Syria 2012

[pocketfullofshells]

Almost complete ignorance of history.
You ought to study a bit before you spew out this level of inane vitriol that is un-American and pisses a lot of veterans--like me--off.
You probably ought to head east or west until you find an ocean--and GTFO.

You don't know shit from shinola.

Crying Unamerican at anything you don't like ( because true Americans only believe what ever you happen to believe!) and then again posting nothing of value to back up anything you say...If pointing out that Vietnam was a lost war...and that Korea was a huge loss of life to sit at the same line it started at...gaining nothing.

so what because you say you served I am suppose to just pretend everything we do is right and every war we fight we won? Sorry I am not here to rub your feet and tell you are pretty just because you served....facts are facts...You know odd thing...people served on the other sides in those wars as well. You think Germans cry if someone points out German lost WWII...like its a attack on them and thus just pat them on the head and say...don't worry we won!

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Were there many pictures and stories of the atrocities that North Vietnamese soldiers did while murdering women and children in the lust for communism? Both in the North and South. Did the elucidate their crimes? There were IMMENSE.

Attempts to stop that is what started the whole damn conflict, in large measure.

Bullshit...American could care less if they where committing horrible crimes against each other. Just like they don't care about How many Syrians Die...or How many Iraqis died under Saddam. WE got in because people politicians have to prove they could fight commies harder then the other side. If the North was Capitalist and did the same things..we would have just as easily backed them if we thought we could benefit from it.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

Bullshit...American could care less if they where committing horrible crimes against each other. Just like they don't care about How many Syrians Die...or How many Iraqis died under Saddam. WE got in because people politicians have to prove they could fight commies harder then the other side. If the North was Capitalist and did the same things..we would have just as easily backed them if we thought we could benefit from it.

"Un-Hinged"

 

[pocketfullofshells]

"Un-Hinged"

Unable to debate

 

[Aus22]

Bullshit...American could care less if they where committing horrible crimes against each other. Just like they don't care about How many Syrians Die...or How many Iraqis died under Saddam. WE got in because people politicians have to prove they could fight commies harder then the other side. If the North was Capitalist and did the same things..we would have just as easily backed them if we thought we could benefit from it.

I think you are right. The USA got into Korea and Vietnam because they were Communist, their enemy at the time. They or any other western country did not intervene to stop the killings in Rawanda despite the numbers of deaths. They did not intervene In Pol Pot genocide because both sides were communist, There were no anti Communist side to defend so they allow women and children to be killed.

They intervene in Iraq because their government was Muslim. They could not attack Saudi Arabia where most of the September 11 bombers came from because they were too powerful. They invaded Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. However they found him in Pakistan. There was therefore no need to invade Afghanistan

 

[Cruella]

They intervene in Iraq because their government was Muslim. They could not attack Saudi Arabia where most of the September 11 bombers came from because they were too powerful. They invaded Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. However they found him in Pakistan. There was therefore no need to invade Afghanistan

Boy you sure remember events differently than most of us here do. We didn't go to Iraq because it was Muslim. We went there to get Saddam. Are you forgetting the gulf war? The little matter of Saddam invading Kuwait and murdering all their citizens, then setting the oil fields on fire and killing off Iranians and his own people with chemicals? We set up a no fly zone there for 12 years to protect the Kurds. Oh, and we had air bases in Saudi Arabia. Don't think that Saudi Arabia is all that powerful or anti-American, just because the Muslim Brotherhood's (you know, the guys that just took power in Egypt) nut job Osama bin Laden was born there. Rwanda was Clinton's disgrace. He preferred to go after the Christians in Bosnia instead. We basically had Vietnam won, but the screaming liberals here at home and around the world wanted us out and the pussy Democrats in Congress refused to fund it, so blame them, including the Cambodian massacre.

But I'll make a little suggestion. If people like yourself are so worried about the Syrians, why don't the Australians get their butts over there and do something about it?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I think you are right. The USA got into Korea and Vietnam because they were Communist, their enemy at the time. They or any other western country did not intervene to stop the killings in Rawanda despite the numbers of deaths. They did not intervene In Pol Pot genocide because both sides were communist, There were no anti Communist side to defend so they allow women and children to be killed.

They intervene in Iraq because their government was Muslim. They could not attack Saudi Arabia where most of the September 11 bombers came from because they were too powerful. They invaded Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. However they found him in Pakistan. There was therefore no need to invade Afghanistan

on the bin Ladin thing, he was in Pakistan , but had we not gone into Afghanistan he would not have been.Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

 

[TheJPRD]

Unable to debate

I just now responded to two posts you made in the thread on Democrats walking out of Congress. I was concerned that I'd misunderstood those posts of yours, but it appears now that I understood them fully.

If you're a liberal Democrat, I suspect that an understanding of true debate and the ability to debate logically are not characteristics you possess. Conservatives NEVER fear legitimate debate with liberals, for liberals are wrong on virtually every issue. Liberals are also notorious for making cute little un-meaningful statements, and then running away. And if you think that one little remark in Latin is sufficient evidence of your intelligence, you're mistaken. Cogito, ergo sum!.... or if you prefer en Francais, Je pense donc je suis! Anytime you'd like to convince us that liberals are smarter than conservatives, I'll be very happy to engage you in real debate on any issue! Wanna pick one and find out?

 

[Gipper]

I just now responded to two posts you made in the thread on Democrats walking out of Congress. I was concerned that I'd misunderstood those posts of yours, but it appears now that I understood them fully.

If you're a liberal Democrat, I suspect that an understanding of true debate and the ability to debate logically are not characteristics you possess. Conservatives NEVER fear legitimate debate with liberals, for liberals are wrong on virtually every issue. Liberals are also notorious for making cute little un-meaningful statements, and then running away. And if you think that one little remark in Latin is sufficient evidence of your intelligence, you're mistaken. Cogito, ergo sum!.... or if you prefer en Francais, Je pense donc je suis! Anytime you'd like to convince us that liberals are smarter than conservatives, I'll be very happy to engage you in real debate on any issue! Wanna pick one and find out?

You are catching on quick. Old Pocketrocket is our leading HOP liberal. You will find debating him difficult because he is a strong advocate of the 'strawman' debating tactic.

I find it very sad that liberal Americans believe in Socialism. They think it works and they want it. They fail to realize that once implemented, Socialism will destroy the private sector which funds all the goodies liberals want given to them, leading to poverty for all...while destroying ALL the liberties we Americans once had.

Liberalism is an illness that is very grotesque.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

You are catching on quick. Old Pocketrocket is our leading HOP liberal. You will find debating him difficult because he is a strong advocate of the 'strawman' debating tactic.

I find it very sad that liberal Americans believe in Socialism. They think it works and they want it. They fail to realize that once implemented, Socialism will destroy the private sector which funds all the goodies liberals want given to them, leading to poverty for all...while destroying ALL the liberties we Americans once had.

Liberalism is an illness that is very grotesque.

Liberalism's credo is--AGREE with me, and it is a debate.
AGREE with me, it is compromise.
AGREE with me and it is negotiation.
Capitulate to me, and I will deign a nod to you.
Las Vegas odds.

 

[BigRob]

Big Rob and Johnny Tremain, I am am yet to hear of any specific actions except perhaps Grenda, that advance American status. I have great sympathy for the men and women who fought in Vietnam, Korea and the Middle East. They were serving their country by going where their country sent them. It is not their fault that the government did not win. They won the military operation but lost the political discussions that led to the results.The American government is not respected in Vietnam. You only have to go to the war museum in HO CHI Minh city to see that. The USA is condemned at the first country in warfare to destroy agriculture land with Argent Orange and also the lives of many people. Vietnam ,Laos and Cambodia are liter with unexploded bombs. This is not the result of the soldiers. They are respected for their bravery . Many Vietnamese have help find the lost bodies of allied soldiers.
The same will apply in the Middle East. We might leave some lasting legacies like schools, hospitals and roads. But we will leave Iraq, Afghanistan divided under Tailban rule and with a lost generation. The USA and allies will not be wanted there and Russia ,China and Iran will be welcome.
We might have got rid of Bin Laden and his supporters. But we will not leave behind leaders favourable to the west either.

History shows few wars are completely successful to either side. Sometimes doing nothing as we could have in WW2 would lead to a worst result. However I am not so sure about the wars of the last 50 years...

I would simply respond by arguing that not all interests are long term.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

I would simply respond by arguing that not all interests are long term.

Pardon me--but--that is hardly profound.

 

[BigRob]

Pardon me--but--that is hardly profound.

Reality usually is not I suppose.

 

[Aus22]

Reality usually is not I suppose.

It may be true that not all interests are long term. For example getting elected is a short term interest for most politicians. However as a historian I think the important interests are long term. All historians now agree with lost in Vietnam. Surely we should take this into account before we intervene in Syria. Australia has been in every war that the USa was engaged in the past. Now some of us want a more independent policy.

 

[Aus22]

Liberalism's credo is--AGREE with me, and it is a debate.
AGREE with me, it is compromise.
AGREE with me and it is negotiation.
Capitulate to me, and I will deign a nod to you.
Las Vegas odds.

This comment is absurd. There is no Socialist party in the American congress. Liberalism is not a dirty word in the rest of the world. In fact our main conser4vative party in Australia is called the Liberal Party.