Counterglow Forums  

Go Back   Counterglow Forums > Site Issues > Archive > CounterPoint Archive

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19-04-2003, 08:18:22   #51
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
If that is correct, then my understanding is correct: The US is fully falling into the escalation trap.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:20:07   #52
notyoueither
a loyal subject
 
notyoueither's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: What was the subject?
You believe it is a trap. I don't. I regard it as the way out.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
This is bunny. He owns your soul!
notyoueither is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:20:29   #53
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
All we need to do is withdraw our support of the Saudi regime.

No more arms, no more bases, no more diplomacy.

They will fall from within, naturally and justly, as the result of their own actions.
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:27:31   #54
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Who would have imagined Iraq, today, 2 years ago?
A big faction among the Bushies made those noises from the start. But it was hard to take them seriously.

MM:

"No more arms, no more bases, no more diplomacy."

Withdrawal of US bases will stablise the regime. Arms - you're telling me the US weapons industry would miss on some good business. Diplomacy - how is that crucial for the regime?

"They will fall from within, naturally and justly, as the result of their own actions."

Now that's goddamn fucking brilliant, a radical islamist regime in Saudi Arabia.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:33:06   #55
notyoueither
a loyal subject
 
notyoueither's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: What was the subject?
That is not what will happen.

I doubt the Yanks will be content to wait for things to happen. I think they will push them.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
This is bunny. He owns your soul!
notyoueither is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:33:57   #56
LoD
The Human Banning Rod.
 
LoD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: No longer Freudtown
Quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither

Islamism wanted a war? OK. The Islamists and any who support them have got one. They sowed the wind. Now they reap the whirlwind.
Gas the Arabs, is that what you are saying?
__________________
Austrian english would be completely different. It sounds like a nasal record player on sedatives.
--Dyl
LoD is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:37:23   #57
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Yes it is. Follow, please.

It won't be bloodless coup, it will be a revolution, because the Wahabists want blood.

It will be a revolution in the biggest oil fields in the world, and, coincidentally, the holiest lands in Islam. Europe and Japan won't sit still for it, Islamic nations (especially Shi'ite ones) certainly won't. They could not afford to ignore it.

So...it will go to the UN Security Council, and an intervention will be called for (America won't even have to). Who will dare veto?

And who will be in the force to intervene? Who is always in the force to intervene? Not to mention, right next door.

edit: responding to Dyl. Fecking LOD.
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.


Last edited by The Mad Monk; 19-04-2003 at 08:47:23.
The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:49:37   #58
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Your views are really scary. That they are mainstream in the US confirms my view that we have to sever all institutional ties with Washington as soon as possible.

So MM, you want to instigate an islamist revolution in Saudi Arabia to have an excuse to occupy it? That is, excuse me, just insane.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:50:02   #59
notyoueither
a loyal subject
 
notyoueither's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: What was the subject?
Quote:
Originally posted by LoD
Gas the Arabs, is that what you are saying?
Nope. But any regimes that supported the perps of 9/11 are legitimate targets by the rules of war.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
This is bunny. He owns your soul!
notyoueither is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:52:40   #60
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Rules of war, hmm? Like which ones?
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:54:07   #61
LoD
The Human Banning Rod.
 
LoD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: No longer Freudtown
Quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Nope. But any regimes that supported the perps of 9/11 are legitimate targets by the rules of war.
We're off to invade Russia, yay!


Dyl: The following is a list of contemporary rules of war.
The List:
__________________
Austrian english would be completely different. It sounds like a nasal record player on sedatives.
--Dyl
LoD is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:56:08   #62
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Dyl, do you agree that the scenario can take place as I described?
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:56:14   #63
notyoueither
a loyal subject
 
notyoueither's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: What was the subject?
Dyl, MM is outlining one way the situation could develop. Not the only one.

One way or the other, though, Islamism will not be left alone to fester anymore. It will be confronted in any regime that wants to hitch their star to it. Wanna bet how fast it looses vouge when the consequences are known?
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
This is bunny. He owns your soul!
notyoueither is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:57:54   #64
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
"do you agree that the scenario can take place as I described?"

Very unlikely.

"Wanna bet how fast it looses vouge when the consequences are known?"

Holy fucking bullshit!!!
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 08:59:52   #65
notyoueither
a loyal subject
 
notyoueither's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: What was the subject?
Quote:
Originally posted by Dyl Ulenspiegel
Rules of war, hmm? Like which ones?
Like the one that if you sponsored, or harboured an attack, you are a belligerent.

You want to be neutral? You impound and detain belligerents. You don't shovel money to them.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
This is bunny. He owns your soul!
notyoueither is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 09:10:06   #66
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Dyl, what parts of the above scenario do you believe to be in error, and why?
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 09:23:36   #67
LoD
The Human Banning Rod.
 
LoD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: No longer Freudtown
Quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Like the one that if you sponsored, or harboured an attack, you are a belligerent.

