Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chavez to Blair : Give back the Faulklands

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    "The UN has merely become another League of Nations... better at confusing the democracies of the world than preventing dictatorships from aggression.

    Your "facts" are a little blurry."

    Well if we are speaking of aggresion...Bush has invaded what?....2 countries all ready and is now planning a 3rd, killed at least what....12,000 people in Iraq to start. All in the name of spreading Jeffersonian democracy and ridding the world safe from WMD's? C'mon guys, open your eyes. The only nation that is looking aggresive is the U.S. and the only country killing large numbers of civilians is U.S. Not to mention the US keeps large stockpiles of WMD's itself and no WMD's were in Iraq. Pretty thin arguments when looked at objectively really.

    But...sence we are speaking of the MALVINAS. Look at a map and see where Britian is in relation to the Malvinas. Now look at Argentina and look at its relationship to the Malvinas. Pretty simple really. The British empire is gone, its a relic from the past. There Argentinas.


    But yes your right, Chavez goes over the top alot. But he says alot of truth also.
    Last edited by Ike99; 13 Feb 06,, 22:30.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Ike99
      Well if we are speaking of aggresion...Bush has invaded what?....2 countries all ready
      YOU'VE GOT TO BE SH!TTING ME!!!!!! You're stupid or what? Forgot 11 Sept already? We didn't start the War in Afghanistan. They did. They attacked us.

      As for Iraq, that war has been going on for 11 years. It was time to end it once and for all.

      Originally posted by Ike99
      and is now planning a 3rd,
      Planning is no crime.

      Originally posted by Ike99
      C'mon guys, open your eyes. The only nation that is looking aggresive is the U.S. and the only country killing large numbers of civilians is U.S.
      Chechnya. Congo. Rwanda. Cambodia. Former Yugoslavia. Our eyes are fine. Your stupidity is blatant.

      Originally posted by Ike99
      Not to mention the US keeps large stockpiles of WMD's itself
      Russia. China. UK. France. Israel. India. Pakistan.

      Originally posted by Ike99
      and no WMD's were in Iraq.
      And what killed the Iranians during their war with Iraq?

      Originally posted by Ike99
      Pretty thin arguments when looked at objectively really.
      Why let facts get in the way of your bullcrap?

      Originally posted by Ike99
      But...sence we are speaking of the MALVINAS. Look at a map and see where Britian is in relation to the Malvinas. Now look at Argentina and look at its relationship to the Malvinas. Pretty simple really. The British empire is gone, its a relic from the past. There Argentinas.
      And why don't the US give Alaska back to Russia? The simple fact is that both the UK and Argentina agreed to peacefully sought out the Falklands deal. Argentina, not the UK, resorted to force on what is clearly British citizens residing in their own homes. And they deservedly got their butts kicked.
      Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 13 Feb 06,, 22:42.

      Comment


      • #18
        Officer of Engineers -

        "YOU'VE GOT TO BE SH!TTING ME!!!!!! You're stupid or what? Forgot 11 Sept already? We didn't start the War in Afghanistan. They did. They attacked us."

        Really, how strange. I missed the part where Iraq attacked the Twin Towers or that any of the Hijackers were Iraqi citizens. Very strange...missed that part completely. Or is it Iraq is it what?..."Colateral Damage" as you say? I also missed it where Afganistan attacked the US also. Hmmm...news here said it was a group of muslims from several different nations mostly from Saudi Arabia. So I guess if a 12 US citizens commit an act of terrorism in China for example...well China can just bomb the **** out of the US and kill 15,000 Americans. I quess so from your sense of justice.

        "As for Iraq, that war has been going on for 11 years. It was time to end it once and for all."

        Really? I heard the Iraqi army pulled out of Kuwait and destroyed it's WMD's as part of the cease fire agreement in 91' Must have been true. UN didn't find any, US military hasn't found any. Where was the smoking gun, the mushroom cloud? I never saw any.

        "Your stupidity is blatant." No your stupidity is obviously based upon US media created for US consumption.

        "Russia. China. UK. France. Israel. India. Pakistan." Yeah they have WMD's same as US. Who is to say who can have them and who can't? Where does this right come from? I'd like to know.

        "And what killed the Iranians during their war with Iraq?" Lots of things, but I'm guessing your talking about the poision gas. Hmmmm....where did Iraq get it from....good ole Red White and Blue. Guess the USA said it was ok to have them and use them then. It did help with the targeting after all.

        No need to go into the rest....my advice...vary your sources of information, look around. There are more media outlets besides CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS and NBC.

        Ok chief? Catch you on the flip side. Try to be calmer on your reply ok? You sound like one of those agressive Americans. Don't shoot a missile at my house are nothin.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Ike99
          Ok chief? Catch you on the flip side. Try to be calmer on your reply ok? You sound like one of those agressive Americans. Don't shoot a missile at my house are nothin.
          9/11 was the "Pearl Harbor" that finally woke the U.S. up out of our stupor and clued us in that there is a big pile of mess in the world, mostly in the Middle East and in part the result of our own Cold War realpolitik policies, from which people, many, many people, emerge to do harm to the U.S., our citizens, and our allies.

          In response President Bush initiated the "War on Terror", which is a long-term campaign the object of which is to end the ignition, incubation, and proliferation of international terrorism.

          The WoT encompasses all the military, law enforcement, intelligence, and diplomatic efforts that are necessary and proper to its successful prosecution.

          Afghanistan was the first miltary "front", Iraq is another, as is Pakistan. Indonesia and other parts of S.E. Asia are some others. Libya is/was a diplomatic front and Pakistan is as well, in addition to being a military front. All of Europe and North America are solid law enforcement fronts, and the intelligence "front" is everywhere of course.

          And we are winning across all of these fronts. Where we are doing less well are places like N. Korea and Iran as diplomatic and intelligence fronts.

          That is as basic an explanation of what the War on Terror is and why and how we are fighting it as can be given. Now, you may disagree in the manner in which some or all of these fronts or strategies are being planned or executed, but you cannot deny the overall framework, i.e. the War on Terror, in which they exist.

          -dale

          Comment


          • #20
            Ike, you're liberal indoctrination isn't going to help you outside of a DNC rally.

            No one here ever said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, we know they didn't.

            Here're the short facts for you, read them closely and MEMORIZE them:

            The Afghanistan government was controlled by the Taliban who was aiding Al Qaeda, who planned, funded, and trained for the attacks on 9/11, as well as other attacks around the globe. Al Qaeda acted with the Taliban's enodorsement, support, and blessing. As a result, they are directly responsible, thus legitimizing the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan by the US. The number of hijackers was 19, not 12, but if 12 US citizens intentionally acted against China with the endorsement and support of the US government, then China would have reason for complaint.

            The war in Iraq is also legitimate, and not illegal, because under the terms of the ceasefire, Iraq was to not support terrorism, nor have ground attack missiles exceeding a certain range (which they had and used during OIF). While WMD's were the salespitch, they are not the end-all and only reason. Just because WMD's were not found, does not de-legitimize Operation Iraqi Freedom. While Iraq was not connected to Al Qaeda, Iraq had at least three major operational terrorist training camps, one of which had the fuselage of an airliner to practice with.


            And Ike, while you are not required to agree or follow the line here, unless you demonstrate some semblance of research, education, and critical thinking skills, we will not compel ourselves to suffer your presence.
            The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out.

            I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Ike99
              Well Dreadnoughnt It really isn'y my opinion but a fact. When Bush invaded Iraq he never had a UN mandate authorizing a use of force, therefore it was an illegal use of force. An act of agression by international law any way you look at it. A warcrime. He is just powerful enough to get away with it though.
              Looks like someone read the updates from the Liberal Daily News.

              Hey guess what? FDR never had UN mandate to fight the Axis power. OK, UN wasn't there, but he had no international mandate. How do you explain that? Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor, but that's because his administration forced Japanese's hand by cutting off strategic resources, a provocation, if you will. FDR was fighting a secret war against Germans in 1940, well before Pearl Harbor, to help his friend Winston Churchill. Let's bring him up on warcrime charges.

              Johnson never had UN mandate yet he murdered 54,000+ US soldiers and millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians just to show that he's his own man and not the lapdog of a pretty boy from Mass.

              I don't see the Liberals argue these fine points.

              If rewriting history is what you want, let's do it.
              "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Ike99
                But...sence we are speaking of the MALVINAS. Look at a map and see where Britian is in relation to the Malvinas. Now look at Argentina and look at its relationship to the Malvinas. Pretty simple really. The British empire is gone, its a relic from the past. There Argentinas.
                .
                The British Empire may be gone but the Commonwealth, her Territories and Treaties have not. Let's see Chavez take them.
                In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                Leibniz

                Comment


                • #23
                  sofort

                  See? An Englishman takes a few days off and the whole shebang explodes.

