isnt this a bit too much for the US?
#21
Posted 19 January 2005 - 09:35 AM
Neo conservative definition: http://www.ipsnews.n...sp?idnews=19618
main differences between a classic conservative are: a conservative was originally a member of the right wing, while neo conservatives have their roots on the left, not the right. They are products of the influential Jewish-American sector of the Trotskyist movement of the 1930s and 1940s, which morphed into anti-communist liberalism between the 1950s and 1970s and finally into a kind of militaristic and imperial right with no precedents in American culture or political history.
Another definition taken from here (http://www.disinfope...onservatives.22): Neoconservatives constitute an intellectual current that emerged from the cold war liberalism of the Democratic Party. Unlike other elements of the conservative mainstream, neoconservatives have historical social roots in liberal and leftist politics. Disillusioned first with socialism and communism and later with new Democrats (like George McGovern) who came to dominate the Democratic Party in the 1970s, neoconservatives played a key role in boosting the New Right into political dominance in the 1980s. For the most part, neoconservatives,who are disproportionately Jewish and Catholic,are not politicians but rather political analysts, activist ideologues, and scholars who have played a central role in forging the agendas of numerous right-wing think tanks, front groups, and foundations. Neoconservatives have a profound belief in America1s moral superiority, which facilitates alliances with the Christian Right and other social conservatives. But unlike either core traditionalists of American conservatism or those with isolationist tendencies, neoconservatives are committed internationalists. As they did in the 1970s, the neoconservatives were instrumental in the late 1990s in helping to fuse diverse elements of the right into a unified force based on a new agenda of U.S. supremacy.
Here some resourcers which have given me motivations and proves about the huge hype of this conflict:
"Final assault in Fallujah": http://www.counterpu...an11062004.html
"Illegality and war crimes in Iraq":
http://www.counterpu...an11052004.html
"Iraq body count":
http://www.iraqbodycount.net
Even if the Saddam's idol was Tito or Ceausescu or Noriega this won't change anything. Saddam didn't nothing against the US to be a threat against the world, why don't the US bomb North Korea? They have nuclear power and they said it, im my opinion they are at least 50x more dangerous than a country without a regoular army.
I ask sorry if my words sound anti American, it wasn't my intention. I've never said anti american phrases like "US sucks, kill the Americans etc..." No anti nation words are written by me, here nor in other forums. I respect all the Americans so other people in the world, I respect all the people who believe in peace and condemn war in every single aspect, war is always a defeat, a defeat of human ratio and a defeat of diplomacy, nothing good can be created with a conflict, nothing since the human history. In particular the hype of preventive war must be eradicated since has only created devastation, I really hope these $20B are really invested and aren't in some banks.
Well, I've finished, if you want more informations just contact me privately
#22
Posted 19 January 2005 - 12:42 PM
You do realize that site is all just an anti-US military bonanza. These are the type of people you see other people punch when they're booing when C-17s land at Andrews.
By your own source
15,365 - 17,582 does not equal 100,000.
#23
Posted 19 January 2005 - 01:53 PM
I see an article estimates 100000 body counts but the exact list can't be post with absolute accuracy since it grows everyday. About the kind of site I won't make any comment, I just read the spurces
BTW today at least 5 car bombs exploded in bagdad, they are all attempts to stop the elections. Personally I'm quite sceptic, I think elections won't resolve the actual situation.
#24
Posted 19 January 2005 - 04:41 PM
Anything edited by Alex Cockburn! I like that name...
You do realize that site is all just an anti-US military bonanza. These are the type of people you see other people punch when they're booing when C-17s land at Andrews.
By your own source
15,365 - 17,582 does not equal 100,000.
thats not nice very nasty for people to do that
Quotes
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
"In a man-to-man fight, the winner is he who has one more round in his magazine." -Erwin Rommel
Economic Left/Right: 10.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.56
#25
Posted 19 January 2005 - 08:55 PM
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/
I see an article estimates 100000 body counts but the exact list can't be post with absolute accuracy since it grows everyday. About the kind of site I won't make any comment, I just read the spurces
BTW today at least 5 car bombs exploded in bagdad, they are all attempts to stop the elections. Personally I'm quite sceptic, I think elections won't resolve the actual situation.
So you want to say that about 92 thousand people died and we haven't heard about any of them, no missing persons reports, no morgues?
Please, in the middle ages you couldn't make 90 thousand people go missing and not have reports filed and morgues accounting for the dead.
#26
Posted 25 January 2005 - 12:52 PM
And Spencer, what's the problem is his source is anti-war? Does it invalidates it? And if it does, how come it wouldn't invalidate your pro-war source?
The report in one of the news he linked where the guy talks about what happend inside Falluja during April 10 (2003 or 2004... not sure) sounds very real. The coalition army works expecting the worse and are very paranoid... afterall, you can never expect when the next enemy bomb will explode. So, it's possible that they shoot every ambulance because they think there is an injured enemy there.
Command & Conquer Mods, Mods Support, Public Researchs, Map Archives, Tutorials, Tools, A Friendly Community and much more. Check it out now!
#27
Posted 26 January 2005 - 11:03 AM
#29
Posted 27 January 2005 - 03:59 AM
Command & Conquer Mods, Mods Support, Public Researchs, Map Archives, Tutorials, Tools, A Friendly Community and much more. Check it out now!
#30
Posted 27 January 2005 - 01:46 PM
#31
Posted 27 January 2005 - 01:49 PM
Military positions were bombed to make sure Iraq couldn't mount another offensive operation. No civilian targets were hit.
intentionally. Just finishing off your sentence MSpencer
Edited by Allied General, 27 January 2005 - 01:49 PM.
#32
Posted 27 January 2005 - 02:03 PM
#33
Posted 27 January 2005 - 02:23 PM
#34
Posted 27 January 2005 - 06:49 PM
#35
Posted 27 January 2005 - 07:00 PM
Quotes
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
"In a man-to-man fight, the winner is he who has one more round in his magazine." -Erwin Rommel
Economic Left/Right: 10.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.56
#36
Posted 27 January 2005 - 07:04 PM
I did the math at one point. 1/7874th of all troops in Iraq were even around the area of that. You cannot generalize because it's not even in the thousandths place.
#37
Posted 27 January 2005 - 07:24 PM
And then they got a dictator who shot and gassed his own people, AND tried to invade two countries within 10 years! Do you just not get it?!
Opposed to a fraud who allows his lower classes to suffer, his schools to drop standards and his own peoples children to suffer (thats the future of your country), give tax cuts to himself and his fat cat friends, and also invade two countries within 3 years! One wasn't even a legal war! Do you not get that?
#38
Posted 28 January 2005 - 06:25 AM
no, but he did rape and kill women and force the husbands to watch as a punishmentYes spence but did sadamn make pictures of prisoners in sexual positions and take pictures of them with his thumbs up smiling for the camera?
Economic Left/Right: 6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.64
"Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility." -Sigmund Freud
"Laws: We know what they are, and what they are worth! They are spider webs for the rich and mighty, steel chains for the poor and weak, fishing nets in the hands of the government." -Pierre Joseph Proudhon
"You sleep safe in your beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do you harm." -George Orwell
#39
Posted 28 January 2005 - 08:22 AM
#40
Posted 28 January 2005 - 12:04 PM
Schooling is largely dependant on the state government, mainly the governor. State funds for education are divided up per state by each state government.his schools to drop standards and his own peoples children to suffer
And MY schooling is fine.
This is why I don't like Bush.give tax cuts to himself and his fat cat friends
You cannot define the legality of war. War is the most unpure thing to exist on our planet, and there is nothing such as a completely legal and justified war. There are wars for causes, like Afghanistan, and defensive wars, like World War I and World War II. We went into Iraq on the suspicion that Saddam Hussein was continually actively pursuing nuclear weapons. We don't know that he wasn't. It is not that hard to hide a crude nuclear weapon in a country the size of Iraq which can be recovered later, much like the SU-25s US forces found buried under the sand.also invade two countries within 3 years! One wasn't even a legal war!
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users