User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 182

  1. #71
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Viv View Post
    It depresses me when I see pictures of Georgian victims on NPR.

    My take on it? Since I don't trust the U.S. mainstream news media whatsoever, I watch/read news from different sources online and really try to see things on both perspectives. On top of that, I look at the historical relationships that happened/where the natural resources at, in order to get a really general view of what's really going on/why before I make a judgment.

    I feel really sorry for the civilians..
    Just be aware that any domestic Russian sources you may find are funded and controlled by the Kremlin. Bias is fine (assuming you get your news from several sources), but news without an independent media is not very useful.

  2. #72
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IlyaK1986 View Post
    This is a joke. The war on terror can very easily be won, and within the course of a few months, if even that long. It's just that no nation wants to be seen as the one that did the necessary to burn the evil ideology from this planet.

    Step 1: Stealth fighters.
    Step 2: WMDs
    Step 3: Erase known nations funding and harboring terrorists.
    Step 4: Let history be your judge.

    If Genghis Khan had command of the U.S. armed forces, terrorism would be a historical curiosity. Too bad no politician these days has his fortitude to do what needs to be done.

    Or does anybody remember the innocent people of the Kingdom of Tangut?

    If it can be won so easily then why wasn't it won?

    LOL I can't believe the brainwashing is this deep in some of you guys. Even after it is a known fact that terrorism was used as a pretext to exploit Iraq's oil supply and benefit a small faction close to Bush (i.e. Haliburton and the Texas oil men, etc) you're still buying into this shit. I am completely mesmorized at the level of idiocy. First, you can't have a war on terrorism because war is terrorism so you're dealing with a contradiction in terms. Dude, you are brainwashed. Perhaps you can't see it but when other non-Americans read what you said it is very evident that you're still brainwashed from the propaganda that was used to mobilize support back after 9/11. Please, move on and understand that the soldiers are not fighting for you or the 50 million without healthcare insurance. They are fighting for their government. They're fighting for Haliberton and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. And if you have studied even the slightest bit of history you'd know that wars like this can't be won (US in Vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan, Russian forces in Chechnya. And you cite WMD that is really bright - create a mushroom cloud for a few terrorists. Do you carpet bomb Columbine and make the whole community pay for a small number of people who commited terrorist acts? What about the Oklahoma terrorist bombing - do you make a mushroom cloud there because of this too? If you think the war on terrorism can be won via stealth fighters and WMD then were going to have to create mushroom clouds in virtually every state in the world - Israel, Ireland, the US. Do you get my point? It's stupid. And if you buy into the propaganda, well then it's pretty easy to infer what you are as well.

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Provoker View Post
    LOL I can't believe the brainwashing is this deep in some of you guys. Even after it is a known fact that terrorism was used as a pretext to exploit Iraq's oil supply and benefit a small faction close to Bush (i.e. Haliburton and the Texas oil men, etc) you're still buying into this shit. I am completely mesmorized at the level of idiocy. First, you can't have a war on terrorism because war is terrorism so you're dealing with a contradiction in terms. Dude, you are brainwashed. Perhaps you can't see it but when other non-Americans read what you said it is very evident that you're still brainwashed from the propaganda that was used to mobilize support back after 9/11. Please, move on and understand that the soldiers are not fighting for you or the 50 million without healthcare insurance. They are fighting for their government. They're fighting for Haliberton and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. And if you have studied even the slightest bit of history you'd know that wars like this can't be won (US in Vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan, Russian forces in Chechnya. And you cite WMD that is really bright - create a mushroom cloud for a few terrorists. Do you carpet bomb Columbine and make the whole community pay for a small number of people who commited terrorist acts? What about the Oklahoma terrorist bombing - do you make a mushroom cloud there because of this too? If you think the war on terrorism can be won via stealth fighters and WMD then were going to have to create mushroom clouds in virtually every state in the world - Israel, Ireland, the US. Do you get my point? It's stupid. And if you buy into the propaganda, well then it's pretty easy to infer what you are as well.
    Bunnies, not bombs, right? I'm not in the mood to get in some kind of Patriotic Rumble right now, but I do tend to disagree with most of that.

