DescentBB

[ultraliberal propaganda and paranoia, apparently]

did the rest of world really think the US wouldn't EVENTUALLY go from MAD to first strike after Russia no longer became a threat?

MAD only works if you have a known enemies that all fire from known locations. the only thing you had to be paranoid about was when.

The US now has known enemys, but with no fixed location for many. so its got two things to be paranoid about.

Welcome to 1984, where liberation is now *forced freedom*. Makes it sound damn sinister, doesn't it? Europe didn't used to mind that we *forced freedom* on it. *shrug* Give it back, then, or give it to the Islamic clerics. They will be more than happy to take it off your hands.

flip: I wouldn't know; I wasn't old enough. Point is, you're at FS now, and it's sure as hell not a likeable prospect. Especially given the nuclear arsenals in the hands of countries with similarly crackpot leaders, Israel for one, not to mention non-country factions with possible nuclear capability (that's EVIL TERRORIST NINJAS).

bash: I consciously answered newspeak with newspeak. Congratulations for spotting it. You get 1 point. Besides, liberation if anything is a fnord.

Let me guess, you suggest turning over the US Military to UN control. Oui?

All "police" are paranoid.

I do think Bush thinks he is doing "God's will", however I don't fault him for that because that is still what he thinks is right. It's not like he is personally against the war, but created the war because his religious doctrine told him so. So I can shrug that off pretty easily.

Several times he mentioned that the war offered a "historic opportunity to change the world."

Oh, I agree with Bush here. If there is a stable successful democracy, in that region, that will be a huge sigh of relief from my generation, (whom Bush is taking the money to finance this war). The world will be so much better if a democracy is created and embraced by the people in that region.

But I think Bush made a mistake in thinking that once Sadamn was gone they would be singging and holding hands in the streets. Many, hopefully not most, do not want a democracy.

Democracy can kill itself very easily. It is suppose to do what the people want, and if the people want its destruction, then democracy will take its own life.

More money needs to be invested in showing the Iraqis why democracy is such a good thing. Less money needs to be spent killing those who think that it is a bad thing.

Contrary to some, I'm not lobbying my personal Final Solution here; I'm merely pointing out the fact that there is a Big Problem. Many chose to ignore it, and unfortunately it is no longer just their problem. It's turning into everyone's problem.

Good, because Europe's first *Final Solution* didn't sit well with the rest of us. Why don't you folks tell us to take our troops out of Europe? You have no idea how happy that would make most Americans.

In other news, while I'm not claiming that Bush is faking his faith, sometimes I do detect that he overplays it for his audiences both domestic and foreign. We're facing an enemy consisting of religious fanatics and I believe by speaking their language they understand the message a bit better.

History recalls that Nixon and Kissinger played good cop/bad cop with the North Vietnamese to great benefit. They thought Nixon was nuts and ready to drop the big one. I think we need to similarly put that *fear of God* into North Korea and al-Qaeda (and maybe even Iran). So far most of what we're finding out about our enemies is that appeasement and kindness is interpreted as weakness and it leads to further escalation. These folks only back down if they believe the consequences are far greater than the rewards.

bash wrote:Good, because Europe's first *Final Solution* didn't sit well with the rest of us. Why don't you folks tell us to take our troops out of Europe? You have no idea how happy that would make most Americans.

Are you entirely certain we haven't? Of course, that is not a viable option either, since it'd probably only escalate the chaos. Unecessary chaos, as it were, caused by the invasion in the first place.

Gooberman wrote:All "police" are paranoid.

Which beggars the question; why did the USA appoint itself the Police of Nations, and by what authority besides the obvious (force of arms)?

It's something that I've never seen a satisfying answer to. Most [Americans, at least] seem to treat it as an unyielding law of nature, which it most certainly isn't. (It's also interesting that the USA is one of the youngest nations on Earth, and largely composed of descendants of emigrant peasants from Europe.)

Clarification: Many, not most, Americans are descendents of folks who fled Europe out of persecution (although Europe's bloodlines to North America grow thinner everyday).

bash wrote:These folks only back down if they believe the consequences are far greater than the rewards.

Maybe. It'd sure suck if they rose to the challenge in a big way, though.

bash wrote:Correction, many Americans are descendents of folks who fled Europe out of persecution

You can "flee" poverty, too. Besides, the peasant part is a fact, try a book of history (look into 1800s Sweden if nothing else).

