45 replies to this topic

[fae]

uh?  You mean the Middle East would be a stable haven of democracy without the U.S. intervention?  Sure if you think any of the tyrannical regimes would ever willingly give up power or stop refusing basic liberties to their citizens.  Saddam's rape and torture dungeons would totally be not there anymore if we didn't get rid of him!  His sons were psychopaths.

 

The Middle East continues to be a ridiculous hellhole of despair.  The Arab Spring didn't do anything long-term.  Yemen's gone to shit just this week.  Syria is a mess.  ISIS is terrible.  Boko Haram is terrorizing Africa by stealing and then marrying off very young girls whilst expanding its territory for an eventual caliphate.  Iran is getting ever closer to the nuke.  Lebanon continues to support Hezbollah.  al Qaeda is not on the run.

 

Terrorism isn't going away even as we leave.  Do you just expect it to go away once we're not there?  Of course not.  It was there long before we intervened and it will continue to be there long after we leave.  Until they're stopped of course.  But who will stop them, realistically, if America doesn't?  Nobody, really.

I'm not saying all would be well if America hadn't invaded Iraq but as you said nothing changed for the people there so I really don't understand why the Iraq war was necessary. The only thing that was accomplished is the increased hatred for the western world.

[Bowsette]

But who will stop them, realistically, if America doesn't?  Nobody, really.

Lets be honest though. America isn't doing all that well on the whole stopping terrorism thing. You destroyed what little stability Iraq had, murdered thousands upon thousands of Afghani civilians, etc.

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure the kill count for US friendly fire events is higher than actual terrorists the military has taken down.

[Calvary]

Give it 50 years and the Middle East as we know it simply won't exist. Iran will be there sure, Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, but anywhere north of the peninsula up to Turkey just won't exist. If we're lucky we'll get a moderate Muslim independent Kurdistan but that's if we're lucky.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

I've never seen such a combination of denial and sensationalist bollocks at the same time, how do you do it, what's your secret?

Sorry if the fact that Americans' oil interests not benefiting from the Iraq War is one you won't accept.

 

So many better criticisms of the Iraq War than that one, bro.

Lets be honest though. America isn't doing all that well on the whole stopping terrorism thing. You destroyed what little stability Iraq had, murdered thousands upon thousands of Afghani civilians, etc.

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure the kill count for US friendly fire events is higher than actual terrorists the military has taken down.

I blame the current Administration.

Give it 50 years and the Middle East as we know it simply won't exist. Iran will be there sure, Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi, but anywhere north of the peninsula up to Turkey just won't exist. If we're lucky we'll get a moderate Muslim independent Kurdistan but that's if we're lucky.

But will Israel?  That's the key question.  Will ISIS and Boko Haram still be kickin' around with their caliphates?

I'm not saying all would be well if America hadn't invaded Iraq but as you said nothing changed for the people there so I really don't understand why the Iraq war was necessary. The only thing that was accomplished is the increased hatred for the western world.

And? That hasn't changed with several of the countries we consider enemies for decades now.  Of course they hate us!

 

(Obama ran on healing the hatred/unease between our allies, which he's only managed to somehow make worse.  Britain and Israel don't seem to like us much anymore.)

[Calvary]

From a report commissioned by Dick Cheney in 2001.

 

"Iraq remains a destabilising influence to... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets. This would display his personal power, enhance his image as a pan-Arab leader... and pressure others for a lifting of economic sanctions against his regime. The United States should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments. The United States should then develop an integrated strategy with key allies in Europe and Asia, and with key countries in the Middle East, to restate goals with respect to Iraqi policy and to restore a cohesive coalition of key allies."

[Affray]

You mean the oil fields we secured and then handed right back to the Iraqis?  Those?

 

Because that's a lie that just won't die, apparently.

 

Or did you forget about the Oil for Food scandal that rocked the UN before the Iraq War?

 

Huh?  You mean the Middle East would be a stable haven of democracy without the U.S. intervention?  Sure if you think any of the tyrannical regimes would ever willingly give up power or stop refusing basic liberties to their citizens.  Saddam's rape and torture dungeons would totally be not there anymore if we didn't get rid of him!  His sons were psychopaths.

 

The Middle East continues to be a ridiculous hellhole of despair.  The Arab Spring didn't do anything long-term.  Yemen's gone to shit just this week.  Syria is a mess.  ISIS is terrible.  Boko Haram is terrorizing Africa by stealing and then marrying off very young girls whilst expanding its territory for an eventual caliphate.  Iran is getting ever closer to the nuke.  Lebanon continues to support Hezbollah.  al Qaeda is not on the run.

 

Terrorism isn't going away even as we leave.  Do you just expect it to go away once we're not there?  Of course not.  It was there long before we intervened and it will continue to be there long after we leave.  Until they're stopped of course.  But who will stop them, realistically, if America doesn't?  Nobody, really.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

From a report commissioned by Dick Cheney in 2001.

Noticed you didn't provide a link for that.  Also, the Iraq War started in 2003, so what was said before doesn't apply to what actually happened during the war.  And it should be noted Dick Cheney was the VP with little control over the Iraq War resolution, the war itself, or basically anything.  The VP has no real power.  Just ask Biden.

 

Just so we're clear on how facts work.

 

EDIT:  Googling the quote comes up with a bunch of links to disreputable and downright conspiratorial sites.

 

Affray, prove it then.  I'll be waiting.

[Affray]

Any time someone ends their little blurb with "But who will stop them, realistically, if America doesn't?  Nobody, really.", there is nothing more I can say to derail that argument that hasn't already been said.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

Any time someone ends their little blurb with "But who will stop them, realistically, if America doesn't?  Nobody, really.", there is nothing more I can say to derail that argument that hasn't already been said.

Tell me:  Has the UN been able to stop the advance of tyrannical regimes?  Ever?

 

Who stops bad people?  America does.  Who else does?  I can't really think of any examples post-WWII.

[Affray]

Dude, half of the people that the US stops from being assholes in other countries were put in positions of power by the US to begin with.

Canada works hand in hand with the US in a great many military situations, especially the ones where bad men are quietly and discreetly removed from the living world.

Only Canada doesn't make a big deal about it and act like a parade should be thrown, and we aren't the only country that throws in with the big bads of the world.

 

The US certainly throws it's weight around when people start dying en masse in other countries, and sometimes those who are responsible for those deaths even get what they have coming. But being the biggest bully on the block just means that you are exactly that, and bullies don't just attack those who deserve it.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

Dude, half of the people that the US stops from being assholes in other countries were put in positions of power by the US to begin with.

Canada works hand in hand with the US in a great many military situations, especially the ones where bad men are quietly and discreetly removed from the living world.

Only Canada doesn't make a big deal about it and act like a parade should be thrown, and we aren't the only country that throws in with the big bads of the world.

 

The US certainly throws it's weight around when people start dying en masse in other countries, and sometimes those who are responsible for those deaths even get what they have coming. But being the biggest bully on the block just means that you are exactly that, and bullies don't just attack those who deserve it.

We didn't put them into power.  We helped bring about the power vacuums that led to their rise, maybe.  But so did the fall of the Soviet Union.  And the fall of Hitler.  And the revolutionaries that fought against communism.

 

(Dude, you may not know it, but you're using arguments first cultivated by Noam Chomsky.  He's the seed from which a lot of anti-American moral relativism came from, at least the "intellectual" ammunition for it.  I basically became an expert in the history of Noam Chomsky because my best friend in college was a Noam Chomsky fanboy.  I had to learn a lot to counter his generally terrible arguments in favor of Noam Chomsky's worldview.)

 

Really, it's much more complicated than any of us really want to make it.

[Calvary]

Is anyone else just sitting here laughing at this point? If it wasn't so sad at the same time I'd be in tears.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

Is anyone else just sitting here laughing at this point? If it wasn't so sad at the same time I'd be in tears.

When you're the one losing an argument, such bravado is funny, Gol~. 

 

Because, honestly, by choosing not to engage, I win the argument.

[Calvary]

If you go into an argument with the purpose of 'winning', then it is you who has lost, mate.

I won't do myself the embarrassment of entertaining discussion with you, we're done.

[The Seldom Seen Kid]

Hehe I hate patriotism. So I'm not going to bother bringing to everyone's attention that the soldier man portrayed in the film was actually a bit of a lying weirdo as I'm sure you all know that. However what I do want to bring up is that there's a part in the film that's supposed to be really emotional where there's a baby in the scene. But the baby is a really obvious plastic toy baby and like oh man its just hilariously bad. Just a little something to cheer everyone up.

 

 

Oh P.S. BWS please just look, everyone disagrees with you, by telling everyone how oh so intelligent you are and by saying you've outright won the arguments you're having with them will come across as nothing but arrogant and isn't doing much to better your already poor reputation here. Everything you've commented on has literally turned into an argument. It's like you have a talent where everything you touch turns into poo. Please just relax, have some green tea, snort some cocaine, just chill.

[Affray]

Will, you very clearly do not know as much as you think you do about a great many things.

The American government directly and intentionally places people of their choosing in to positions of power (or maintains the integrity of people already in power) in a great many countries they have stakes in. A lot of them are even trained along side the US military, and funded by the military, and equipped by the military. They aren't accidents, they don't just pop in to the vacuum created by some freedom that the US is dealing out.

 

I noticed you neglected to even attempt to negate what I said in response to your "nobody stops bad people except America" statement.

 

Your arguments exist simply to exist, with no real reason to even be said other than to stroke your own ego and maybe hear yourself boast.

You seriously need to take a step back and really, really think about whether or not the things you "argue" about are even that important.

 

 

Because, honestly, by choosing not to engage, I win the argument.

Choosing not to engage in an argument is the exact opposite of winning an argument.

It is literally, by definition, not an argument any more.

It is just one guy making a point, and the other believing himself too intelligent to even bother with it.

Which is exactly how small minds operate.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

The American government directly and intentionally places people of their choosing in to positions of power (or maintains the integrity of people already in power) in a great many countries they have stakes in. A lot of them are even trained along side the US military, and funded by the military, and equipped by the military. They aren't accidents, they don't just pop in to the vacuum created by some freedom that the US is dealing out.

 

I noticed you neglected to even attempt to negate what I said in response to your "nobody stops bad people except America" statement.

Examples then.

 

Affray, explain who stopped bad people post-WWII. That was the dawning of America's geopolitical dominance.  The UN, designed as a way to help stop bad people, hasn't been very successful in doing so.

 

No other nation or group of nations seems to have a grasp on what to do about international terrorism. Hell, the current administration in my country is feckless on that topic.

 

The funny thing about "me not knowing as much as I think I do" is that I'm seemingly the only one in this discussion who's actually seen the movie.  Which hasn't stopped any of you from commenting and criticizing a movie without actually seeing it.  Just thought I'd point out the hypocrisy of that.

 

My whole jam is that I like being proven wrong.  It takes effort to do that. I want you to prove me wrong. Allow me to learn something.

 

(Just so you know, I assumed you weren't talking about the topic of "regime change," but something more nefarious than that.  Most of those were during the Cold War and were done to stop the spread of Soviet-backed communism.  Something y'all forget about the Cold War, as in the Soviets were aggressive in backing communist governments and rebels hoping to install a communist government.)

[Affray]

I have zero desire to go fishing around the internet for links to prove that what I am saying is accurate.

Quite honestly, you aren't worth the trouble.

It is damn near common knowledge (even for people not living in the US) that the US does exactly what I said.

 

Proving you wrong is definitely difficult, but not for the reason you think.

You think it is because you are a master debater (heh) who is filled to the brink with knowledge, when in reality it is because you are an insufferable know it all with a decent vocabulary and just enough dabbling knowledge to get by.

 

Take that as you will.

 

And no, I have not seen the movie nor will I ever.

It is about a man who established himself as a weiner, and I avoid patriotic American movies regardless of accuracy or quality.

That go-go Murika vibe always seeps through and ruins it for me.

I can't even watch documentaries that are made in America for the same reason.

[Big_Willie_Styles]

No, it's "conventional wisdom" among the academics and journalists like Noam Chomsky and Glenn Greenwald.

 

I like challenging conventional wisdom.  I Think Like A Freak.

 

(That's a book, for those unaware.)

 

And it's not a "ra ra ra" 'Murica movie.  It paints a complicated picture.

 

The trailer made war look like Hell.  You haven't even seen that apparently.

 

Because it took zero stance on the Iraq War, focusing instead on the psychological and physical toll it takes on soldiers, Chris Kyle specifically.

 

Your loss, then.

 

(When discussing the merits of a movie, it helps to have actually seen it.  Playing with a full deck as it were.)

[SushiKitten]

On a lighter note...