  4. #74
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Provoker View Post
    Did it ever occur to you that Russians don't like true liberal democracy? Not when compared to economic security and under Soviet rule they had a welfare state and benefits from cradle to grave. Moreover, something American policymakers called "reform" contributed to a depression in the 1990s far worse then the Great Depression and the impoverishment of the majority of the country as well as the creation of an oligarchic state. Add to this the bombing of parliament by Yeltsin the spread of HIV and AIDs and homelessness and Russians came to the conclusion that if this is democracy "we don't want it". In fact, Putin has brought Russia out of the humiliation and suffering it faced in the 1990s and restored it to respect and dignity. There is no need to get rid of Putin and his cronies - they have approval ratings that Western politicians can only dream of (to be sure they also have control over the main media outlets which helps). Survey polling suggests that Russians want a leader with a strong hand. They have a history that dates back to the tsarist empire where the leader provides and the people obey and people stay out of politics so long as the father protects the children. This has been the Russian tradition. You can't just install a democracy and liberal democracy is only one of many democracies. This was a horribly stupid decision, it would have been much more wise to pursure a substative democracy like Sweden or Canada which still has a strong welfare state as opposed to a liberal democracy. Moreover, there is a perception in Russia that American foreign policy - and democracy being one of its tools - is out to weaken Russia. Who are you to say what Russia should do? This has been the essence of American foreign policy. That is, this idea that we won the Cold War and you lost and now we're going to bully you and tell you how you should go about reform. Well, you can erect a building put the title parliament and go home and the next day it won't be there. The point is democracy =/ legitimacy. But equally important, authoritarianism doesn't equal non-legitimacy. People around the globe, especially American foreign policymakers ought to recognize this reality. Let Russians be Russians.

    To the OP. I think the Bush administration is pursuing an extremely unwise policy in this by opting to provide supplies to Georgians. The United States has no business intervening in Russia's near abroad. They've done enough damage by supporting the pseudo colour revolutions in former warsaw pact countries, expanding NATO bases eastward which now fully encircle Russia, and withdrawing from the ABM treaty. This is nothing new. Analysts have been saying for a long time now that under the surface relations between RUssia and the US are not warm and that we are in a neo-Cold War period. THe US has pursued an unwise policy toward Russia since the end of the Soviet Union which has resulted in a high level of anti-American sentiment and skepticism on behalf of the Russian people.
    But let me get back to why the US should not get involved. Russia has the largest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in the world. The bulk of their arms are on hair-trigger alert which means that within minutes of receiving instructions they can launch their warheads over the North Pole to Washington in about 25 minutes. In 2006, Putin moved his fleet of nuclear submarines to the Arctic where they are undetectable. After the US withdrawed from the ABM treaty Russia started building the Topol M which can penetrate any illusion of nuclear supremacy. This cannot be intercepted by any defense shield in the world because it goes out into space and comes in at a different trajectory. The point is, Russia has a litany of weaponry and is more than capable of making mushroom clouds if provoked. What we also know is that Putin is a tough guy. He's not a Krushchev softy who shows his hand or folds too easily. Any people who have opposed or criticized the Kremlin have been in prisoned, gone missing, or were assinated. Putin does not %^% around. People who have doubted this like Khordorkovsky, Berezovsky, and Gusinsky are now in jail or living in exile. If Bush gets involved, things could possibly escalate. If Bush is doing this to manufacture an enemy so the Republicans win the election with their stupid war mongering policy he may want to rethink this. Russia is no longer hurt and wounded and it emasses an extradinary amount of weaponry and energy that can be turned against the US. Russia also sells arms to Iran and China and if the US pushes Russia too hard on this one we are likely to see Russia move even further from the US and toward these other players which some of which are already hostile toward America.

