PDA

View Full Version : I've just watched the movie "W" by Ollie Stone(r)



pate
03 Nov 09,, 06:31
Okay, Gee Dubya is an idget.

Seriously, Saddam didn't use chemical weapons on his own people? When Saddam was the leader of 'his' people? I don't care much for legality. I care more for justice. Was Saddam justly served?

Does anyone else miss Gee Dubya?

Mobbme
03 Nov 09,, 10:13
Watched the movie in the theaters when it first came out, great movie. I'd watch it again.

HistoricalDavid
03 Nov 09,, 14:01
pate, do you advocate invasion, occupation and forcible democratisation of North Korea, Myanmar, China, Syria, Sudan, etc.

Dreadnought
03 Nov 09,, 19:57
Okay, Gee Dubya is an idget.

Seriously, Saddam didn't use chemical weapons on his own people? When Saddam was the leader of 'his' people? I don't care much for legality. I care more for justice. Was Saddam justly served?

Does anyone else miss Gee Dubya?

No doubt. And served by those that survived his rule. I seriously wouldnt put much faith in "W" the movie nor Fathead Moores newest one on capitalism either. Living proof that Hollywood has lost its mystique as far as quality pictures go. Political slants run the roost. They cant offer much better since the majority of the Babyboomers and younger are busy doing drugs, DUI's, cheating on or beating their wives/husbands etc.

Anyone who has lived the better part of atleast the last three to four decades know that Hollywoods twilight has come and gone with the exception of a handfull of good talented artists that are left because the are Babyboomers. You younger generations and those after you will have to live with the self absorbed, self rewarding, spoiled smacked asses that do everything else including political slants/rants and all mentioned prior now instead of doing their jobs....making good quality pictures for civilized people to enjoy.

*Ever wonder why there are so many reality shows?

*Ever wonder how Disney (returned to the top) and Pixar (New) became so big in the last 10 years. It all points to the quality of pictures and themes coming out of Hollywood in the last 15. Its utter trash, and very rare quality.
Needless to say Im glad I wont grow up in that era.;):redface:

*9 out of 10 stars in Hollywood these days could not hold a candle to their former parents or mentors careers of making good quality pictures and sound judgement as far as their private lives were led. A total shame.

Dreadnought
03 Nov 09,, 20:10
pate, do you advocate invasion, occupation and forcible democratisation of North Korea, Myanmar, China, Syria, Sudan, etc.

*Invasion and occupation dont belong in your statement David since two of the three mentioned (Iraq and NK) have invaded and occupied others before bringing about wars in the last 55 years. Both being ruled by dictatorships not elected by the people and both staunch supporters of having no human rights what so ever. The other three (China,Myanmar and Sudan are guilty of the very same) aka no human rights what so ever and dictatorships or military rule.

gunnut
03 Nov 09,, 20:40
pate, do you advocate invasion, occupation and forcible democratisation of North Korea, Myanmar, China, Syria, Sudan, etc.

Which one of these are openly adversarial toward the US, has unconventional weapons, AND willing to supply such a weapon to a terrorist group intent on delivering it to the US?

dalem
03 Nov 09,, 22:02
Does anyone else miss Gee Dubya?

I do.

-dale

HistoricalDavid
04 Nov 09,, 01:19
*Invasion and occupation dont belong in your statement David since two of the three mentioned (Iraq and NK) have invaded and occupied others before bringing about wars in the last 55 years. Both being ruled by dictatorships not elected by the people and both staunch supporters of having no human rights what so ever. The other three (China,Myanmar and Sudan are guilty of the very same) aka no human rights what so ever and dictatorships or military rule.

Dreadnought, I am speaking not from issues of morality - whatever our disagreements, you know I'm no fan of authoritarian regimes - but of practicality. If Iraq was invaded and occupied because of the injustice of Saddam, then presumably those other countries should be too. Will pate supply the millions of troops necessary for this task?


Which one of these are openly adversarial toward the US, has unconventional weapons, AND willing to supply such a weapon to a terrorist group intent on delivering it to the US?

I don't remember pate talking about those matters, he was talking about Saddam's tyranny. Now that you mention it, NK fits the bill, although instead of terrorist groups they've demonstrated a desire to be able to deliver a nasty package directly, in repeated missile tests.

gunnut
04 Nov 09,, 02:05
I don't remember pate talking about those matters, he was talking about Saddam's tyranny. Now that you mention it, NK fits the bill, although instead of terrorist groups they've demonstrated a desire to be able to deliver a nasty package directly, in repeated missile tests.

Actually no. NK's nukes have been proven to be either duds or simply too primitive with tiny yields. Their missile technology hasn't impressed anyone. The range, accuracy, and reaction time are less than weapon ready. They also haven't demonstrated the ability to mount a nuke on a missile. NK is really not a threat to the US. That and there's China to keep NK on the leash. No one kept Saddam on a leash.

sappersgt
04 Nov 09,, 02:41
Does anyone else miss Gee Dubya?

Yep, I surely do. I quit me ta drinkin, I figure if it's good enough for the President it's good enough for me.;):biggrin:

Blue
04 Nov 09,, 03:41
Okay, Gee Dubya is an idget. He was phonetically challenged.:biggrin:


Seriously, Saddam didn't use chemical weapons on his own people? Chemical, projectile, starvation, torture, political imprisonment, sanctions, what was left to use? He did it all!


When Saddam was the leader of 'his' people? His party.


I don't care much for legality. I care more for justice. Was Saddam justly served? Hell yeah!!!!! Although, being an advocate for eye for an eye, I think he should have suffered WAAYYYYYY more!!


Does anyone else miss Gee Dubya? NO! I miss RWR!!! And though I thought this could never be possible, BHO almost makes me appreciate WJC!! Even perhaps JEC as he is only surpassed in the worse pres ever(IMO) by BHO.:))

Dreadnought
04 Nov 09,, 14:14
Dreadnought, I am speaking not from issues of morality - whatever our disagreements, you know I'm no fan of authoritarian regimes - but of practicality. If Iraq was invaded and occupied because of the injustice of Saddam, then presumably those other countries should be too. Will pate supply the millions of troops necessary for this task?


IMO, No. The reasoning, better to go collectively then to go alone. As with Iran today and NK we are exausting all avenues of diplomacy first. We refuse to get dragged into single talks because we want other countries input and for them to understand all circumstances, agreements and issues. This will atleast relay to other nations that indeed our intentions are peacefull and true. We all have much to loose if either of them perfect a weapon capable of threatening their neighbors. After this business with Iraq,Afghanistan and Iran, IMO the ME needs a good long cooling time. Time for relations and talks to further take place and hopefully take a solid path to a peacefull future whatever it may be. We all benefit.

Luke Gu
05 Nov 09,, 15:18
pate, do you advocate invasion, occupation and forcible democratisation of North Korea, Myanmar, China, Syria, Sudan, etc.
Welcome to invade China!I promise I won't kill you if I capture you.:)):)):))

Luke Gu
05 Nov 09,, 15:25
Sir,can I ask a question:what's your thought when you support US invade Iraq,for the interest of US,or Iraqis?If for the interests of US,you don't need find so many High-sounding excuses,It is only self-deceiving。

osage18
05 Nov 09,, 16:47
I came away from the movie feeling bad for W.

He strikes me as a good fellow...and not to sound cliche, but truly someone I'd like to have a beer with.

I can kind of see why politics didn't work out for him...he doesn't seem the type.

Dreadnought
05 Nov 09,, 18:46
A little Presidents joke.

All US Presidents before leaving office, leave behind three envelops behind in the top drawer of the desk in the Oval office.

In the first, the note inside reads:

"Its ok, just blame it on me and my administration."
Love Uncle George.

In the second, the note inside reads:

"Its ok, just blame it on me and my administration."
Love Uncle George.

Inside the third and last one the note reads:

"Your all out of excuses now to blame me and my administation,
Make up three more envelops for the next President.
Youre on your own!"
Love Uncle George.

