Wait... what?

What should I be voting for?

Re: Wait... what?

Postby Zokrah on Thu May 28, 2009 7:30 am

Yino wrote:One thing is if you shoot the mugger who threatens your family, and another completely different thing is raping him.


An interesting argument, but I have not heard any accusations, or at least valid proof of such rapings in Guantanamo. As for the idea behind the argument though, I'd have to agree. But, perhaps you were talking about raping their minds? If so, then I'd actually condone that because that's what interrogation is. There are so many ways to get information out of people, and everyone thinks that 99% of it is always boiled down to torture. People need to move past the stipulation that interrogation is as it was back when the Inquisition was in effect. We don't throw people on the rack, or put them in iron maidens or use burning embers anymore.

Waterboarding... that's a difficult topc... I honestly am not sure what to think about it. I'd have to say, if fooling someone into the idea that they're drowning to get information out of them... that is borderline torture, but in the end I suppose is no actual damage is done, then I think it's fair game to people who do attempt to cause harm to us. Also, everyone has this idea, that the intelligence of the US government is all sadists. And with the concept that you can be 'thrown into Gitmo' for any reason or accusation of supporting terror' I think is misguided. It's always important have a careful eye on what those above you are up to, but at a certain point, you have to accept that there are things that are so far beyond your scope and your awareness, that you need to let those incharge of you run the show.

As for the Gitmo interrogations, let me clarify something for you Yino. If you are guilty of supporting terrorism, they're going to find out. If you are wrongfully accused, then they'll find out quickly too. Those guys are good at what they do. People's complete lack of faith in the US Intel's capability I think is completely misguided. Sure, people cite the example of "No WMD's in Iraq" as the mainstay for their lack of skill, but, keep in mind, we weren't the only ones saying it. EVERYONE was. I'm not saying, 20 wrongs make a right, but, if you're going to take the high ground and condesend on the intelligence agencies, you best make sure your own government wasn't preaching the exact same thing. But I digress.

Remember that Guantanamo worked outside of the legal jurisdiction.


What!? No they don't. They are bound to the military's legal jurisdiction. I suppose it depends on what jurisdiction you're referring to by that statement, and if you want the US legal system to take of them... that's another argument entirely.

It means anyone who was a suspect of supporting terrorism could go into Guantanamo, just supporting the other political party could get you in there.


Can you give me a specific example of this? Or say, three examples of out spoken democrats going to Guantanamo?

Here's the deal with conspiracy theroies and plots within plots ideas. They're sexy. They're mind porn if you will. People don't like to think, that their government is actually fairly boring and composed of lots of slow paperpushing processes. Somehow, they've managed to make the senate room a "cool" thing to watch or pay attention to. I'm glad that people are taking a bigger interest in their government instead of the age old classic American mentality of "just run the country for me" mentality. But to mask something as sexy, exciting, full on intrigue... well one only need look further into who's making money off that stuff. CNN, FOX, televisions... what's their angle! They want to make $. That's all it is. If they can spin ANYTHING in ANYWAY to make a profit, they will. And ultimately, that's what this battle is about. Who's able to make more money?
Confucius say: Man with hand in pocket feel cocky all day.
User avatar
Zokrah
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: Mildenhall United Kingdom

Re: Wait... what?

Postby David Yun on Thu May 28, 2009 8:52 pm

Zokrah wrote:Sure, people cite the example of "No WMD's in Iraq" as the mainstay for their lack of skill, but, keep in mind, we weren't the only ones saying it. EVERYONE was.


That wasn't a failing of our intelligence community. That was propaganda of the most outrageous order on the part of the White House. It was like bad science where you look specifically for evidence to support your theory and ignore the rest. We did have intel that contradicted White House claims, but that was firmly silenced.

Colin Powell's briefing to the U.N. was based on nearly decade-old British intel. I imagine that this was the first major breaking point in his relationship with the Bush administration. He's loyal to a fault, but being asked to lie before the world on a matter as grave as that? It must've eaten at him.