    This is the situation in my judgement. Bush should simply say RUssia should ceasefire and leave it at that. Once it starts providing aid and supplies it is clearly taking a side and this could be end up escalating into a tragedy on a colossal scale.

    Sorry for such a long post.
    To oppress nations should be the order of events?

    Oppression does not bring about strife and conflict?
    Strife and conflict does not breed about a counter strife and a counter conflict?

    It is safe to be on the side of the oppressor?
    A sovereign country cannot be a neighbour to a super power?

    Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraina and Moldavia should succumb to a foreign rule?
    Eyes shut is the best policy, eh?

    I say the posts of mercury are a lot more realistic.

    Order is not made.
    It is born.

  5. #75
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraina and Moldavia should succumb to a foreign rule?
    Eyes shut is the best policy, eh?

    I say the posts of mercury are a lot more realistic.

    Order is not made.
    It is born.
    Provoker seems to care more about checking the power of the United States than he does about the rights and freedoms of other people. In his eyes, Russia's resurgence is a good thing for that reason, and by extension the insecurity and oppression of neighboring countries is an acceptable sacrifice. He supports Russia in its efforts to consolidate control over its "near abroad" because he's obsessed with his desire to see an end to a unipolar world dominated by a liberal (rather than social) democracy that he thinks will drag the world down into a massive race to the bottem. These fears led him to assume the worst behind recent American fuck-ups, gradually forming into his current prejiduce and paranoia. I would suggest he read up on the "democratic peace" phenomenon, but that would force him to associate the United States with countries like Sweden and Canada. Its pathetic, really.

  6. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Provoker View Post
    If it can be won so easily then why wasn't it won?

    LOL I can't believe the brainwashing is this deep in some of you guys. Even after it is a known fact that terrorism was used as a pretext to exploit Iraq's oil supply and benefit a small faction close to Bush (i.e. Haliburton and the Texas oil men, etc) you're still buying into this shit. I am completely mesmorized at the level of idiocy. First, you can't have a war on terrorism because war is terrorism so you're dealing with a contradiction in terms. Dude, you are brainwashed. Perhaps you can't see it but when other non-Americans read what you said it is very evident that you're still brainwashed from the propaganda that was used to mobilize support back after 9/11. Please, move on and understand that the soldiers are not fighting for you or the 50 million without healthcare insurance. They are fighting for their government. They're fighting for Haliberton and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. And if you have studied even the slightest bit of history you'd know that wars like this can't be won (US in Vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan, Russian forces in Chechnya. And you cite WMD that is really bright - create a mushroom cloud for a few terrorists. Do you carpet bomb Columbine and make the whole community pay for a small number of people who commited terrorist acts? What about the Oklahoma terrorist bombing - do you make a mushroom cloud there because of this too? If you think the war on terrorism can be won via stealth fighters and WMD then were going to have to create mushroom clouds in virtually every state in the world - Israel, Ireland, the US. Do you get my point? It's stupid. And if you buy into the propaganda, well then it's pretty easy to infer what you are as well.
    No, you create a mushroom cloud AWAY from your territories. You're an NT. I think you're smart enough to realize that.

    The small-time Iran-funded terrorists near Israel can be dealt with by enough high-powered explosives or just blockading Gaza away from the rest of the world. Cut off the electricity, the water, the transportation, and the weapons, and let the consequences run their course. You'd do away with a massive amount of enemies and potential enemies without firing a single shot.
    I am an ENTJ. I hate political correctness but love smart people ^_^

  7. #77
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IlyaK1986 View Post
    No, you create a mushroom cloud AWAY from your territories. You're an NT. I think you're smart enough to realize that.