:));)

dalem
05 Nov 09,, 19:26
I came away from the movie feeling bad for W.

He strikes me as a good fellow...and not to sound cliche, but truly someone I'd like to have a beer with.

I can kind of see why politics didn't work out for him...he doesn't seem the type.

Didn't work out? Two-term governor of Texas, two-term President of the United States? It doesn't work out much better than that, sheesh.

-dale

gunnut
05 Nov 09,, 19:49
Sir,can I ask a question:what's your thought when you support US invade Iraq,for the interest of US,or Iraqis?If for the interests of US,you don't need find so many High-sounding excuses,It is only self-deceiving。

We do things only for the interest of the US, just like any other nation would do things only in self-interest. Does China build railroads to Tibet for the good of Tibetans or for the good of China?

osage18
05 Nov 09,, 19:59
Didn't work out? Two-term governor of Texas, two-term President of the United States? It doesn't work out much better than that, sheesh.

-dale

I meant that he doesn't seem like a political guy...like Obama. Didn't work out for him in terms of all the guff that he got from everyone.

Mobbme
06 Nov 09,, 04:53
I meant that he doesn't seem like a political guy...like Obama. Didn't work out for him in terms of all the guff that he got from everyone.

Yeah, Bush wasn't a good talker, but he didn't have to be. He actually did something. Obama just seems to be saying the right things, but can't act on anything.

dalem
06 Nov 09,, 18:45
I meant that he doesn't seem like a political guy...like Obama. Didn't work out for him in terms of all the guff that he got from everyone.

He didn't get guff from "everyone", 99% of it came from the Left, liberals, and their propaganda outlets in the MSM. The rest of us may have disagreed with him at times, but respected him.

Obama is a talker, not a do-er, and is actually quite politically inept.

-dale

pate
08 Nov 09,, 04:05
pate, do you advocate invasion, occupation and forcible democratisation of North Korea, Myanmar, China, Syria, Sudan, etc.

Sure, but all in good time, my friend. It took the US some (assuming the 1988 gassing of their own people) 20-30 years to bring Saddam to justice? Among our other promises is that we are guarauntors of only our only freedom, and only friends of anyone elses' (anyone elses' freedom, that is.) Of course we should and I hope will attend to our friends' needs eventually...

But to say that Korea (not to be devisive, forsooth, North & South KOREA?); a close friend isn't sleeping with the enemy at some level? My, my, perhaps we need some psychiatric intervention between the two parties, on second thought perhaps not...

Myanmar, China, Syria, Sudan, etc (Cuba, Venezuela, Libya, Iran) the list goes on and on for both me and you HD. I weep for some of the countries you (and I) list, I also just sort of look at some of them askew and ask myself; "What are the people living there thinking?"

Not that I want to really understand what they are thinking, but more to wonder why they aren't doing something about it?

If the liberty I imagine isn't as sacred to them as it is to me, why spill blood over it?

That was a semi-rhetorical question; if their own liberty isn't enough for them to rise up as a people against the regime that holds them under its sway, then that regime is very much a threat to my liberty. Perhaps not now, but in good time, my children and grandchildren's liberty.

Not to put words in your mouth; for I have nothing against any of them. My problem is if I do nothing about it, and trust but am watchful; what happens when I am no longer around to be trustful and watchful? I'm not so sure...


Will pate supply the millions of troops necessary for this task?.

Now that is the greatest question I have yet noticed today!

I think I have an answer!

Sign up today, The People's Republic of Pate (PRP) is now accepting applications for citizenship. Under our Dear Leader's Tutelege (tm) you will recieve information and advice on how to protect your OWN personal freedom. All that is require is an oath of absolute fealty to Pate on sufferance of death, and you too can share in his great wisdom on personal freedom, wealth and all your dreams come true; but wait, ONLY if YOU are willing to WORK hard to free your fellow man. This takes a TREMENDOUS commitment, one toward CHANGE, and a HOPE that you are not alone... PRP assures you happiness, life, and 'freedom to choose.'*


(fine print:)
Citizenship in PRP revokes all prior citizenships in all prior countries regardless of birth. "WORK," "WORKING," and "WORKED" by no definition in the PRP dictionary gives any person (or sentient/right bearing being) any rights whatsoever in the PRP. Immunity under the law is in no way to be construed as a 'right**.'











*'freedom to choose' should not be confused with 'liberty' due to the vagaries of the English language (an outdated lingua franca at best) this symbolism of speech has become confusing. (All talk of circle-speak is hereby outlawed in PRP)


**The word 'right' in the outdated language of Ameri/Anglospeak is silly and has no meaning, it means a direction, a political philosophy and some sort of mish-mashery about things that "cannot be taken away." The People's Republic of Pate does not recognize these 'placeholder' definitions of the word, and hereby MANdate (for pate is truly a MAN) that the word means: "uhh," forever and ever, amen. May Pate truly bless pate and his country. Amen

pate
08 Nov 09,, 04:10
Aw, Jeez, HD, I meant to invite you to join me, and yesss... If I can I shall indeed provide the 'millions' necessary to liberate the countries you delineated.

Man, I had no idea so many countries were in need. Truly brother you should join with me in the fight against evil...

If it is not too much to ask, perhaps instead of living in your own so obviously well positioned country and making mazillions, you might join me in service to the world and join your local country to free the world of tyranny? oR is it a bit too late for you? Has tyranny visited your Wuderland?

Luke Gu
08 Nov 09,, 10:39
We do things only for the interest of the US, just like any other nation would do things only in self-interest.
Then please don't use human right or democracy as excuses to attack other nations。All these things are good,but all these things make me feel Vomiting when US use it to get its interests

Luke Gu
08 Nov 09,, 10:48
Dear pate,overthrow the government should not be your goal。What will you do after it?When the Soviet Union disintegration,you have chances to help them,but what happened?Do you has the plan to build up the new the government In line with your imagination?Are you sure you can avoid Russia's tragedy? Look what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan,I don't think they have a better life now。

Mihais
08 Nov 09,, 10:52
Then please don't use human right or democracy as excuses to attack other nations。All these things are good,but all these things make me feel Vomiting when US use it to get its interests


Luke,you don't get it:biggrin:.It's called getting two birds with one shot.

Mobbme
09 Nov 09,, 11:36
Dear pate,overthrow the government should not be your goal。What will you do after it?When the Soviet Union disintegration,you have chances to help them,but what happened?Do you has the plan to build up the new the government In line with your imagination?Are you sure you can avoid Russia's tragedy? Look what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan,I don't think they have a better life now。

Well, you think wrong.

In a few years, Afghanis and Iraqis will be able to do whatever they want on the internet, something you'll never ever be able to do living in China ;)

Luke Gu
09 Nov 09,, 14:00
Well, you think wrong.
In a few years, Afghanis and Iraqis will be able to do whatever they want on the internet, something you'll never ever be able to do living in China ;)
Then how many years is the "a few years"?And no matter Presidential elections or freedom of expression isn't our goal,the better life is.You can't make sure it will come true just rely on Democracy.:cool:

Mobbme
09 Nov 09,, 15:03
Then how many years is the "a few years"?And no matter Presidential elections or freedom of expression isn't our goal,the better life is.You can't make sure it will come true just rely on Democracy.:cool:

Democracy and freedom for all! Everyone deserves it, so do you, my friend.

Blue
09 Nov 09,, 15:11
democracy and freedom for all! Everyone deserves it, so do you, my friend. Cheers to that!!!!!!!!!!!:):):)

Luke Gu
09 Nov 09,, 15:25
Democracy and freedom for all! Everyone deserves it, so do you, my friend.
Sure about it.Then how to delimit Democracy and freedom?Do we have same idea about it?Do the American's democracy is suitable to other nations?And help is one thing,aggression is another matter.When Japan invade China,Japanese also said they were helping Chinese.

dalem
09 Nov 09,, 22:06
Sure about it.Then how to delimit Democracy and freedom?Do we have same idea about it?Do the American's democracy is suitable to other nations?And help is one thing,aggression is another matter.When Japan invade China,Japanese also said they were helping Chinese.

Yeah, but I think the bloom might've come off of that rose pretty much when they started burning Chinese alive and enslaving them. So it's a leeeeeeeetle bit different.

-dale

rj1
13 Nov 09,, 19:43
Not watched the movie. When it came out it struck me as too exploitationist. Like Stone thinking, "this guy's presidency is about to end, I'll release a bio film about him and his administration and make money". When I first saw the trailer, I couldn't figure out if it was a serious movie or a satire.

gunnut
13 Nov 09,, 22:55
Then please don't use human right or democracy as excuses to attack other nations。All these things are good,but all these things make me feel Vomiting when US use it to get its interests


I have never advocated invading another nation based on human rights or democracy.

Our government may say that, but it's just to sell the war.

pate
15 Nov 09,, 06:23
Sir,can I ask a question:what's your thought when you support US invade Iraq,for the interest of US,or Iraqis?If for the interests of US,you don't need find so many High-sounding excuses,It is only self-deceiving。

If this question was directed at me here is my answer:

The first time my country had a conflict anywhere near Iraq (early 1990's I think, apologies I was a child at the time) I felt that Saddam Hussein was an awful man who killed his own people (I was not so young that I didn't remember the news footage of the dead people, women, children, etc with flies feeding on their corpses) that I saw after the leader of the country in 1988(?) had gassed his own people. So in the early nineties I saw both a war against a nation, and in my own mind a war against an awful man who was leading the nation in question.

That first war was concluded, and the United States of America was in a unique position to carry the UN mandated war to a more 'just' war in the great scheme of things; i.e. an awful man who had been in control of his country since the 70's(?) could have been eliminated and his people (who he apparently felt free to gas, kill etc)....

Okay, I am about to get angry. Saddam Hussein was an evil man; the world shouldn't miss him. I certainly don't. In my opinion it would have been better for the world (humanity {yellow, black, tan, white} in other words) that Saddam Hussein is no longer running a country or even alive... I just don't miss him; I don't miss hitler either, and I think that death came far too late...

Godwin's Law, I lose the argument I guess... Still, I don't think that the fact that Iraq was invaded whether it was for the express purpose of preventing weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of a madman, or just to eliminate a madman leading a country was a bad thing.

The end justifies the means in this case is all I wanted to say.

Human rights justifications? Heck, Iraq was a tiny country, easy to defeat, we could do it. Taking on China for Human Rights? What does that mean?

Does China massacre its own people? I dunno, it took "Nixon to go to China" you tell me; do you massacre your own people?

Why do you feel so threatened? Do you plan to massacre your own people?

Is there a genuine fear of how you deal with you billion people from us, other than you pacify them? You already have weapons of mass destruction, and I think the world recognizes that. Do you plan on going 'rogue' and expanding your borders, or eliminating people you don't agree with?

Are you a threat to the Republic of Pate?

If you are, then damn right you better be worried.

Mobbme
15 Nov 09,, 06:25
If this question was directed at me here is my answer:

The first time my country had a conflict anywhere near Iraq (early 1990's I think, apologies I was a child at the time) I felt that Saddam Hussein was an awful man who killed his own people (I was not so young that I didn't remember the news footage of the dead people, women, children, etc with flies feeding on their corpses) that I saw after the leader of the country in 1988(?) had gassed his own people. So in the early nineties I saw both a war against a nation, and in my own mind a war against an awful man who was leading the nation in question.

That first war was concluded, and the United States of America was in a unique position to carry the UN mandated war to a more 'just' war in the great scheme of things; i.e. an awful man who had been in control of his country since the 70's(?) could have been eliminated and his people (who he apparently felt free to gas, kill etc)....

Okay, I am about to get angry. Saddam Hussein was an evil man; the world shouldn't miss him. I certainly don't. In my opinion it would have been better for the world (humanity {yellow, black, tan, white} in other words) that Saddam Hussein is no longer running a country or even alive... I just don't miss him; I don't miss hitler either, and I think that death came far too late...

Godwin's Law, I lose the argument I guess... Still, I don't think that the fact that Iraq was invaded whether it was for the express purpose of preventing weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of a madman, or just to eliminate a madman leading a country was a bad thing.

The end justifies the means in this case is all I wanted to say.

Human rights justifications? Heck, Iraq was a tiny country, easy to defeat, we could do it. Taking on China for Human Rights? What does that mean?

Does China massacre its own people? I dunno, it took "Nixon to go to China" you tell me; do you massacre your own people?

Why do you feel so threatened? Do you plan to massacre your own people?

Is there a genuine fear of how you deal with you billion people from us, other than you pacify them? You already have weapons of mass destruction, and I think the world recognizes that. Do you plan on going 'rogue' and expanding your borders, or eliminating people you don't agree with?

Are you a threat to the Republic of Pate?

If you are, then damn right you better be worried.

Pate, as time goes on, and as your posts pile up, brother, I'm getting more and more respect for you. I enjoy your posts. Guys like us might be a dime a dozen, but hey, we're here, respect bro,

Luke Gu
16 Nov 09,, 03:20
The first time my country had a conflict anywhere near Iraq (early 1990's I think, apologies I was a child at the time) I felt that was an awful man who killed his own people (I was not so young that I didn't remember the news footage of the dead people, women, children, etc with flies feeding on their corpses) that I saw after the leader of the country in 1988(?) had gassed his own people. So in the early nineties I saw both a war against a nation, and in my own mind a war against an awful man who was leading the nation in question.
Are you saying Gulf War?It happened in 1991.I'm 2 years old at that time.As for the crime of Saddam Hussein,I just want to ask you :what US have done during Iran-Iraq War?I think you also need to search how much military aid US offered to Iraq。And when the crime of Saddam happened,what you guys did at that time?Offer him enough money and support him?I don't know if it's true that US helped Iraq make Biological and chemical weapons ,maybe you can give me the answer。

i.e. an awful man who had been in control of his country since the 70's(?) could have been eliminated and his people (who he apparently felt free to gas, kill etc)....
Check what US had done from 1982 to 1989 to Iraq,then tell me you're just。

Human rights justifications? Heck, Iraq was a tiny country, easy to defeat, we could do it. Taking on China for Human Rights? What does that mean?

Oh,you can't take on China,but you can take on other tiny nation in the name of human rights。

Why do you feel so threatened? Do you plan to massacre your own people?
Can you tell me how do you Definite human rights?What kind of human rights violations would trigger your attacks?The scope of human rights violations are too big。I don't feel threatened because I know who you are ,I just feel sorry for the poor tiny nation,especially these don't have a good relationship with US。

Is there a genuine fear of how you deal with you billion people from us, other than you pacify them? You already have weapons of mass destruction, and I think the world recognizes that. Do you plan on going 'rogue' and expanding your borders, or eliminating people you don't agree with?

Are you a threat to the Republic of Pate?

If you are, then damn right you better be worried.
Are you asking me ,CPC or China?How do you judge expanding borders and eliminating people we don't agree with?Is it expanding borders if we Reunification with Taiwan,get the dispute land ?Is it Clear dissidents if we think they‘re
Separatists but you think they are not?Do you know how many things are hard to judge it's right or wrong?What I can say is we needn't fear no one,though China isn't strong enough,we can send some missiles to the intruder‘s home at least。
At last,I want to ask you another question:why do you guys overthrow the democratic government of Iran and Support the autocratic Mohammad Reza Sabalewei(the Shah) in 1953。When Eisenhower decided to overthrow the Mossad goverment,did he ever think about Why Mossad to implement the oil nationalization or hear Mossad’s explanation about it?I don't know when Eisenhower celebrate his victory,if he know how big disaster he had brought to Iranian people。

Luke Gu
16 Nov 09,, 03:59
Kinzer makes seven salient points. The first is that the 1953 coup was an American plot, not a spontaneous uprising by the Iranian people to overthrow the democratically elected prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, though both the American government and the former monarchy have propagated this myth. Virtually all politically active Iranians knew about the role of the United States and Britain in the 1953 coup, but the U.S. government and the Iranian regime under the monarchy tried to conceal that information, and Islamic fundamentalists have tried to suppress scholarship on their role. It is therefore not surprising that criticism of Kinzer's book has come from these quarters.
.................................................. ...............................
The shah's regime, installed by the CIA coup, would severely punish anyone who tried to gain access to such evidence in Iran; research from 1953 to 1979 was virtually impossible. After the revolution, Khomeini and his supporters also tried to conceal the role of high-ranking Shia clerics and close Khomeini allies in the coup organized by the "Great Satan."3
.................................................. ..............................
Kinzer shows that throughout his life, Mossadegh was impeccably honest and incorruptible. This contrasts sharply with the avaricious Reza Shah Pahlavi and his son Mohammad Reza, who looted the treasury, confiscated private property, and lived a life of conspicuous consumption in a land of terribly poor people.9 Corruption has only worsened in the post-revolutionary period.10
.................................................. ..............

iranian.com: Masoud Kazemzadeh, Stephen Kinzer, Mossadegh, 1953 coup (http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/January/Kinzer/index.html)

rj1
16 Nov 09,, 17:50
iranian.com: Masoud Kazemzadeh, Stephen Kinzer, Mossadegh, 1953 coup (http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/January/Kinzer/index.html)

Luke, if you're going to try and tell us that 55 years ago our country and others did some not so nice things, well, no shit, we're not ignorant children. The only posters on this forum that thinks their country has never done anything wrong are possibly you, a couple Iranian posters, and a few Europhiles that get banned after a month because they're not able to realize that a reality exists outside of their worldview. But if you'd like to open up the can of worms to explore items from 55 years ago and expand upon those things to present day events, I and probably others would be more than happy to debate such things with you on the Rise of China forum. Although it may result in your internet connection getting cut off by your government. ;)

As I kind of stated in another thread though regarding American actions in the past and current rhetoric from "rogue" world leaders, I don't see why the Americans organizing a coup in Iran in 1953 has anything to deal with Iran aiming to build a nuclear missile program in order to threaten the local geopolitical order, predominantly Israel. If you believe that than you believe the Germans were justified for starting World War II because the conditions imposed upon them in the World War I peace treaty was too severe.

American foreign policy, especially in the era of the Iranian coup, had a simple basis, anti-communism thanks to our major competitor for world power the Soviet Union using communist and some socialist states as vassals against us, especially after your country where Mao overthrew Chiang and 25% of the world population became communist with a snap of the fingers. Mossadegh was a self-proclaimed socialist that campaigned to nationalize the Iranian oil industry. This obviously hurt the interests of the company that was heavily in Iranian Oil, British Petroleum, and with control of oil even then increasingly overlapping control of geopolitical order, the Brits and Americans organized a coup using anti-communism as the reason. Was that right? In hindsight, probably no, but a lot of things that happen in politics and geopolitics usually are not. And anyone that thinks the world order tends itself toward "100% morality and always do the right thing that doesn't hurt anyone" is living in fantasyland. That said, I back my country's actions more often than not. You may think the Chinese were wrong on some things they've done in the past 55 years but that doesn't you don't back their position most of the time. So using stuff from 55 years ago to say why something can't be done now is 100% wrong.

Luke Gu
17 Nov 09,, 02:09
You didn't get my point:did I say US is wrong or right?I Cite Iran as an example to prove that the U.S. is the pragmatists,what you want to get is interests,not Democracy。
And you can forget it because it did not much impact your daily life and your nations‘ history,what about Iran?Do you think how do they avoid this event when they write their history book?You just want to say:forget it!So you don't understand why Iran your enemy。And this just happened 55 years ago,Some guys experienced it is still alive。US changed a nation's fate,and then forget it。Isn't it sad to Iran?
OK,I wouldn't say much about it because it Away from the subject。