I'm somewhat torn on the issue of military detainment. I'm fairly certain that among the prisoners are genuine terrorist threats, so who knows what disasters might have been averted by our heavy handedness. However, shifting to "guilty until proven innocent", especially when the mechanism for such proof doesn't exist is deeply troubling.

Ultimately, these draconian measures address symptoms, not the disease. We need to enact superior foreign policy that reduces/eliminates the very desire of these terrorists to inflict harm on the United States, or we'll be chasing our tails indefinitely. It's wearying our nation, and sapping our ability to enact positive influence on the world. We need to claim the moral high ground again.

This issue was so much simpler when Islamic extremists were pointed at the Soviet Union instead of us. *sigh* The blame rests on both Bush presidents, and on all of us for buying into the jingoism.
"I want me some glory hole." --Jerry Jones
User avatar
David Yun
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3915
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Diremanistan

Re: Wait... what?

Postby Yino on Sat May 30, 2009 4:52 am

Zokrah wrote:
Yino wrote:One thing is if you shoot the mugger who threatens your family, and another completely different thing is raping him.


An interesting argument, but I have not heard any accusations, or at least valid proof of such rapings in Guantanamo. As for the idea behind the argument though, I'd have to agree.

I don't know if they were raped or not, in fact there are still many torture methods that remain in the dark, So please let me rephrase:
"One thing is if you shoot the mugger who threatens your family, and another completely different thing is pouring water in his nose."
Zokrah wrote:Waterboarding... that's a difficult topc... I honestly am not sure what to think about it. I'd have to say, if fooling someone into the idea that they're drowning to get information out of them... that is borderline torture, but in the end I suppose is no actual damage is done, then I think it's fair game to people who do attempt to cause harm to us. Also, everyone has this idea, that the intelligence of the US government is all sadists. And with the concept that you can be 'thrown into Gitmo' for any reason or accusation of supporting terror' I think is misguided. It's always important have a careful eye on what those above you are up to, but at a certain point, you have to accept that there are things that are so far beyond your scope and your awareness, that you need to let those incharge of you run the show.

I completely disagree, First waterboarding is still torture saying it's not is like saying a beating is not a beating unless there's a permanent scar. Declarations obtained this way are still tainted, not only because of human rights concern but also because they can be false, if saying you are guilty will make them stop.
And there's no such thing beyond our scope and awareness, there always will be somebody who knows more of the topic so it will be in his scope and his awareness.
Zokrah wrote:As for the Gitmo interrogations, let me clarify something for you Yino. If you are guilty of supporting terrorism, they're going to find out. If you are wrongfully accused, then they'll find out quickly too. Those guys are good at what they do. People's complete lack of faith in the US Intel's capability I think is completely misguided. Sure, people cite the example of "No WMD's in Iraq" as the mainstay for their lack of skill, but, keep in mind, we weren't the only ones saying it. EVERYONE was. I'm not saying, 20 wrongs make a right, but, if you're going to take the high ground and condesend on the intelligence agencies, you best make sure your own government wasn't preaching the exact same thing. But I digress.

First, I'm not trying to take the high ground sorry if it looked like that.
But those guys take their time for telling if you are guilty or not. I'm not gonna go through the list of detainees, is just too long. So I'm just gonna link to Sami al-Hajj held for 7 years without charges or trial.
Zokrah wrote:
Remember that Guantanamo worked outside of the legal jurisdiction.


What!? No they don't. They are bound to the military's legal jurisdiction. I suppose it depends on what jurisdiction you're referring to by that statement, and if you want the US legal system to take of them... that's another argument entirely.

Military's legal jurisdiction is outside of the legal jurisdiction, they have totally different rules. Perhaps I'm biased, but I don't consider a military legal jurisdiction a valid legal jurisdiction, much less in times of war.
Zokrah wrote:
It means anyone who was a suspect of supporting terrorism could go into Guantanamo, just supporting the other political party could get you in there.


Can you give me a specific example of this? Or say, three examples of out spoken democrats going to Guantanamo?

Again, I won't go through the whole list, so I stick with the first case I found: The Afghan ambassador in Pakistan: Abdul Salam Zaeef
<insert signature>
User avatar
Yino
 
Posts: 1133
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:08 pm
Location: Somewhere in Chile

Re: Wait... what?

Postby MadCat on Sat May 30, 2009 8:24 am

Just nitpicking here, but I would call stripping someone naked and forcing them to masturbate in front of you with a bag over their head a form of rape. It's sexual degradation as a display of power, which I think fits the definition of rape.
http://www.stern.de/politik/ausland/:Ly ... 4&postid=4
http://dcscience.net/lynndie-england.jpg
http://www.rwf.gr/uploads/photos/england-graner2.jpg

Now on the news I'm hearing people saying "It's not torture unless it's likely/intended to kill them." Which is sick, to me.
I want my job description to be: "gets paid to draw sexy ladies." :D
User avatar
MadCat
=^-^=
 
Posts: 1510
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:13 am
Location: Bew Bogling Street, Everwas

Re: Wait... what?

Postby David Yun on Sat May 30, 2009 11:52 am

While I lean entirely sympathetic to your sentiment MadCat, those photos you linked aren't germane to this discourse, but designed to provoke a tangential emotional response. That incident certainly wasn't SOP, and the offending parties were punished fairly severely. It would have been even better if the powers that be that permitted these disgraces were punished as well, but it is extremely difficult to prove 'knowledge' compared to an actual act.
"I want me some glory hole." --Jerry Jones
User avatar
David Yun
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3915
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Diremanistan

Re: Wait... what?

Postby MadCat on Sat May 30, 2009 9:49 pm

The article and photos I linked were designed to show that yes, I'm not just making this up, it's documented that this happened, since it seemed like Zok was asking for specific instances in regards to various events.
The article that also indicated that yes, this sort of degradation was SOP at that place, since England stated that her team came in to relieve an earlier team already there, which had been performing the same acts. So it was ongoing for a long period of time, long enough to require a 'shift change.'

A quote from the article, page 3:
Graner told me about some of the stuff they were doing. When we first got there in September the prisoners were already naked, they had them wear women's underwear, and they had them in stress positions. The company that we relieved was doing the exact same stuff. We just took over from them.


Also, that higher-ups had knowledge of the events:

Of course it was wrong. I know that now. But when you show the people from the CIA, the FBI and the MI the pictures and they say, "Hey, this is a great job. Keep it up", you think it must be right. They were all there and they didn't say a word. They didn't wear uniforms, and if they did they had their nametags covered.
I want my job description to be: "gets paid to draw sexy ladies." :D
User avatar
MadCat
=^-^=
 
Posts: 1510
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:13 am
Location: Bew Bogling Street, Everwas

Re: Wait... what?

Postby Zokrah on Sun May 31, 2009 12:04 am

The article and photos I linked were designed to show that yes, I'm not just making this up, it's documented that this happened, since it seemed like Zok was asking for specific instances in regards to various events.
The article that also indicated that yes, this sort of degradation was SOP at that place, since England stated that her team came in to relieve an earlier team already there, which had been performing the same acts. So it was ongoing for a long period of time, long enough to require a 'shift change.'

A quote from the article, page 3:
Graner told me about some of the stuff they were doing. When we first got there in September the prisoners were already naked, they had them wear women's underwear, and they had them in stress positions. The company that we relieved was doing the exact same stuff. We just took over from them.

Also, that higher-ups had knowledge of the events:

Of course it was wrong. I know that now. But when you show the people from the CIA, the FBI and the MI the pictures and they say, "Hey, this is a great job. Keep it up", you think it must be right. They were all there and they didn't say a word. They didn't wear uniforms, and if they did they had their nametags covered.


I think the last quote sums up my argument quite well. "they didn't wear uniforms, and if they did, their nametags covered." What better way to say "Oh, it's not my fault, because ummm, the guys who ran it whom I can't actually name other than throw around random acronyms of agencies that are from the government are behind it. Yeah. I'm the victim here! No oversight."

This is the story, time and time again. People whine bitch and moan when the government is too controlling, but when it suits their defense, they complain that they aren't around enough! Classic.

The stress positions? Do you know what stress positions are? Stress positions are usually forcing someone to be uncomfortable. It can range from doing wall sits, to doing push ups until you can't move. All really, are psychological in the end. To impose a sense of control from the interrogators position. If you believe they are in power, you are more willing to bend to their wills and desires for information. If they make your life hell by doing wall sits (pretend you're on a chair without actually sitting on one *they suck SO bad*) and reward you by letting you stop doing that for a day by giving up some info, you're more inclined to give up info again. It's all a mind fuck. Same as water boarding. Mind fuck, mind fuck, mind fuck. Seems you guys are caught up on the wording, rather than the acts.

The whole Lyndie scandal... I'd like to point out that those 'security guards' who were in charge of the place, were not trained military interrogators. Infact, the military was quite appalled to find out what the self-empowered mall cops were doing. We had another issue on our hands at the time, and that was to finish kicking the shit out of Saddam's regime. Goal one needed to be achieved before we began this whole bullshit guerilla brushfire war in Iraq to begin with. This was back when everyone was pissed we just owned Saddam. Now it's funny how it's shifted to "well, we shouldn't have gone into Iraq", and the focus is no longer on how we brought that bastard to justice. Oh well, score one for the main stream media for swaying public opinion.

Almost entertainingly enough, this discussion is probably one of my favorite. I'll gladly admit this affects my emotions very strongly, as being on the recieving end of this debate, I feel compelled to help people understand the misinformation out there on these issues. That having been said, I'm as quilty and the next person who lets their emotions cloud the actual discussion here. It seems, that my stance on this issue is provoking people's anger! Highly enjoyable to read, but I digress.

I don't know if they were raped or not, in fact there are still many torture methods that remain in the dark, So please let me rephrase:
"One thing is if you shoot the mugger who threatens your family, and another completely different thing is pouring water in his nose."


No, I got what you meant by it Yino. I was commenting on a part of your statement rather than trying to contest the comment as a whole. I agree completely. But then it also boils down to your definition of torture and rape. What defines torture? Physical damage or otherwise? Interrogations ARE rape. They're raping your mind for information. And I see the waterboarding as a psychological rape, rather than a physical one. Sure, they're tricking you that you're drowning, but no damage is caused. I am in support of waterboarding because I feel the ends justify the means.

I'd like to caveat the threatens and actually kills your 'family'. If someone sucessfully helped or actually did kill your fellow community members since most of you might not fully understand the 'family' concept of military to military members, (not attacking you guys, I mean literally expierence it since you're not in) you might take a different stance on where the 'line' is to get information to help protect yourself and your family for the next day. Hence why I'm more, I guess leaniant is the right word (?) in what is acceptable in these cases.

Also, here's a tip about this whole water boarding thing and interrogation. If you think your life is in danger, yeah you might say anything to get yourself out of it, but if you realize that it's a 'routine' after a while, and it's like your daily water boarding... are you seriously going to actually feel each and every time your life is really in danger? Give humans SOME semblance of inteligence...

This goes back to my argument about backing your statements with proof/action. If I say, each and every morning I'm going to punch you in the face if you don't stop looking at me, and I don't ever keep my word, are you going to be afraid of me, or at least take me seriously? Fuck no. But if you look at me, after I say to stop and I punch you in the face, you're going to take what I say seriously. Same thing applies for national policy. Look at the upstart nation of North Korea? Hell, if the US doesn't keep flexing it's muscles, people are going to fuck with us even more. But that's not this discussion and in light of keeping in context to the original post, we'll move past that point.

First, I'm not trying to take the high ground sorry if it looked like that.
But those guys take their time for telling if you are guilty or not. I'm not gonna go through the list of detainees, is just too long. So I'm just gonna link to Sami al-Hajj held for 7 years without charges or trial.


No no no, I didn't think you were. I was speaking as a generality. Sorry for the confusion. As for Sami, I actually support and believe the reasons he's being held. With out charges? I wasn't aware that being a POW required charges. POW aren't granted rights for trails. If you are offered them, and you accept, you're a fool. You'll lose and then it's the end.