                  At this roadstop I would simply like to thank OoE for saving me a lot of bloody typing. He is perfectly correct on all affore-mention matters. :)
                  Where's the bloody gin? An army marches on its liver, not its ruddy stomach.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    "The British Empire may be gone but the Commonwealth, her Territories and Treaties have not. Let's see Chavez take them."

                    Chavez will say anything and look for any conflict to drive a wedge between the US and the world. He doesn't care who the Malvinas belong to. Why would he?

                    What drove a wedge between the US and the world is Bush's invasion of Iraq. After the Sept 11th attack the world was ready to unite behind the US in a war on terror. It was an obvious crime and many other countries have suffered the same crime of terrorism. The Bush administration lost a real opportunity. Now, just a few short years later the US is more hated and isolated than it has ever been. Any country Bush steps in there is an Army of protestors. Sure, there will always be the extremist on the left and right protesting but Bush has an ARMY of people protesting.

                    Somewhere US foreign policy commited a BIG error.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Ike99
                      "The British Empire may be gone but the Commonwealth, her Territories and Treaties have not. Let's see Chavez take them."

                      Chavez will say anything and look for any conflict to drive a wedge between the US and the world. He doesn't care who the Malvinas belong to. Why would he?

                      What drove a wedge between the US and the world is Bush's invasion of Iraq. After the Sept 11th attack the world was ready to unite behind the US in a war on terror. It was an obvious crime and many other countries have suffered the same crime of terrorism. . Now, just a few short years later the US is more hated and isolated than it has ever been. Any country Bush steps in there is an Army of protestors. Sure, there will always be the extremist on the left and right protesting but Bush has an ARMY of people protesting.

                      Somewhere US foreign policy commited a BIG error.

                      Chavez will say anything and look for any conflict to drive a wedge between the US and the world. He doesn't care who the Malvinas belong to. Why would he?

                      You know the funny thing is nobody seems to care what he says. Hes a joke like so many others of his kind.(Castro etc) He couldnt drive a wedge between the U.S. and anybody even if he offered oil for "free". And his political rants are even more a joke that his people listen to him....LMAO


                      I dont know where you get your information at but I would strongly question its sources. My suggestion do more homework.

                      Somewhere US foreign policy commited a BIG error.

                      "YES WE SHOULD HAVE DONE IT ALOT SOONER AND NOT WAITED"

                      *HATED? Who cares most countries that aren't ran by democracy hate anybody that is anyway. Why? Because then their religious rulers or appointed council cannot rule by "their" version of religion and or law". The people must have their say which is exactly what they do not want thus they would certainly loose their ruling powers altogether.
                      *ISOLATED? I laugh at this one. They seem to line up to do business with America every single day.

                      The Bush administration lost a real opportunity. Youre correct we should have taken Iran out first the Iraq. But thats ok they will do themselves in just fine.

                      By taking the fight to where it needed to be? I think not. Bush took the iniative to take the fight to where terror was centered at that time and the allied countries seem to agree the only ones that dont seem to agree either play host them or have their own problems with them inside their own boarders.


                      Originally Posted by Ike99
                      Well Dreadnoughnt It really isn'y my opinion but a fact. When Bush invaded Iraq he never had a UN mandate authorizing a use of force, therefore it was an illegal use of force. An act of agression by international law any way you look at it. A warcrime. He is just powerful enough to get away with it though.

                      Now please do tell me about fact again about UN mandates and Security facts
                      Last edited by Dreadnought; 14 Feb 06,, 19:13.
                      Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Ike99
                        What drove a wedge between the US and the world is Bush's invasion of Iraq. After the Sept 11th attack the world was ready to unite behind the US in a war on terror. It was an obvious crime and many other countries have suffered the same crime of terrorism. The Bush administration lost a real opportunity.
                        Now you're saying Bush didn't go to war quick enough. What happened to the "we should let diplomacy run its course?" Or "let the inspectors do their job?"

                        Originally posted by Ike99
                        Now, just a few short years later the US is more hated and isolated than it has ever been. Any country Bush steps in there is an Army of protestors. Sure, there will always be the extremist on the left and right protesting but Bush has an ARMY of people protesting.
                        Quick, more talking points from the Liberal News Daily.

                        Where in the diplomacy handbook does it say our goal is for everyone to like us? We are hated because we are the most powerful, most prosperous, most free, nation on this earth. Those people are jealous because our model works better than theirs and they just can't understand why.

                        Does anyone hate Sierra Leone? Not many. Do you know why? Because no one's jealous of a 3rd world nation on the western coast of Africa which has seen years of civil war, with all due respect to the good people of Sierra Leone.

                        Originally posted by Ike99
                        Somewhere US foreign policy commited a BIG error.
                        Yes, and that mistake started when Clinton was busy getting a blow job from an intern while his aides were trying to tell him Sudan's on the phone offering some nutjob named Osama bin Laden in exchange for more favorable trade policies.
                        "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Ike99
                          Officer of Engineers -

                          "YOU'VE GOT TO BE SH!TTING ME!!!!!! You're stupid or what? Forgot 11 Sept already? We didn't start the War in Afghanistan. They did. They attacked us."

                          Really, how strange. I missed the part where Iraq attacked the Twin Towers or that any of the Hijackers were Iraqi citizens. Very strange...missed that part completely. Or is it Iraq is it what?..."Colateral Damage" as you say? I also missed it where Afganistan attacked the US also.
                          Ok to settle this nonsense about why Afganistian was attacked. Osama and his 'army' where based in Afganistian. They planned, funded and coordinated the 9-11 attack on the U.S.

                          The reason Afganistian got attacked is Bush told the Afgans to hand over Osama and they refused and claimed he had nothing to do with the attacks. Not only did they refuse to hand him over but they made him a General of some type in the Taliban army.

                          No there is no debating Osama was responsible, hes released videos personally claiming credit for the attacks. Only hardcore conspiracy theory types even debate this now.

                          Hmmm...news here said it was a group of muslims from several different nations mostly from Saudi Arabia. So I guess if a 12 US citizens commit an act of terrorism in China for example...well China can just bomb the **** out of the US and kill 15,000 Americans. I quess so from your sense of justice.
                          Thats not an accuate comparison, if you changed it to some General in the U.S army planned, paid and coordinated an attack on China that resulted in mass casualties. Then afterwards the U.S refused to turn him over and protected him, you'd have a more accurate comparison.

                          Although I doubt China would attack even though they'd be morally in the right to do so.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Ike99
                            "The British Empire may be gone but the Commonwealth, her Territories and Treaties have not. Let's see Chavez take them."

                            Chavez will say anything and look for any conflict to drive a wedge between the US and the world. He doesn't care who the Malvinas belong to. Why would he?

                            What drove a wedge between the US and the world is Bush's invasion of Iraq. After the Sept 11th attack the world was ready to unite behind the US in a war on terror. It was an obvious crime and many other countries have suffered the same crime of terrorism. The Bush administration lost a real opportunity. Now, just a few short years later the US is more hated and isolated than it has ever been. Any country Bush steps in there is an Army of protestors. Sure, there will always be the extremist on the left and right protesting but Bush has an ARMY of people protesting.

                            Somewhere US foreign policy commited a BIG error.
                            Did you even read my post on the previous page?

                            -dale

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              "We are hated because we are the most powerful, most prosperous, most free, nation on this earth."

                              I don't share your opinion. I think it is because the US strongarms financialy, politicaly and militarily other nations. China very shortly have the worlds largest economy and shortly be the most powerful country in the world. Yet I don't see massive security forces needed and a wave of protestors when their leaders visit foreign countries.

                              "*HATED? Who cares most countries that aren't ran by democracy hate
                              anybody that is anyway..."

                              Well this is a pretty good example of US foreign policy and how it has isolated itself.

                              "Horrido-
                              The war in Iraq is also legitimate, and not illegal, because under the terms of the ceasefire,"

                              It is not legitimate. It is illegal. Because Americans invent stories about WMD's and the US governmant says it is legal doesn't make it legal.

                              The UN Secretary-Genaral Kofi Annan has said many times the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter. Therefore illegal. Look it up. ;)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Ike99

                                I don't share your opinion. I think it is because the US strongarms financialy, politicaly and militarily other nations. China very shortly have the worlds largest economy and shortly be the most powerful country in the world. Yet I don't see massive security forces needed and a wave of protestors when their leaders visit foreign countries.
                                All nations "strongarms financialy, politicaly and militarily other nations", depending on their ability to do so. As for protests, I have both seen and participated in protests against the Chinese Premier when he was here in NZ in I think '98. At that time we protested in Christchurch on the route he was going to take to a state dinner. He refused to leave his hotel room (where we weren't allowed to protest) until we were removed. Our Prime Minister of the time aquiesced and had the police move us to a side street and blocked him from seeing us by using buses and skips to block his view of us. The reason that you don't see any protests when their leaders travel is because they refuse to travel unless protesters are first quelled. Incidentally our Prime Minister lost the next election.
                                Last edited by Parihaka; 14 Feb 06,, 22:31.
                                In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                                Leibniz

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X