1. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Neutrality is the Answer - They Didn't Attack Switzerland

Discussion in 'World Politics' started by Truth-Bringer, Apr 7, 2007.

  1. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    Germany wanted Russia too, and used a hell of lot more resources in the process than they used to take Norway...which would seem to indicate that they wanted Russia more...yet they didn't take it.
     
  2. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    On another note, since when does conquering others through brutal, violent force indicate that someone is forward-thinking?
     
  3. Dave

    Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yet they were still attacked. The premise of your original post is that if you don't pick a side in the fight and remain neutral, and as long as you keep up a military deterrent, you won't get attacked. My point is that no matter how neutral you stay, sometimes you are going to have to either fight, or roll over and give in. If Norway had chosen a side in WWII, maybe they would have been able to mount a meaningful defense. Neutrality was not the best choice for Norway in WWII, and it is not the best choice for America today.
     
  4. Abraxis Axis

    Abraxis Axis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    0
  5. Dave

    Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    1
    What are you? 12? How ****ing retarded do you have to be to post a cheech & chong video as an insult? Go toke up somewhere else dumbass.
     
  6. did he say anywhere it was an insult? or it was directed at anyone here?it didnt say anything just a video? maybe he posted the wrong forum? maybe he/she is 12? anyhow

    Actually it was a BIT amusing as i hadnt heard that in 25 years!!! hell i went to you tube after this post!!! they have all of C&C stuff on there it was nostalgic

    thanks for jarring the memory banks Abby
     
  7. Abraxis Axis

    Abraxis Axis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    0
    sorry dave its not all about you
     
  8. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    I've never claimed any policy was 100% effective. And secondly, the context is that terrorist attacks made against us ARE NOT BEING MADE BY A NATION STATE.

    If your point is "no matter how neutral you are you'll eventually have to fight" - that's refuted by the Swiss example.

    This is where you're wrong. Why I say an invasion of the U.S. won't happen if we declare neutrality:

    First, if we remove the cause of the fatwa against the U.S., the terrorists will have no reason to invade our territory if we're not in their territory and not interfering in their region. So there should be no reason for them to waste time attacking a neutral people. After all, they're not attacking anyone in Switzerland, Sweden or New Zealand, now are they?

    Secondly, even if they did try to invade and occupy us after we left, they would fail miserably. For one thing, they couldn't afford it. We're practically the richest country in the world, yet look what it's costing us to invade and occupy the tiny country of Iraq - and we're FAILING. And add to this that private Americans are far more heavily armed that Iraqis were. Our insurgency would be devastating to any invader. They can certainly try to attack me, but I'm well-trained in the use of firearms, so I doubt they'll get close enough to try.

    And last but not least, no nation state wants a war with us. Why? The simple reason is that we have enough nuclear weapons to nuke every square inch of every country on earth. We are not helpless and we are not defenseless. No one could ever successfully invade and occupy the U.S. No other country's economy could stand the strain, let alone the bombardment that would follow.
     
  9. Dave

    Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    1
    The Swiss didn't have to fight because there was nothing in the country worth taking. They had wealth, but they made it very clear that the Nazis were welcome to that. What else was there to fight for? We in the U.S. have something that Islamic fundamentalists want. If you are willing to give in to their demands and fly a crescent moon flag over the White House and have the President swear allegance to Allah, then you are right. We won't need to fight after that. If you have something the enemy wants, you have to either give it to them, or fight them. Neutrality is not an option. The U.S. is the target of terrorists because of all of the reasons you claim they will not attack us. Our lifestyle is an afront to their religion. They will not focus on countries like New Zealand or Sweden when the U.S. is the most obvious offender. Being the wealthiest country in the world makes us a target. As for being an armed populace, Israelis are armed to the teeth, but that doesn't help a lot when your favorited resteraunt blows up.

    Nation states are not the threat. It is the groups that rogue nation states that support that pose the threat. Al Qaieda's goal is not to get a massive army and march up through Mexico and fight battles with our military. It is to create instability through constant attacks until the government fails. That is when they feel they will be able to step in with an Islamic government.
     
  10. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    I see now that you're going to do nothing but lie since your argument has been beaten. The Swiss never said any such thing. They made it very clear they would fight the Nazis to the last man if they invaded.

    LOL. Really? Please tell us exactly what they want?

    If they want something, they'll have to invade and occupy us to take it. Please explain how Al Qaeda will invade and occupy the U.S.