Military's legal jurisdiction is outside of the legal jurisdiction, they have totally different rules. Perhaps I'm biased, but I don't consider a military legal jurisdiction a valid legal jurisdiction, much less in times of war.


Ah well this is the root of the discussion on that point. "Perhaps I'm biased, but I don't consider a military legal jurisdiction a valid legal jurisdiction, much less in times of war".

Again, I won't go through the whole list, so I stick with the first case I found: The Afghan ambassador in Pakistan: Abdul Salam Zaeef


Ah see, also this boils down to whether or not you trust your government to know more and be right on this issue. Goes back to the whole "they're always going to know more than you can percieve" thing. But then again, Chile doesn't have a big hand in the global war on terror does it?

While I lean entirely sympathetic to your sentiment MadCat, those photos you linked aren't germane to this discourse, but designed to provoke a tangential emotional response. That incident certainly wasn't SOP, and the offending parties were punished fairly severely. It would have been even better if the powers that be that permitted these disgraces were punished as well, but it is extremely difficult to prove 'knowledge' compared to an actual act.


Let me say this to caveat what follows. Yun, I'm not attacking you (at least directly on this).

I'm not entirely sure where we Americans got this idea that we're morally superior to everyone in the world, let alone need to take the high road on everything. Talk about arrogance. You know the countries that don't deal with these problems often do? They fuck their enemies SO hard, that everyone else goes "oh shit, let's not fuck with them." Look at the Russia/Georgia thing. OMG. Russia just flexed it's muscles and the whole Previous USSR area went "oh god, maybe we should lean more towards the return to Soviet Russia. The US is helping us, but they can't throw down when Russia rolls out on us. That'd be war." And that's why Russia is pushing their influence on those countries that want to join NATO. "If you keep trying to join the 'captalist pigs' we'll fuck you like we did Georgia." The US made it's most outspoken objectors quiet down when we crushed Saddam... The Chonger didn't say shit, and surely wasn't happy when he was put on the black list. But now with Obama and the bullshit American sentiment of "let's all be friends", he's launched missiles, tested nukes, and where as holding hands gotten us? The high road won't last long when your enemy doesn't care whether or not you sympathesize with them or their captured people. They're out for blood. Apparently, we're not.

We've been doing this for quite some time, and yet the world still hates us. Vietnam? They learned how powerful the American media is and how easily if the right ammount of opposition, and propaganda applied can manipulate the American public. Probably really the source of the first massive distrust of the Government or faith in it's military to have the country's best outcome in mind. Sure, go fight our wars, but don't do anything that any of us might object to. God forbid you kill someone in a war. We can't have that! Fucking disgusts me. Risk your lives, give your lives, but when you come home, we'll shit all over you because you made it safe for me to sleep at night and have the right to sit back and arm chair coach everything? Amazing.

Remember when Pakistan was bitching non-stop that the US was striking across it's borders at Taliban and Al-Qaidea? Funny how they began to sing a different tune when we threatened to pull away our BILLIONS of dollars of aid to the their corrupt leader. Oh, and now they've got problems of their own that everywhere people are like "oh those poor Pakistani's."

I'm with India on this. Fuck em. I say the world court 'unleashes' India and lets them take it over. More power to em. Just like Israel and Iran. Sooner rather than later, the US's hold on Israel won't keep and they're going to roll out and fuck up their neighbors and everyone will be surprised how well they can do it. But what will the public opinion be then? Take the high road, don't decend to the jews level? Wouldn't surprise me if that's what the 'American opinion' became.

People's continnual condemnation of the government and the military never ceases to amaze me. I think the last time people really were in support of the American military was in World War II. But of course, now people are contesting whether or not we were right in that war even. The embargo on the Japanese? Use of Nukes? Did we really need to kill so many Germans? Why didn't we do more for the French? Just can't do anything right it seems. And really, at what point do you finally accept, that the military does what it's designed to do. Let's boil it down to basics. The military kills threats to it's herd. We're not here to hold hands and make the world a touchy feely place. We kill people and destroy. Peace through power. What did people think the military's real job was?

If your complaints are with the military's handling of the whole prisioner thing, remember, that the military answers to the government and it's rulers. Not the other way around. This is all bullshit deflecting from the senators and other politicians trying to save their jobs and their fortunes. And blaming the military isn't anything new in that regard. Our military is always going to conduct business as it has, and the military isn't going away. So, it's the prefect scapegoat. We'll cheer you on while it suits our best interests, and the minute we can make ourselves look better, we'll attack you. But it's not like our vindication and condemnation of you will make you stop.
Confucius say: Man with hand in pocket feel cocky all day.
User avatar
Zokrah
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: Mildenhall United Kingdom

Re: Wait... what?

Postby David Yun on Sun May 31, 2009 3:38 am

@ MadCat - You and I have different ideas of SOP then. That was never a matter of policy, but of denial. Procedure always has official documentation. That was a rogue operation. It obviously happened, but this conversation (as I understood it) was about stated policy, not recrimination.

@ Zokrah - I don't perceive that as an attack at all. I fully agree that we can't be naive, and that we need to approach strategic problems with a pragmatic mindset. However, I strongly feel that our GRAND strategy needs to be predicated on values greater than short-sighted immediate reactions.

A higher moral imperative is NOT mutually exclusive with acting in self-interest. We're wearing ourselves out (in terms of money, manpower, materiel, and willpower) by acting unilaterally. We simply can't sustain this indefinitely. We need to take a genuine leadership position, part of which is moral leadership to rally others to our cause. This IS in our long term national security self interests.

And we are NOT the Russians lol. They have a different mindset rooted in centuries of suffering. They considered those Moscow Theater and Beslan School hostage situations as successes, whereas we would have found those civilian losses completely abhorrent and unacceptable. It's a different strategic approach, and one completely alien to our culture. In WW2, the Russians blasted their own trains so the Germans couldn't use them, even though the Nazis loaded them up with Russian civilians. On and on going further back in history. If you're advocating adopting that perspective, it runs counter to our most basic values as prescribed in our nation's founding documents.

I'm not saying we shouldn't take a hard line. (Reagan knew the score.) We should be approaching the Georgian situation with resolute strength. Those joint military exercises were a good start in this direction. We HAVE the moral high ground on this issue.

I appreciate your frustration with Pakistan/India. I'll take what you said as somewhat facetious, as I'm absolutely certain you know that they're both nuclear powers. You don't want a wounded animal backed into a corner with those sort of weapons.

Frankly, I do wish we hadn't invaded Iraq. It was a high liability/low return investment. They weren't a WMD threat (the only WMDs they ever had that I know of is VX gas that WE supplied), but rather a stabilizing SECULAR power in the region. Saddam was an outright villain, but an amoral (as opposed to immoral), intelligent one who always towed the American line in action, if not speech. He was an asset. I just take solace in the fact that we likely would have had to deal with his psychopathic sons eventually, anyway.

I'd rather we'd invaded North Korea. They are a MASSIVE terrorist threat with a documented WMD research program. Hitting them also wouldn't have drawn the ire of Islamic fanatics, who rely on emotional "jihad" rally cries for recruitment. Occupation and reconstruction also would NOT have been as expensive or arduous as Iraq. Koreans are far more accepting of suffering, and would have quickly shifted to positive cooperation with South Korea. Finally, this isn't in line with U.S. security per se, but as a Korean-American, I would've been in favor of reuniting the country. The bloodshed would have been worth it.

And yeah, you are reacting emotionally as well. It looks like I'm the closest thing you have to an ally on these boards - I don't think we're that far off in perspective. The only matter where I think you ought to reign it in, is that you're perceiving MC's and Yino's criticism of very particular subject matter as a broad general indictment of the military at large. I definitely understand why, but I don't think that's the case, and we should all attempt to discourse rationally (as opposed to emotionally) on the specific topics at hand.
"I want me some glory hole." --Jerry Jones
User avatar
David Yun
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3915
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Diremanistan

Re: Wait... what?

Postby Zokrah on Sun May 31, 2009 5:20 am

Mmmm I suppose I can see your point, but no I don't take their generalities as assaults on the military, but when they DO insult the military albeit misguided, I leap to the defense! So, HAH!

What I mean specifically by that statement, is if you're going to cast blame upon the military, remember, that we can't even drink water with out government approval first. The war in Iraq wasn't started by the military. The war in Afganistan wasn't started by the military. The GOVERNMENT told us to go clean house there.

As for Pakistan/India. Hell yeah I'm serious. Let them duke it out. Everyone has the abhorrent fear of nuclear weapons. Yes, they're powerful, but so what if they use them? All it takes is one to be used against the US, and god almighty, I seriously pity those who were stupid enough to do it. If they use them on each other, so be it. That was THEIR war, THEIR calls, THEIR lines they chose to cross. Not ours. I agree with owning the FUCK outta North Korea though. As someone wise once said: "America. Fuck yeah."

Granted, now that I've just exhuded the best sterotypical American mentality, I'd like to follow up with, yes, I know we're not Russia. But, you're missing my point. Speeches, lots of "we're very disappointed in you" crap isn't what the rest of the world respects. Sure, long term goals we want to unite rather than divide. But if the others don't still see that the big dog on the street can still kick some ass, they've no reason to take anything we say seriously. Does this mean whipping it out and crushing another nation? Perhaps. I agree we're spreading ourselves out more than we should, but I wouldn't say we're spread too thin. I'd have to agree with you... Regan was probably one of the better presidents out there. Everyone else knew not to fuck with the US too much.

Ah, the civilian loss of life in Korea. Yes, that is I think what's only holding us back from going in there and making the country whole again. But, with the Chonger saying anything is now an act of war, I say we call his bluff. Pop their next missile out of the sky. If he wants to detonate nukes and try to intimidate the South Koreans into submission, I say let him try. If he tosses one nuke across that line, the rest of the world is going to pucker their assholes when they see what the US is holding back from doing. You think Saddam was kicked outta power? That will unleash a fury no one in the world will have witnessed. I almost think it'd be good for us to do it. War is good for business. I'd almost wager the world economy would go back up with all the mobilization it'd take to get that infrastructre redone. After all, it seems everyone's answer to the problems of the global economy is to spend spend spend!

Pakistan deserved what is now being reaped upon them. They kept bitching and resisting US sanctions to help us hunt the Taliban and Al Qaida. Fuckers got what they deserved. They made a haven for them, and now they're like "oh shit, they wanna run things now..." Too bad Pakistan. Let's let India fix those woes for you and you'll be called New Indiastan. I have no problem with Vishnu running things over there from now on. At least we know they're not hostile to US interests. And India is the power in that region (even surpassing the chinese in military might and purchasing power). It's like that giant weapons deal with Algeria that Russia's got going on. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4796382.stm) Algeria will be the power in Africa that will rival India. That's some serious firepower they're trying to buy/going to. Glad we're friendly with them too.
Last edited by Zokrah on Sun May 31, 2009 5:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Confucius say: Man with hand in pocket feel cocky all day.
User avatar
Zokrah
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: Mildenhall United Kingdom

Re: Wait... what?

Postby MadCat on Sun May 31, 2009 5:29 am

Re: India and Pakistan 'duking it out' with nukes:
Ever heard the term 'nuclear winter'? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter
If they shoot off enough of them, it doesn't matter how far away they are, the whole planet is boned. Simulations have already been done on what a Pakistan/India conflict would cause. http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/nuclear/
I want my job description to be: "gets paid to draw sexy ladies." :D
User avatar
MadCat
=^-^=
 
Posts: 1510
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:13 am
Location: Bew Bogling Street, Everwas

PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Learn about Advertising | Learn about Contributing | Learn about Us

Website is © 2005-2008 Direman Press. All content is © their respective creators. All rights reserved.
cron