What quotinent fled persecution or poverty is irrelevant; Muslims may well flee persecution in the USA now, I don't know for sure, though I suspect it.

Edit: I'm glad you clarified your post. I don't edit half as much as you

Not really, it's childish to think of our nuclear arsenal as anything more than a deterent. We don't need nukes anymore and our military strategy has evolved to the point where we understand there is no benefit of destruction at that level. Most conflicts from here on that require US intervention will be fought with surgical accuracy to remove only those parts we deem *diseased*. What should spook you is we are starting to militarize space for the purpose of rendering everyone else's nukes obsolete. It's all about gaining (and holding) the highground.

bash wrote:What should spook you is we are starting to militarize space for the purpose of rendering everyone else's nukes obsolete.

You don't think it does? Anyhow; maybe you wouldn't nuke anyone, maybe you would. Fact: a nuclear arsenal of any size is more than just a deterrent, it's power. This seems to be the main reason the American stockpile's reduction is drawing out.

Also, a lot has been justified in the USA-vs-Terrorists conventional-vs-guerilla war. Give it a few years, another few civilian targets, then maybe a nuclear strike or two will be, too. It's amazing what apathy drawn-out conflict can incite.

The stockpile of first-strike weapons is being slowly retired, largely. The only reason we've withdrawn from SALT II is to pursue anti-nuke nukes (missile defense shielding), which, I might point out, we're developing in cooperation of many of our allies in the understanding that they will be shielded, too.

Right now the fear is a single smuggled nuke in a shipping container or commercial aircraft. That will be catostrophic, no doubt, but in ten years or so the mad mullahs of Iran or North Korea will be able to launch multiple missiles to anywhere. The plan it to undercut their motivation to develop that sort of lethality if they realize by the time they reach that capability it will already be obsolete.

Great. May you please hold off the global extermination until I've moved to a Mars colony? Because the keyword here is mad. Raving lunatics on either side don't know or care about collateral damage or losses to their own side as long as they get to make their point.

I don't have a solution, but I'm not buying yours either.

Right now the fear is a single smuggled nuke in a shipping container or commercial aircraft.

Riddle me this: how do you get it and completely miss the point simultaneously?

Heh, one of the things I think most Euros fail to grasp is we don't want anything from you, land or otherwise. For all your paranoia about American might, never forget that the last two World Wars were of European origin.

Most of us learned the lesson.

[bash may or may not have a point - you decide]

[spoiler]{quote bash}Heh, that's what you said after the first one.{/unquote}

Be that as it may, I find it quite unlikely we're about to start WW3.
Also for the record, I refer to Europe as in the European Union most of the time...[/spoiler]

I started to reply to this, but it's not worth my time or effort....

KompresZor wrote:I started to reply to this, but it's not worth my time or effort....

Then why in the name of sanity did you? It's not making you look any smarter, nor clarifying your point of view. It's not even a particulary clever way of suggesting everyone in this thread are idiots, if that is your goal. How's the foot?

For the record, if I delete a post before you have replied, consider yourself lucky for seeing it but don't be lame and re-post it.

Compromise

Wow, Wolf on Air. Another example of ultraliberal propaganda and paranoia. Wake me when it's over . KompressZor's right; this one ain't worth the powder to blow it off the DBB .

Top Gun wrote:Wow, Wolf on Air. Another example of ultraliberal propaganda and paranoia.

You're talking to a 16 year old. Apply prejudice as neccessary to feel content

Maybe I'm ultraliberal, maybe I'm not. At least I'm not ultraconservative

And hey, where would the world be without us crackpot liberal paranoid youngsters? A hell of a lot more boring, at the minimum

Thanks folks, it's been great fun&flame, keep it coming! I'm going to go to bed soonish, but I'll check again tomorrow.

Wolf, I understand it's a rebellous time for you and usually the bigger the monster one can thumb his nose at the better. But from our side of the pond, we see ourselves as having the power to look after everyone's best interests. What is everyone's best interest? Peace. Yep, peace through strength, peace through war. Sounds like an Nazi slogan, I know, but it works and it's a longterm strategy to spread that peace as far as we can. Shake hands with Pax Americana. Peace is good for business and business is really what America is about.

What you should concern yourself with more, imo, is what appears to us to be a rise in European hate crimes that looks eerily reminiscent of past bad habits that led to bigger troubles. Also, I think Europe is just waking up now to the fact that your liberal policies of letting in certain immigrant groups has not mainstreamed or *Euro-fied* them but rather created an angry disenfranchised underclass that resents it's host nations. Europe may once again find itself in need of this scary giant you see us as.

"Pax Americana - Peace for Oil"
Cheap shot, I know, but what the hell. Keep in mind it's 2 in the morning here

hah tetrad,
you deleted your post! what are you trying to manipulate the text "conversation" to make yourself look rational and the other debater look overly-emotional?

it's a very good reason why the edit "notification" should be turned on. especially with the political debates going down... wouldn't want to bend perception of the non-trolls.

btw i edited this 3 times.

Hehe Wolf, I'm a 17 year old whom some might describe as "ultraconservative" . We should get into a flame war sometime; it might be fun .

You forgot one "Not because."

"And certainly not because Bush's necktie was pumping out subliminal messages to join the Army."

bash wrote:What you should concern yourself with more, imo, is what appears to us to be a rise in European hate crimes that looks eerily reminiscent of past bad habits that led to bigger troubles.

There does seem to be a swing in Europe towards more right wing policies regarding immigration. This gives birth to the dicks with swaztikas on their armbands, which is a misguided waste product of this war on terror thing thats going on at the moment. I don't think it's limited to Europe though. There are hate groups in all corners of this paradise we temporarily inhabit.

FC

TheCops wrote:hah tetrad,
you deleted your post! what are you trying to manipulate the text "conversation" to make yourself look rational and the other debater look overly-emotional?[/i]

Considering I'm not part of this "conversation"...

I have always wondered... Isn't all this international terrorism a by-product of the US military development and international politics policies? At least to a certain degree?

Terrorism has been everywhere, but usually the terrorists had clear demands and would stop their activities if the demands are met. This is not the case with the current wave of international terrorism. They have no demands, they just want to cause as much damage as possible. Where lay the roots of this?

About the European Union: it is not fair to bash us. We have a completely different background, we are not a bunch of states with similar historical backgrounds, we are individual countries with their own language, people, and until a few years ago, currency. I am personally citizen of four entities. I am citizen of my city, for which I have to vote. I am citizen of the federal state of Flanders, for which I have to vote. I am citizen of Belgium, for which I have to vote. I am also citizen of the EU, for which I have to vote. There are people who have problems identifying themselves in this system, and this creates tensions at all levels. For instance, someone who strongly feels himself to be a citizen of the Flanders state, will criticize tax collection and the financing of the two other federal states in Belgium. Someone who identifies himself as a belgian, will not. Likewise, if people have no faith in the European project, they will hold back and think for their own country alone. The EU is a very difficult and complex thing, politically. You can't blame us for still having internal disagreements and a seemingly lack of willpower and unity. We'll get there.

I will retort in this way: as one of the few non-US citizens of this forum, I am often offended by the blind confidence you Americans have in your government. You are unable to recognise that there are people out there who do not agree, or at least you do not value their opinion as equal to your own. You are free to post your opinions, just as I am, so if you wish to be blind for all the issues and problems your government is introducing, it is your full right. But remember this is limited to your personal opinion, it is not a truth or a fact.

Of course it's my opinion, whose else would it be? Ah, I see, so it's *not fair* to criticize European countries but apparently it's completely fair (and even encouraged by your governments) to criticize (stupidly, I might add, your press is even worse than ours) and to make continual assinine denouncements of America. Pfft. btw, Tri, how's that Genocide Memorial working out for you Belgians?

For those wondering what I'm talking about...

* * *

Display Says U.S. Has Worst Genocide

Friday April 9, 2004 3:16 AM

BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - A display praising the merits of peacekeeping that cited the killing of native North Americans as the world's worst genocide shouldn't be considered a jab at the United States, Belgian defense officials said Thursday.

Defense Ministry spokesman Gerard Vareng denied criticism that the display carried an anti-American message.

The display, shown at the monument of the Unknown Soldier in Brussels this week, was meant to honor Belgian soldiers who died in humanitarian missions.

It included a panel listing North America as the continent of the world's worst genocide with a death toll of 15 million, starting with Christopher Columbus' 1492 arrival in the New World but giving no end date.

The daily De Standaard called the display - that was also covered extensively in a defense ministry publication - insulting to Washington.

It said Defense Minister Andre Flahaut, who has tangled with U.S. officials in recent months, effectively blamed the United States for killing 15 million people ``in a genocide that continues to this day.''

The newspaper complained about a ``curious'' list of genocides that mentioned Nazi Germany, Rwanda, Cambodia, Armenia and other countries - but ignored killings in the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin and Europe's colonial past in Africa, including Belgium's role in the Congo.

Vareng said ``the peacekeeping display was the work of historical experts. They took the list of genocides and the numbers of people who died in them on the Encyclopedia of Genocide'' by Israel W. Charny, head of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem.

He said the two-volume encyclopedia, published in 1999, is a ``very serious book that deals with all kinds of genocides.''

The ceremony this week at the Monument of the Unknown Soldier coincided with the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide in which at least 500,000 people died. Estimates have ranged as high as 1 million.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... 91,00.html

* * *

And then there's this. While I'm well aware that Belgium is not technically France...

* * *

France blamed as Rwanda marks genocide date

Jeevan Vasagar and AP in Paris
Thursday April 8, 2004

France's representative at a commemoration to mark the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide yesterday left early after accusations that France was partly responsible for the tragedy.

Renaud Muselier, the deputy foreign minister, left the Rwandan capital, Kigali, sooner than expected because "accusations that are grave and contrary to the truth have been made against France", the foreign ministry said.

The Rwandan president, Paul Kagame, pointed a finger of blame during his speech, saying that the French "consciously trained and armed" government soldiers and militias who carried out the killings of more than half a million people 10 years ago, and "knew they were going to perpetrate a genocide".

He accused the French of preparing a "strategy to protect the killers and not protect the victims".

Mr Kagame lit an eternal flame at the main memorial site while women held up pictures of their lost loved ones and choirs sang.

Earlier yesterday, France's defence minister, Michele Alliot-Marie, said French troops did all they could to halt the genocide. Accusations that France was partly to blame were "totally scandalous".

"Even if French soldiers were, unfortunately, unable to prevent all the massacres ... they nevertheless made it possible that there was not a total genocide," he told France-Info radio. "They truly did all they could to prevent an even more dramatic situation," he said, dismissing allegations against France as "unfounded and scandalous".

France's President Jacques Chirac and officials at the foreign ministry observed a minute of silence yesterday in memory of the victims.

Mr Kagame said last month that his government planned to investigate the role that French troops and other foreigners allegedly played in the 1994 genocide. He singled out France then for helping leaders of the slaughter escape.

France had ties to the regime of extremists from Rwanda's Hutu majority that carried out the genocide, and its soldiers helped to train the Rwandan army. But French officials have repeatedly denied that France aided or directed Hutu forces that slaughtered Tutsis.

"Time will write history with the greatest possible objectivity," Mr Muselier said on France-2 television. "Each must assume his responsibilities." He had joined EU and US officials and African leaders at the commemoration.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international ... 76,00.html

* * *

Somehow I doubt that little bit of ugliness gets etched onto the Genocide Memorial either.

America is out there taking action. We are still trying to sort ourselves out. So yes, I don't think the US and the EU are comparable, and yes I think the US ought to be criticized. Self-criticizm would not be out of place for you guys either!

The law against genocide has been removed. The intention was good but the implementation was poor so it was being taken advantage of. At least it got a message out. Not that us Belgians are crazy, but that some actions by politicians that are considered normal, are in fact of criminal nature and should raise questions.

I agree the law itself was a mistake though, it hurt Belgium on the international political scene more than it was worth to get that message out in the world. Or maybe not...

[Edit]: Bash you editing slut
Our defense minister, André Flahaut is just like our military power, a joke. Since military and defense is about the least important federal portefeuille in Belgium, it was given to a politician of lesser capabilities. If that idiot starts to making international fuss though, we have a problem. Flahaut is getting a lot of criticism for the way he does things.

[Edit]: Again? jeezes!
If you are too far away or too stupid to be unable to make the distinction between France and Belgium, then you void yourself of any credibility when quoting those articles. Belgium is an independant country since 1831, and is a federal state since 1989. There are six million people in flanders, who speak less french than english, and only four million in wallonie who speak french, who are not in the least affiliated with France in any way. It's like saying Canada takes blame too because a part of the country speaks french with a weird accent. Well, same goes for us.