    The small-time Iran-funded terrorists near Israel can be dealt with by enough high-powered explosives or just blockading Gaza away from the rest of the world. Cut off the electricity, the water, the transportation, and the weapons, and let the consequences run their course. You'd do away with a massive amount of enemies and potential enemies without firing a single shot.
    Even the case studies you use reflect your worldview in many ways. You're a product of US propaganda...there is far worse terrorism in Israel than Iran. What about the genocide in Israel (ethnic cleansing ring a bell?) this is state-sponsored terrorism.

    The mushroom cloud was to make a point. You think a war on terrorism can be won when all the evidence suggests that it has only led to the proliferation of more terrorist organizations so you're dead wrong on that one.

  8. #78
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Provoker seems to care more about checking the power of the United States than he does about the rights and freedoms of other people. In his eyes, Russia's resurgence is a good thing for that reason, and by extension the insecurity and oppression of neighboring countries is an acceptable sacrifice. He supports Russia in its efforts to consolidate control over its "near abroad" because he's obsessed with his desire to see an end to a unipolar world dominated by a liberal (rather than social) democracy that he thinks will drag the world down into a massive race to the bottem. These fears led him to assume the worst behind recent American fuck-ups, gradually forming into his current prejiduce and paranoia. I would suggest he read up on the "democratic peace" phenomenon, but that would force him to associate the United States with countries like Sweden and Canada. Its pathetic, really.
    Democratic peace theory is used as propaganda by the West to advance their agenda. The mere fact is that the "civilized West" (especially Europe) has fought the most barbaric wars of the 20th century.

    Second, don't lump the US with Sweden and Canada. Sweden and Canada have substative democracies while US has a "liberal" democracy. The US makes a mess in the middle east and countries like Canada and Sweden try to help others by cleaning, we must not forget that Bush doesn't engage in "nationa building". We also have healthcare systems that protect us from cradle to grave and we seek alternative sources of information (something many Americans do not do and have a narrow view of reality because of this).

    More importantly, don't talk about american democracy when 80 000 american soldiers have been stop-lossed.

    This is getting off track though. If you want, respond to some of my original posts regarding the topic of the thread. My essential stance is that it is unwise for the US to get involved in Russia's near abroad.

  9. #79
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Provoker is all over the place here. There isn't a rational argument, just anti-American jingoism.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  10. #80
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Provoker is all over the place here. There isn't a rational argument, just anti-American jingoism.
    My arguments are very rational. I've been studying international relations for years and I try to understand the ways Great powers work, how they mobilize support for their foreign policies, what are and are not effective diplomacy strategies. Unfortunately, I've used up several posts in this thread talking less about the main theme of the thread and more about the false assumptions some of the posters have made. When some of you guys are still posting that "the war on terrorism can be won" you assume a) that your government is actually trying to win the war on terrorism rather then using this as a pretext to continue its exploitation of oil b) you assume that a war on terrorism can be won when all the data indicates that it has only resulted in a proliferation of more terrorist organizations c) you assume that war is not terror when many intellectuals have argued that it's impossible to have a war on terrorism when war is terrorism (thus, a contradiction in terms).

    The point is that it's hard to get at the good stuff when you are still making countless false assumptions. And I think these false assumptions are because you're viewing everything through the State Department of Propaganda lens. If I can give one piece of advice, it is to not assign so much value to the political jargon of politicians and assign more value to the actual policies and what has worked throughout history. If the US learned anything from Vietnam it's that wars like this can't be won - guys like Kissinger know this deep down. But again, that Bush is even trying to win is something you assume. It's really all about oil. And as long as the war goes on the troops are there to secure Haliburton's assets and oil investments.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 370
    Last Post: 02-07-2016, 09:54 PM
  2. What is the craziest bit of technology you have read about in SF?
    By macjoven in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-14-2009, 08:15 PM
  3. What's the deal with Socionics?
    By alicia91 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-02-2008, 08:56 AM
  4. What is the best country to live in?
    By JAVO in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 04-28-2008, 05:44 AM
  5. What's the deal with Water Divining?
    By JivinJeffJones in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 01-09-2008, 01:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO