Another Troll for Fairweather and Co.

[Zenolith]

Here is a list of US bombing targets up to 1999. NONE of these bombing campaigns led to the establishment of a humane democracy. Who believes that Afghanistan (or Iraq) will be different?

 

China (1945-46 & 1950-53)

Korea (1950-53)

Guatemala (1954 & 1960)

Indonesia (1958)

Cuba (1959-60)

Congo (1964)

Peru (1965)

Laos (1964-73)

Vietnam (1961-73)

Cambodia (1969-70)

Guatemala (1967-69)

Grenada (1983)

Libya (1986)

El Salvador & Nicaragua (all of the 1980s)

Panama (1989)

Iraq (1991-99)

Sudan (1998)

Afghanistan (1998)

Yugoslavia (1999)

[TimL]

 

 

[ 08-02-2002, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: TimL ]

[iain]

And how else would you recommend we smoke 'em out and git 'em in the sunlight were they will shrivel in the infinite light of justice? maybe you need a trip to camp x-ray in gitmo or whatever it's called. we'll call it operation enduring sweeping infinite turban-busting freedom.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Anyone find it odd that we (i.e. our "president") are pushing for peace in the Middle East while we are bombing Afghanistan? The Doctor's no rocket scientist, but unless his calculations are incorrect, that would represent a contradiction of sorts.

 

Not to say that our stupid, crooked government is always fraught with hypocrisy, of course.

[mikeadam]

Perhaps some of you would rather see the Muslim/3rd world hordes descend on your hometown?

 

Some of you people make me wonder why the hell I ever served to protect your overly liberalized civil liberties.

 

If I serve again it's going to be in the Reagan Youth Gestapo, and I will be knocking down your front door. Pick a side asswipes...or move away PLEASE!

[Greg_W]

quote:

---

Originally posted by mikeadam:

Perhaps some of you would rather see the Muslim/3rd world hordes descend on your hometown?

 

Some of you people make me wonder why the hell I ever served to protect your overly liberalized civil liberties.

 

If I serve again it's going to be in the Reagan Youth Gestapo, and I will be knocking down your front door. Pick a side asswipes...or move away PLEASE!

---

Word up, Mike. Thanks for your service. Could you forward me an enrollment packet for the Reagan Youth Gestapo?

 

Greg W

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Funny, DFA works with some of the "Muslim hordes" as you say. They seem like a nice bunch of folks.

 

And don't mistake a lack of appreciation of the gov't's military policy for a lack of appreciation for the fact that you have risked or will risk being perforated by bullets in service of said government. It's understood that soldiers don't start wars, jackass politicians and fanatics do (the same politicians who perpetuate the need to wipe out "hordes" in the name of freedom or whatever).

 

[ 08-02-2002, 11:26 AM: Message edited by: Dr Flash Amazing ]

[mikeadam]

It's a volunteer system so don't try to win any points with me. I enjoyed being a stormtrooper for the government. I would do it again.

 

We had a prayer at night we used to say collectively as a unit.

 

"Dear God please have war, AMEN"

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Ah, well then in your case, the Doctor will never understand your point of view. His previous statement was based upon conversations with actual humans who had been in the service but were not bloodthirsty psychopaths. Enjoy your tenure as cannon fodder to further some corporate-sponsored tyrant's agenda, captain bullets.

 

Human life is human life, regardless of whose flag is flying over the head of said life. Think about it.

[mikeadam]

I've thought about it MORE than you ever will from the safety of your office dimwit. I thought about it while I froze my ass off in the mud, thought about it while I sweated my ass off in the desert, thought about it many times when I had to put my ass on the line.

 

Mostly I just thought about all your kids and someday mine growing up in a safe neighborhood where some Shiite raghead wasn't going to walk into Bellevue Square, proclaim himself a visionary of *God*, and turn everyone into hamburger. Facing the reality of a situation firsthand is far more valuable than speculating behind a veil of safety provided by myself and others who served. You're welcome by the way. Now please remove yourself for morning prayer call....

[Greg_W]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr Flash Amazing:

Ah, well then in your case, the Doctor will never understand your point of view. His previous statement was based upon conversations with actual humans who had been in the service but were not bloodthirsty psychopaths. Enjoy your tenure as cannon fodder to further some corporate-sponsored tyrant's agenda, captain bullets.

 

Human life is human life, regardless of whose flag is flying over the head of said life. Think about it.

---

Shut the fuck up, asshole.

[sk]

Isn't it wonderful that we live in such an amazing place and time, that we can have such varried points of view and still throw back a cold one, and clip some bolts or bag a peak or what ever I love you all

 

'ALL WE ARE SAYING>>>IS GIVE PEACE A CHANCE'

 

john lennon

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

quote:

---

Shut the fuck up, asshole.

---

Gee, did they teach you that one in the military? Formidable line of reasoning there.

[allthumbs]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Greg W:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr Flash Amazing:

Ah, well then in your case, the Doctor will never understand your point of view. His previous statement was based upon conversations with actual humans who had been in the service but were not bloodthirsty psychopaths. Enjoy your tenure as cannon fodder to further some corporate-sponsored tyrant's agenda, captain bullets.

 

Human life is human life, regardless of whose flag is flying over the head of said life. Think about it.

---

Shut the fuck up, asshole.

---

I'm with ya on that sentiment, Greg. doctor whatever the fuck you call yourself, shut the fuck up pussy

[Bronco]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zenolith:

Here is a list of US bombing targets up to 1999. NONE of these bombing campaigns led to the establishment of a humane democracy. Who believes that Afghanistan (or Iraq) will be different?

 

China (1945-46 & 1950-53)

Korea (1950-53)

Guatemala (1954 & 1960)

Indonesia (1958)

Cuba (1959-60)

Congo (1964)

Peru (1965)

Laos (1964-73)

Vietnam (1961-73)

Cambodia (1969-70)

Guatemala (1967-69)

Grenada (1983)

Libya (1986)

El Salvador & Nicaragua (all of the 1980s)

Panama (1989)

Iraq (1991-99)

Sudan (1998)

Afghanistan (1998)

Yugoslavia (1999)

---

I am not really a political person, but, I thought that most of those examples and the Bombing in Afganistan were to eliminate an enemy, not establishing world wide peace. You might want to check in with reality once in a while

[iain]

raghead? now you're insulting one of my best friends from school, one of the most calm, caring and intelligent people I've known. the situation is hopeless when it comes down to crap like that.

[mikeadam]

Sk,

 

Yes, that would be a fair, but partly naive assumption.

[Matt]

quote:

---

Originally posted by mikeadam:

Furthermore, in case you had forgotten the Soviets had achieved roughly military parity with the western world and it was surmised that they would and could easily roll over Western Europe in 14 days. Ground combat in Afghanistan using subterfuge was superior to mass death of Euro and US combat elements...

---

Mike,

 

You are dillusional if you think our foreign policy towards Afghanistan in the 80s and 90s was really that influential in winning the Cold War. We were never pro-Afghanistan, just anit-Soviet-- your typical knee jerk reactive instead of proactive foreign policy. You are also fooling yourself if you thought it was ever a possibilty that the Soviet Union would invade Europe. That was never a possiblity. Never.

 

It was our pure economic might that toppled the Soviet Union. Captialism baby. Not military subterfuge. Yes, our military built up forced the Soviets to spend their limited resources on weapons too, weakening them further.

 

I will probably regret getting into this mudslinging fest, but I've got to call bull shit on you. In Afghanistan today, just as it was in the 19th century when England and Russia first fought for power in Central Asia, the great game is afoot.

[sk]

naive I may be...but fair is all I am asking, thanks buddy

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

quote:

---

Originally posted by mikeadam:

DFA,

 

OK smart guy let's see what you know.

 

The Afghan situation was created by a previous generations political neccessity. Several DEA, FBI, State department heads went to Peshwar and onto Northern Afghanistan to investigate the possibility of funding the Afghan Jihad by releasing the sale of Opium (Heroin) related products into the Western World to buy guns to train and fund Muslim recruits. Many nations were involved in this and it was fully endorsed by the heads of our government during the early 80's.

 

At the time it was perceived that the Cold War could be ended and the Soviet Union defeated using this policy. Did it achieve this end?

 

Adamson

---

OK, the Doctor said he was staying out of this, but this is irresistible.

