Ummmm..in that we were among the greatest, if not the greatest ( according to Speer) foreign supplier of the Nazis' war machine, irrespective of the fact that we later called that profiteering and tried individuals, this would make an interesting stance as to why we should attack every nation supporting Iraq...
Have you ever considered the possibility that we supplied certain Arab states in an effort to quell problems without utilizing our military? Hmmm....now perhaps we were merely delaying the inevitable. Many of the Arab states HATE us. They have hated us since the 1950s when we recognized the state of Israel. They want us dead. If we do nothing then one or more of these nations will acquire nukes and then more Americans will die than will in any military conflict. I don't want bloodshed more than anybody else. I want this whole ordeal over and done.
hey treeman why dont you go and run for president and declare war on every country you f*cking idiot.. what a jacka$$ you are.. i am ashamed to frequent the same bbs as you .. you insecure war monger piece of crap.. now do you want to fight me too?
Ah, ref...it seems like ages since we've had one of our little chats... okay...what are the eyes for, aside from habit? You respond to an inquiry, re: this topic, about whether we are going to attack everyone who helped/supplied Iraq with what I assume was an attempt to equate the present situation with 1942...I completely overlooked all the incredible historical innacuracies in that comparison to merely point out that, like the people you apparently are preparing to excuse attacking for supplying Iraq, we supplied the Nazis...and rather than deal with the...er...slight problem in your logic you give me a line of the dreaded rolleyes, and move on to rationalize supplying many Arab states...which, it is true, we did do...but beyond that I don't see your point. I can presume a few sketchy ones, but wouldn't want to do you the disservice of assuming...Wanna enlighten me?
I shouldn't even dignify this with a response, but... sirhangover: We can drop this conversation to another level if you'd like, dumbass...
I think the world might actually care about arab opinion if the arabs weren't a stone age culture that hasn't advanced socially or technologically in over 500 years. Everything they have, they owe to Europe and the United States. In case you didn't know, it's mostly foreign companies and foreign employees who run the day to day operations of the oil fields in the middle east. All of their technology is manufactured in foreign countries. I feel sorry for the general populace of these countries because it's the way their society is set up that keeps them this way. A super rich elite controls the impoverished masses and keeps them ignorant and full of religious fire to take their mind off the fact that they're getting screwed by their leaders. It's basically a culture where the strong dominate the weak. This is why you have such practices as the sodomy of young boys so they don't devirginize the women before marriage. Military capabilities of the Arab World: They have no conventional military talent. The finer points of military strategy are almost completely lost on them for some reason. The willingness to use their own civilians as a shield is about as craven as you can get. Guess it's a rant but my underlying theme is **** Syria and Iran. Both of those countries are run by idiots who are in way over their heads. It's like playing chess against mentally handicapped kids.
Excellent post, Heretic. I would just amend the last sentence to read "It's like playing chess against mentally handicapped kids - who have a revolver pointed at your crotch underneath the table."...
We've known for decades about the dangers presented by unstable governments in that region. In decades past we had two choices: 1) Declare war on those who threaten us. 2) Arm those who they are warring with and deal with it strategically behind the scenes. We chose option 2. This has proven to be not very effective. But we looked like the good guy, minus the white hats. So now the guys we had armed have become a problem. The guys they were fighting with years ago are a problem still, but MUCH less so. Nothing was solved and now we have the argument that "we armed them." Well...DUH...of course we armed the Iraqis in the 1980s. They were warring with Iran, who had even gone so far as to take American hostages at the end of Carter's Presidency. Not Carter's fault...but definitely his problem. Mistakes were made. We didn't take care of our problems ourselves. We armed a ruthless dictator instead so we wouldn't seem rash to the rest of the world. Because of this, now we are at a crossroads. Do we let Iraq have WMD in contravention of UN resolutions? Some are comfortable with that notion. I personally think it's preposterous. But to each his own. The question remained of what to do about it. We could arm a nation warring with Iraq. Oh wait, nobody was warring with them. Even if there were, what guarantee is there that 20 years from now they wouldn't be threatening our interests and our allies with those weapons? At some point you have to take care of it yourself or the problem will resurface at a later date and be even more dire.
Quite frankly, if we had any balls we would have gone after Iran and Syria for the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon, but Ronnie choked on that one and those Muslim *freedom* fighters in Afghanistan. Leave it to the lawyers to find a solution. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42990-2003Mar17.html OTOH, it's not like a trickle of arms is going to make any difference in the end result of this war.
No...if being on this board embarrasses him SO much...nobody is forcing him to log on. If one individual poster bothers him so much, he is free to put him on the ignore list rather than post the tripe he has posted.
Heretic, that is so true. They just dont have the trained personel yet. I have lived in saudi arabia for 12 yrs, going on 13 right now. My father works for aramco (oil)