    Straw Man. You're full of fallacies on this round, because you know you've been beaten. You need to check your Cognitive Dissonance and accept the truth.

    Except for the fact that neither Bin Laden nor any of the Fatwa's have mentioned that as a reason. Switzerland is an incredibly wealthy country also, yet they're not attacking them.

    But it does prevent you from being invaded and successfully invaded by a Nation State. Iraqis are armed also - and they are preventing us from achieving our objective there, are they not?

    Then Nation States are ultimately the threat if they're supporting the threat. How we're dealing with Iraq as a rogue nation state though, is failing miserably, and Bush has admitted that:

    Bush: ‘My Stupid Invasion Of Iraq Has Helped Terrorists’

    "Bush said that in the spring of 2005, bin Laden also instructed Hamza Rabia, a senior operative, to brief al-Zarqawi on an al-Qaida plan to attack sites outside Iraq. ‘Our intelligence community reports that a senior al-Qaida leader, Abu Faraj al-Libi, went further and suggested that bin Laden actually send Rabia, himself, to Iraq to help plan external operations,’ Bush said. ‘Abu Faraj later speculated that if this effort proved successful, al-Qaida might one day prepare the majority of its external operations from Iraq'."

    But even after admitting that his unnecessary war has endangered innocent people all over the world, they still won’t impeach him.


    ROTFLMAO!!!! An Islamic government in the U.S.... LOL. What will you think of next??? Then they'll have to invade and occupy at some point. And they cannot do that.

    Again, an invasion of the U.S. won't happen if we declare neutrality because:

    First, if we remove the cause of the fatwa against the U.S., the terrorists will have no reason to invade our territory if we're not in their territory and not interfering in their region. So there should be no reason for them to waste time attacking a neutral people. After all, they're not attacking anyone in Switzerland, Sweden or New Zealand, now are they?

    Secondly, even if they did try to invade and occupy us after we left, they would fail miserably. For one thing, they couldn't afford it. We're practically the richest country in the world, yet look what it's costing us to invade and occupy the tiny country of Iraq - and we're FAILING. And add to this that private Americans are far more heavily armed that Iraqis were. Our insurgency would be devastating to any invader. They can certainly try to attack me, but I'm well-trained in the use of firearms, so I doubt they'll get close enough to try.

    And last but not least, no nation state wants a war with us. Why? The simple reason is that we have enough nuclear weapons to nuke every square inch of every country on earth. We are not helpless and we are not defenseless. No one could ever successfully invade and occupy the U.S. No other country's economy could stand the strain, let alone the bombardment that would follow.
     
  11. Dave

    Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    1
    No fallacy here. Everything I said about al-Qaida is straight out of bin Ladin's own speeches. In his famous offer of a truce to George W. Bush, one of his conditions was that Bush accept Allah and make Islam the official religion of America. I'm not saying that it is rational to think that there will be an Islamic government in America, I'm saying that these are al-Qaida's goals, and this is what they are trying to do.

    Once again, I'm not talking about a nation state here. You are simply attacking a straw man when you are debating this point. I'm talking about terrorist groups attacking America with the financial support of nation states. If America declared neutrality tomorrow we would still be getting terrorist attacks. I don't think anyone could debate against that.

    It seems that you are trimming your theory now. It started out saying "if you are neutral, you won't get attacked." Then it was "if you are neutral and have good defenses you won't get attacked." Now it seems like its "you'll get attacked, but if you have a big military it won't be a successful attack." Have you completely given up on the neutrality portion of your argument?
     
  12. Castle

    Castle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Former US of A
    Umm, ever read some of the stuff Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has had to say on the subject?
    "The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world."
    Sounds to me like neutrality may buy ya some time but this nut plans on killing you or converting you by the end of the day.

    -Castle
     
  13. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    I've read some of his stuff that was mistranslated and used for propaganda purposes, such as this:

    "Wiped off the Map" - Rumor of the Century

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=5866
     
  14. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    I don't see such a condition here:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4628932.stm

    Here's an accuate translation of that text:
    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8419

    Produce and present evidence to support your claim.

    My argument still stands, since no nation state would want to get caught helping a terrorist who was planting a nuclear bomb in the U.S. This would guarantee that the current rulers would be out of power after a U.S. invasion.

    No, I'm neither revising or trimming my theory. I just stated it as neutrality for the sake of simplicity at the beginning, but my complete position is that you must be neutral and strong, and prepared to fight as an insurgency if you are invaded and occupied.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice