholic/Protestant or Ontario/Alberta divides in Canada? Now, imagine if Americans suddenly had to take sides in our various Canadian debates. I think that most Canadians would find foolish/naive American comments taking a side in a Canadian debate. Dre, I suspect that Iranians take your comments about Iran in a similar way. Edited February 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote
August1991 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Fareed Zakaria wrote this commentary last week, then repeated it about word for word on his GPS show. Watch the short video here, or read the excerpts below from his commentary found at the same link.Sorry, if the US in 1948 had destroyed Stalinism and the Soviet Union, it would have done something good for humanity. Instead, several hundred million people in Europe - and a billion or so in China and Asia - had to suffer through such inhumanity.By the 1980s, the Soviet system collapsed anyway. But by then, people had suffered the Khmer Rouge, the Cultural Revolution, Maoism, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Berlin Airlift, the Iron Curtain, innumerable families divided, and death. Maybe if the West had confronted Stalin and the Soviets in 1948, this human suffering could have been avoided. Edited February 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote
eyeball Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 Canada never supported Saddam Hussein. Plus we sat Iraq out. We're with those who did. Plus we were in Iraq. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Guest Derek L Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Sorry, if the US in 1948 had destroyed Stalinism and the Soviet Union, it would have done something good for humanity. Instead, several hundred million people in Europe - and a billion or so in China and Asia - had to suffer through such inhumanity. By the 1980s, the Soviet system collapsed anyway. But by then, people had suffered the Khmer Rouge, the Cultural Revolution, Maoism, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Berlin Airlift, the Iron Curtain, innumerable families divided, and death. Maybe if the West had confronted Stalin and the Soviets in 1948, this human suffering could have been avoided. Or, as suggested by Gen Patton, rearm and turn those Nazi sonuvabitchs around in ‘45 and drive the Soviets back into Russia…… Edited February 25, 2012 by Derek L Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 (edited) Or, as suggested by Gen Patton, rearm and turn those Nazi sonuvabitchs around in ‘45 and drive the Soviets back into Russia…… General Douglas MacArthur wanted to do that in Korea but got sacked instead. Edited February 25, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted February 25, 2012 Report Posted February 25, 2012 General Douglas MacArthur wanted to that in Korea but got sacked instead. Indeed, it’s almost as if Doug and George understood the Communist menace……….And that dealing with them prior to them acquiring nukes would be advantageous………Imagine if the Cold War went Hot, and had ended in 1946-47? You and I might have had different career paths Quote
jbg Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Maybe if the West had confronted Stalin and the Soviets in 1948, this human suffering could have been avoided. I agree. And Ronald Reagan, wherever he is, would have agreed. The problem is we were flat broke in 1948. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
GostHacked Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 I agree. And Ronald Reagan, wherever he is, would have agreed. The problem is we were flat broke in 1948. And you are even more broke now. Quote
GostHacked Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) We're with those who did. Plus we were in Iraq. Not to the extent that some are made to believe. From what I know, Canadian military personelle were on an exchange program with the USA. And the Canadians has the option to come home or go to Iraq. I don't think they were forced to go. Edited February 26, 2012 by GostHacked Quote
eyeball Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 Not to the extent that some are made to believe. From what I know, Canadian military personelle were on an exchange program with the USA. And the Canadians has the option to come home or go to Iraq. I don't think they were forced to go. There's no difference between a penny or a pound of murder. When you're in you're in all the way. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
jbg Posted February 26, 2012 Report Posted February 26, 2012 And you are even more broke now. While I don't have the statistics handy government debt as a percentage of GDP was far higher then. Also unlike then the U.S. has ready access to credit markets. That was very nearly shut down by the WW II borrowings. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
GostHacked Posted February 28, 2012 Report Posted February 28, 2012 While I don't have the statistics handy government debt as a percentage of GDP was far higher then. Also unlike then the U.S. has ready access to credit markets. That was very nearly shut down by the WW II borrowings. Having access to credit markets does not take away from the fact that the US is still broke. All that borrowed money has to be paid back, at interest I might add.. but another war might get their economy back up and going. But it will be the military and the defence contractors that will benefit. Spending money on a socialistic health care system seems bad in many Americans eyes. Spending money on wars to make money off wars (meaning these weapons that would help boost the US economy, but someone's life will be snuffed out because of it). If you are willing to entertain 'first strike' option on Iran, then that leaves the table open for a first strike against the USA or Israel from Iran. Quote
Wild Bill Posted February 28, 2012 Report Posted February 28, 2012 If you are willing to entertain 'first strike' option on Iran, then that leaves the table open for a first strike against the USA or Israel from Iran. Perhaps, but not in the way you mean, GH. This is not some moral contest, where there is some judge somewhere who says if one side committed a foul then the other side gets a free one. This is realpolitik. Some countries perform military actions because they want to and others because they feel they have to. There is a very real difference! Despite the constant carping from the anti-American "peanut gallery", Uncle Sam has rarely been the military aggressor in the last 100 years. A business aggressor, perhaps but not a military one. Rather, America usually has become involved either because some ally was attacked or in the case of Europe, the incumbent countries wanted Uncle Sam to foot the tab. Iran simply does not have the equivalent moral stature on the world stage as the USA. Not even most of its Arab neighbours think Iran is a Boy Scout! They know better than we do what the ruling mullahs in Irah are capable of doing and many are quietly assisting America and its allies behind the scenes. The last thing those other Arab countries want is for Iran to have the Bomb! Remember, Iran is not developing nuclear weapons so that it can serve as a counterbalance for all Arab and Muslim nations! It wants them so that Iran will become the greatest power in that part of the world! Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and even the Saudis will have to dance to Iran's tune. So this is not some tit for tat morality play, GH. Iran has very few friends and is considered a threat by almost all other countries except China and Russia, who want money! You make it sound like America or Israel performing a first strike on Iran is some sort of bullying recreational exercise. It is nothing of the kind! Iran is considered a serious threat and a first strike is simply another option to remove it. Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Moonlight Graham Posted February 28, 2012 Author Report Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Sorry, if the US in 1948 had destroyed Stalinism and the Soviet Union, it would have done something good for humanity. Instead, several hundred million people in Europe - and a billion or so in China and Asia - had to suffer through such inhumanity. By the 1980s, the Soviet system collapsed anyway. But by then, people had suffered the Khmer Rouge, the Cultural Revolution, Maoism, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Berlin Airlift, the Iron Curtain, innumerable families divided, and death. Maybe if the West had confronted Stalin and the Soviets in 1948, this human suffering could have been avoided. So you're saying the US/West maybe should have gone to war with the USSR and defeated Stalin. This would basically be the continuation of WWII or maybe we'd call it WWIII. So nuke a few hundred-thousand Russkies, or more, and install a democratic regime (good luck with that)? Maybe some boots on the ground too, which would have been a blood bath of a war. That's a lot of death in itself. Then we'd have to defeat the Communist Party in China and Mao, which took power in 1949. Another nuke job on them. I guess we'd also have to go after the Korean communists too? Maybe the threat of nukes and our destruction of the USSR would be enough to avoid actual nukes on China, but I doubt it, since they were in a state of civil war for decades. The US maintaining a nuclear monopoly would have been difficult, we didn't have precision airstrikes back then. It all would have been interesting to say the least. Edited February 28, 2012 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
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.