Oops, I *edited* again! Although really all I'm doing is adding to my post because it's taking some time to find the links. I'll stop but I could go on. Point is, Europe has, IN MY OPINION, a far more reprehensible history than America and yet Americans don't spend anywhere near the time you folks do fingerpointing. Glass houses.


Read, I said we know France is not Belgium. But your two nations are very closely linked and my point is at the bottom where I doubted Belgium would be adding France's responsibility for the Rwandan genocide to it's memorial.

Newsflash: America no longer gives a rat's azz about what you gutless Euros think of us and most of us are probably wagering that you all hit your collective knees and grab at Osama's latest *truce offer* to protect your own yellow hides. But, hey, it seems lately you and the Islamic clerics have a shared hatred for the Jews, so that would come as little surprse.

Bush also displayed again the full fervor of his messianic militarism.

Several times he mentioned that the war offered a "historic opportunity to change the world."

In one of his most emphatic moments, he said, "I also have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not this country's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty's gift to every man and woman in this world. And as the greatest power on the face of the Earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom."

This is Bush saying that he is doing God's work in Iraq. That is a particularly inappropriate claim to make, leaving aside the obvious leaping of the church/state wall. Given that Bush has chosen to wage war in an Islamic country, it is unlikely that there are many Iraqis who are anxious to hear Bush's theological justifications.

You should watch how you read things like this, Wolf On Air. This stuff is, for the most part, not angled to be truthful or informative, it's an attack made by someone who's very Anti-Bush.
"This is Bush saying that he is doing God's work in Iraq." - I watched most of his speech and conference on TV, and he wasn't doing anything close to standing up there declaring that he was doing the will of God; he was stating some of his convictions about the task at hand. Therefore, "That is a particularly inappropriate claim to make, leaving aside the obvious leaping of the church/state wall." is total BS. What do they want, a president with no belief in God? Their attempts to make President Bush out to be similar to the radicals that he is currently at war with are very wrong, and have no basis in fact. I think it's pretty obvious, even only from this, that the person who wrote this is not interested in the truth, but in twisting the facts in order to cultivate a certain opinion.
I'd suggest you watch the press conference yourself, Wolf On Air, if you haven't. In fact, if you don't already, I would suggest always going to the source before you read anyone's interpretation (or bastardisation, as it may be). In a day (at least in my country) where reporters, etc are always telling you what things mean, or the way things are, it's nice to be able to see it for yourself.

Take care

Bash, the world evolves. Germany waged war on the rest of the world twice and was beaten by their enemy twice. Even if that was only 60 and 80 years ago, it would be unfair to still treat Germany as a state of criminals because of what happened in the past.

The point is, the US is attacking and occupying a country RIGHT NOW. We are fingerpointing the US for things that are current and in our opinion, are wrong and should be questioned.

We have a long history of war and killings, but that is history. There is no point for blaming us for the world wars, the crusades, the spanish inquisition, the french revolution, or even further in history the occupation by Rome and the roman empire.

bash wrote:Newsflash: America no longer gives a rat's azz about you gutless Euros think and most of us are probably wagering that you hit your knees and take Osama's latest *truce offer* to save your own yellow hides.

That's the ★■◆●ing problem! You americans think you can do anything you want. The rest of the world whines or are terrorists, so you ignore them or kill them, respectively. Germany thought exactly the same when it waged the world wars!

I will not have you accusing us of corwardness. By the way, Osama has no *truce offer*, in case you didn't know. Osama's truce offer is to have everyone convert to Islam and have one big islamic land, stretching all over the world, living by God's will and command. Osama will keep attacking until he dies, and nothing will make him change his mind because of his religious convictions.

Pfft, you forgive yourselves so easily. Did it ever occur to you that maybe Europe has a stake in America's current war against terrorism? Of course not, no, America is obviously causing the terrorists to strike because we're shaking the hornets' nest. And I won't even bring up the UN's Oil For Food (or was that Grease For Palms) program that sent many of you fools into a money-grabbing feeding frenzy. Old Europe, sir, has absolutely no credibility in America any longer. Your only exports are whining, condescension, envy and greed. Sorry, no sale. We'll go it alone. Again. With *friends* like you...