| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
<symbio> Of course he does =)
<StafferX> Christ, you got it from the MEDIA?? Weren't you just saying about how... the media and all..??
<symbio> Troops can't possibly be positive about IRAQ~
<symbio> If a troop says something positive about Iraq, it has to be fake, scripted, or they were forced to do so on threat of their job
<symbio> Now, if a troop says something negative
<symbio> Whoooa!
<StafferX> How did you get this stuff from TV when all the media does is embolden our enemy???
<Chrono-Z> I know my brother in law is positive about it, but he's a little ****ed in the head and joined the army to kill people. His words not mine.
<symbio> Thats one honest son of a gun!
<Hhhhh> symbio, I like your overgeneralizing statements
<Jett> Staffer, there's an intelligence required to decifer the biased news...for instance, when you hear the words from the mouth of an American GI...you should probably believe that's real
<Jett> Staffer, like I said, direct quotes
<symbio> Hhhhh: Not a generalization, mostly just common sense
<StafferX> Apparently, when a troop says something negative, it COMES ON THE TV AND YOU LISTEN TO IT like you just SAID you did, Symbio.
<Hhhhh> symbio, I didn't see the common sense on what you said
<StafferX> What the hell planet am I on??
<symbio> StafferX: When a soldier says anything, I listen to them
<Jett> Staffer, what do you think of G. Bush?
<symbio> You should try it sometime
<StafferX> Aaaaand when that soldier is on TV, does it count as being in the media?
<symbio> It doesn't matter what channel the soldier is on
<Hhhhh> symbio, if a soldier tells you to eat liquid mercury, will you?
<symbio> StafferX: No, its words coming from the soldier
<symbio> Not reports of what a soldier said
<symbio> Or did not say
<StafferX> So if a soldier says it, it's not media?
<StafferX> See where I'm going with this?
<symbio> Unles you think that when a soldier is on TV they are given a script
<Hhhhh> StafferX, he's just getting mixed up
<symbio> And don't speak from their heart
<StafferX> He's been like this for ten minutes. I give up.
<tortus> most media is not about quotes from the soldiers on the ground. most of it is reporters
<Jett> Staffer, your sort plus the media fouled U.S. efforts in Viet Nam...within a year of our exit, three and a half million S.E. Asians were slaughtered by the governments we'd fought there
<symbio> StafferX: When a soldier states something from their own mouth, I believe it
<Jett> Staffer, why don't you talk to me
<tortus> to find quotes from the soldiers, you have to wade thru many many reports from paid reporters
<Jett> you won't be disappointed
<symbio> When its REPORTED about what a soldier did/said/etc., I tend to be cautious
<Jett> actually, you will
<Jett> you'll vomit
<symbio> I believe what comes from thier own mouths
<StafferX> Er, ok, Jett. Although you did just refer to me as 'your sort,' which I think bears some qualification.
<Hhhhh> Jett, do you have sources? I believe you, I just would like to bring that up sometime later
<Jett> but that won't be so bad for your overall fitness when you turn yourself from ignorance to enlightenment
<Hhhhh> Jett, that comment about 3.5 mil people slaughtered
<Jett> Hhhhh, do a Google search
<tortus> hhhhh: the black book of communism. you can see it there
<plusplusc> Jett: So vietnam fell to the communists. What exactly were the long-term dire consequences that were supposed to follow for all of Asia all the way down to Australia as all those "dominos" fell?
<Jett> tortus, correct
<StafferX> I also see that example as perjorative. The Vietnam conflict was going on before we got there and extended past our departure.. those 3.5 million were the final casualties in the Vietnamese Civil War... even if they were civillians, which is a sticky issue in a guerilla war.
<Jett> plusplus, I don't know, do you?
<StafferX> Saigon didn't fall the week after we removed the ground forces, ya know.
<Jett> plusplus, how about the 3.5 million people, is that dire?
<tortus> staffer: beside the point, entirely
<plusplusc> Jett: Consider that the deaths you refer to mostly took place in Cambodia, as a result of the Vietnam war destabilizing the Cambodian regime of Siahnouk.
<StafferX> Okay. Hit me with the point again.
<Jett> StafferX, those were not casualties of the war...those were murders by the Communists after we left
<StafferX> Camps, executions, ect, purges. I know. But those ARE features of an ideological war of revolution.
<Jett> plusplus, Vietnam took over Cambodia after the way
<tortus> the 3.5 million were after we left.
<Jett> but it was the communism we fought
<StafferX> And I feel certain that some of that number WERE combatants, seeing as how the war continued after we left. It would depend on your source.
<Jett> that committed the murders
<plusplusc> Jett: Yep, and what after that? Actually, Vietnam taking over is what ended Pol Pot's murderous regime.
<Jett> as Communist regimes always must
<tortus> your feelings are just not very important. this is historical information.
<Jett> plusplus, I don't understand what you're saying
<plusplusc> Jett: I'm no fan of the Viet Cong or North Vietnam, but what the U.S. did in Vietnam illustrates the doctrine of unintended, counterproductive consequences.
<tortus> black book of communism is the source
<StafferX> ?
<Jett> plusplus, I agree it was an unfortunate war
<tortus> you want the isbn?
<StafferX> Sure.
<tortus> you can get it at amazon.com
<StafferX> Although I should confess that I'm already doubting the credentials of a book called The Black Book of Communism. Dosen't exactly sound like a disinterested observer.
<plusplusc> Jett: We'd have been better off supporting Ho Chi Minh in the immediate post-WW2 period, and let our western influences not-so-gradually corrupt his post-colonial regime on friendly terms.