 

DFA is no historian, and is only passingly familiar with the event you refer to. However, it seems a little ironic that you'd choose to justify the use of military force with that example. First of all, there's the willing introduction of drugs into the US. Our country willingly enabled that, and then proceeded to spend the past what, 20+ years engaged in a "war on drugs?" How many American lives (aren't those the ones you care about?) have been ruined as a result of our allowing drugs into the country and then hypocritically prosecuting people for possessing, using, and distributing those same drugs? How much time and money has been wasted on that, while millions of the kids the government is supposedly so concerned for either get a totally substandard education or none at all? This is an example of the right thing to do?

 

And then there's the issue of us training the extremist fanatics who blew up our landmarks on 9/11. We're somehow surprised that this might happen? We put the fucking tools in their hands, for God's sake. We taught them to be terrorists! Shouldn't we maybe have rounded up all those cats from the FBI et. al. for their involvement in terrorist training that led to 9/11?

 

Dr. Flash Amazing fails to see how this is an example of good foreign policy, or even basic logic. If you could enlighten the ol' doc on that one, please do.

 

[ 08-02-2002, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: Dr Flash Amazing ]

[Cpt.Caveman]

Putting tools into their hands does not tell them to use them against us. Besides shit can be learned in more ways than one and from different areas. Are you trying to justify that criminal and terrorist attacks are our ok from these people and also the gov fault? Our gov never taught them terrorists to hate us. The art of jungle and non conventional warfare is nothing new. It just evolves...

 

[ 08-02-2002, 03:15 PM: Message edited by: Cpt.Caveman ]

[Cpt.Caveman]

You miss the point. I like arguing with peace loving foo foo hippies. It really proves to me what I think about other people sometimes

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 512dude:

Debates like this on the internet are like the special olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

---

Hilarious recycled bumper sticker quote. Dr. Flash Amazing is rolling in the aisles.

 

But, dude! You climb 5.12?! All is forgiven!

[Greg_W]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt:

You are dillusional if you think our foreign policy towards Afghanistan in the 80s and 90s was really that influential in winning the Cold War. We were never pro-Afghanistan, just anit-Soviet-- your typical knee jerk reactive instead of proactive foreign policy. You are also fooling yourself if you thought it was ever a possibilty that the Soviet Union would invade Europe. That was never a possiblity. Never.

 

It was our pure economic might that toppled the Soviet Union. Captialism baby. Not military subterfuge. Yes, our military built up forced the Soviets to spend their limited resources on weapons too, weakening them further.

---

Matt, you're painting things with a broad brush, here. Our support of the Afghans was a product of the Truman Doctrine of combatting the spread of communism (same reason we went to Korea and Viet Nam); so it wasn't a "knee-jerk foreign policy move", as you put it. The key word you missed from Mike's comment on the Soviet's move into Western Europe is "could". The USSR had the capability and manpower to roll across Europe; there's no debate on that. Armies have to take into consideration what an opponent CAN do; that's part of their job. Besides, you can't say NEVER you don't have all the information.

 

"Pure economic might", true but that's a bit simplified. Gorbachev lost the staring contests in Geneva and Rekjavik. He realized that Reagan was serious about pursuing SDI and, furthermore, he knew we had the capability to develop it. Gorbachev realized that we had a lot more money to spend on weapons than he did, bottom line. It was Reagan's steadfastness to his beliefs and principles that forced Gorby's hand.

 

Greg W

[mikeadam]

Matt,

 

I would completely disagree with you that the policies we put into effect via the medium of the Afghan war did not have a crippling effect on the Soviet Union both in terms of financial but more importantly the way the Soviet people began to resist the forces of their own government. The war in Afghanistan was a direct link to the downfall of the Soviets and eventually the end of the cold war. Yes, the economics of it all were staggerring on the Soviets and it wasn't their wanton desire for 501 jeans that brought down the Berlin wall. It was the might of the Afghan freedom fighter that punished the Soviets will to resist. Artyom Borovik writes about this extensively in the "Hidden War" as well as numerous declassified state department documents and subsequent journalistic treatises by persons more intimate with it than your opinion.

 

Dr whatever your name is....I extended that bit of info so that we could have a debate. Something you don't really seem capable of because you are firing blanks. I extended that so that you could see the extent the US was willing to go to in order to destabilize the Soviets.

 

[ 08-02-2002, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: mikeadam ]