<Jett> plusplus, what I'd like to point out is that the antiwar movement in this country convinced a lot of snot noses first and then average people subsequently that Ho Chi Minh was just a simple poet who only wanted his country to be free...he was a ruthless murderer
<StafferX> I'd like to distinguish myself from plusplus at this point.
<Jett> plusplus, we'll never know
<Jett> we supported the French
<Jett> that seems like a good intro into a nightmare
<symbio> ll
<symbio> lol*
<plusplusc> Jett: Yep, Ho was ruthless. But so were the South Vietnamese governments we tried to prop up, except they were venally corrupt and cowardly
<Jett> as was the North
<Jett> I wish it had never come up
<Jett> it was a **** war
<StafferX> If you want to dig into the original tragedy of Vietnam, I would point to the fact that the country was given back to the French after WWII as opposed to, say, the Phillippines, which was granted independence.
<StafferX> But the thought at the time was that France's goodwill was critical.
<Jett> Staffer, yes, that's absolutely right and it never should've been
<plusplusc> Staffer: Yes, exactly. We should have supported Vietnames independence. The French were in no position to give us crap about that after we liberated their country
<Jett> agreed
<StafferX> Eh. Hindsight. What ya gonna do.
<tortus> you could always blame us hawks
<plusplusc> Right now, we're busy creating another huge mess in Iraq that'll come back to bite us even harder down the line
<StafferX> I'm sure the French had their native supporters.
<StafferX> Now that I would dispute, plus.
<Jett> plusplus, I totally disagree
<tortus> the middle east miasma is bigger than vietnam
<tortus> vietnam was a proxy war. iraq is not
<|bob> they didn't have supporters when they tried to come back after WW2
<Jett> way bigger
<plusplusc> Reality is messy when you try to intervene in foreign cultures and disputes
<Jett> plusplus, that's our job
<StafferX> Analogy is fine. There are similarities to be seen. But this isn't a case of nothing new under the sun. There's a lot of stuff about Iraq that would distinguish it from Vietnam in the eyes of an academic such as myself.
<Jett> we're in charge of it
<Jett> the world
<Jett> because nobody else can
<tortus> iraq is a real push to influence an entire region
<symbio> plusplusc: Huge mess?
<Jett> so it falls to us
<symbio> Here we go ... heh
<Jett> plusplus, Sadaam had fourteen binding U.N. resolutions p***ed against him by a body that couldn't enforce anything...and we are still, officially at war with the puke
<StafferX> I think a critical factor in Iraq is going to be the character of the regime that steps into power. You get the right sort of leaders, it's good news. You get the wrong sort, (Diem), it could go real sour.
<plusplusc> Jett: No we're not, in the sense of being capable of intervening anywhere, anytime to rebuild the world in our image by military force. You can only do that by cultural and commercial diffusion, as is happening in China, which has undermined communism there in ways our military never could.
<Jett> he ****ed us and got what was coming to him
<symbio> It has its ps, and it has its downs. However, "creating a huge mess
<symbio> Is a little hard
<Jett> plusplus, I disagree
<plusplusc> sybio: yes, Iraq is a huge mess.
<Jett> we can promote democracy
<StafferX> Jett.. no enforcement? Don't you remember the No Fly Zone?
<Jett> we can support it
<symbio> plusplusc: See, I don't see it that way
<Jett> Staffer, yeah, so?
<StafferX> That wasn't a joke. We shot down Iraqi planes quite often during the period.
<Jett> it was violated everyday
<symbio> But then, you probably figured that out already
<Jett> yes, but they weren't supposed to be shooting at us, by the treaty
<Jett> the Gulf War never ended...there was simply a truce
<plusplusc> symbio: so ok, where's your next democracy-by-military-intervention project? How soon after we go in will they be greeting us with flowers and cheers?
<Jett> and Iraq had obligations under that cease fire treaty that they totally abrogated from day one
<StafferX> I would agree with that, but it wasn't for nothing. And I thought the CIA report on WMDs said that Iraq's ability to manufacture them degraded considerably during that period, no?
<Jett> Bill Clinton supported 'regime change' in Iraq, but never had the balls to see it through
<StafferX> Like, they went from 'poor' to 'nonexistant?'
<plusplusc> Jett: I'm not speaking of technicalities about whether the original gulf war ever ended or not. I'm questioning the basic wisdom of going in so unprepared for the aftermath of even the most smashing military success
<Jett> it was the only right thing to do, but more importantly, it was in our national interests
<symbio> plusplusc: So you are trying to suggest that the insurgents are large percentage of Iraqi's?
<tortus> saddam killed how many millions?
<Jett> plusplus, the unpreparedness of which you speak is a product of a Leftist media, in my opinion
<plusplusc> symbio: the majority of Iraquis wish a pox on both the US and the insurgents.
<Jett> I think we're doing really well there
<symbio> plusplusc: Is that so?
<StafferX> Although I am encouraged by the new tactics that the army has developed fairly recently - fully armored hummers, cellphone signal jammers to spoof roadside bombs, driving everywhere at top speed, etc, etc.
<symbio> So Iraqi's hate us being there all together right?
<Jett> plusplus, you have that from what source?
<plusplusc> Jett: you're living in neocon fantasyland, fellow. By every objective report, Iraq is a huge, expensive hot potato we can't stay in and can't let go of either.
<Jett> within three years, Iraqi forces will be able to handle their own ****
<StafferX> Well, that's a pair of bold statements.
<symbio> The athletes which were saved from torture and murder from the phsycotic son of an ***, the women brutely raped at liesure if they're not doing what they are told?
Return to politics
or
Go to some related
logs:
paul roma -WWE -Wrestling -WWF -wcw
rock
ignxbox360.com
c++
tcl
|
|