You want to be neutral? You impound and detain belligerents. You don't shovel money to them.
Belligerence (sp.?) is a relative term, nye. In most of the Arabic world, for example, it is the US that is considered belligerent.
What were you saying about impounding and imprisonment again?
Neutrality is just that - being neutral to ANY side.
__________________
Austrian english would be completely different. It sounds like a nasal record player on sedatives.
--Dyl
LoD is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 09:35:26   #68
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Trading in arms with one party of a conflict makes you a legitimate target for the other party in that conflict. That has always been the case.
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 09:58:35   #69
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Of course, being a legitimate target (whether through supplying a belligerent, or harbouring belligerents, or attacking a 'friendly' nation, whatever) dosen't compel the other party to do anything about it -- they may not, if they fear the consequences.
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 21:00:39   #70
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
NYE:

"Like the one that if you sponsored, or harboured an attack, you are a belligerent."

Not every terrorist attack qualifies as a belligerent act. The tacit stance of the Saudis does not qualify as such, unless you think the US was a belligerent against the UK for much of the IRA's terror campaign.

"You want to be neutral? You impound and detain belligerents. You don't shovel money to them."

If it is an act of war, the actual duty is internment. But thre are only limited obligations to fight terrorism.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 19-04-2003, 21:07:18   #71
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
MM:

"Trading in arms with one party of a conflict makes you a legitimate target for the other party in that conflict. That has always been the case."

The rules on that have been in flux. Otherwise, the US had entered WWI in 1914, and WWII in 1939.

"It won't be bloodless coup, it will be a revolution, because the Wahabists want blood."

The house of Saud is Wahabite. I'm not sure what you mean by that.

"It will be a revolution in the biggest oil fields in the world, and, coincidentally, the holiest lands in Islam. Europe and Japan won't sit still for it, Islamic nations (especially Shi'ite ones) certainly won't. They could not afford to ignore it."

And everyone would curse Washington for stirring up that kind of shit. But I very much doubt the US can instigate such a development; the withdrawal of bases and a confrontational diplomatic stance will actually help the Sauds.

"So...it will go to the UN Security Council, and an intervention will be called for (America won't even have to). Who will dare veto?"

France, China, Russia and maybe the UK.

"And who will be in the force to intervene? Who is always in the force to intervene? Not to mention, right next door."

You really think that when Washington engineers a coup as a pretext for another war of aggression, everyone will say "great plan, we agree"?
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 07:04:20   #72
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
The House of Saud is not Wahabite. If you go by behavior, much of the House of Saud is barely Muslim. There is a difference between funding them and being them. bin Laden is trying to kill them, remember?

Quote:
A GROWING MOVEMENT
The Wahhabi movement flourishes in every Muslim country despite the fears of governments, and in some cases because of those fears. This has given suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida organization an international ideological and operational network.
In Lebanon, where factional politics flourish, the Wahhabi movement is estimated by internal security officials to be about 4,000 strong. The movement is far larger in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. It goes by many names: Ikhwan, Wahhabi, Salifiyya, Mowahabin and now, famously, Taliban. What all of them have in common is a militant view of Sunni Islam and financial support at the highest levels of the Saudi Arabian government. Over the past 10 years, Saudi Arabia, either directly or indirectly through non-governmental organizations, has financed all of the Wahhabi movements in the region, says one prominent Islamic scholar in Lebanon.
"This was really a strategic mistake", he says. "The Arab rulers, as well as the policy analysts, have really underestimated the [fundamentalist] regeneration in the region. I would expect a war of Wahhabism against the gulf countries, particularly Saudi rulers."
By funding the Wahhabi sect, the Saudi royal family purchased immunity for itself, but this now appears to be ending. As soon as the U.S. air strikes against Afghanistan began on Oct. 7, one of the most prominent Islamic scholars in the kingdom published a fatwah against the royal family, warning, "Whoever supports the infidel against Muslims is considered an infidel. It is a duty to wage jihad [holy war] on anyone who attacks Afghanistan."

Since then, other clerics inside and outside the country have added their voices, in effect ex-communicating Saudi Arabia's ruling family for aiding the U.S.-led attacks on Afghanistan, which is ruled by the Taliban and has been a refuge for bin Laden.
For their part, the United States and Britain, which saved the Saudi kingdom from almost certain conquest by Iraq in 1990-91, are furious at the emerging evidence that Saudi money bankrolled the killers of 6,000 or more Americans on Sept. 11.

A NEW INTERPRETATION
The militancy that the United States believes is behind the Sept. 11 bombings has been dubbed the New Wahhabism. But it is really only the latest manifestation of a centuries-old feud within Islam.
The Wahhabi movement began in 1740 on the Arabian Peninsula, where harsh and primitive conditions bred an unyielding and violent strain of Islam. When Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, the founder of Saudi Arabia and father of the current rulers, conquered the peninsula in the 1920s, he used the Wahhabis to drive out his Hashemite rivals, who now rule Jordan. The Wahhabis eventually turned on Abdul Aziz for not adhering to their fundamentalist view of Islam, and he killed or imprisoned most of their leadership. Now, bin Laden has remade the Wahhabi movement in his own image. First and foremost, bin Laden would like to see New Wahhabism overthrow the Saudi government, which he denounces for corruption and for allowing U.S. soldiers to be based on Saudi soil following the Persian Gulf War.
http://www.wahhabi.info/wahhabi01.html
http://www.msnbc.com/news/643005.asp#BODY

As I said, we won't have to engineer a coup; there will be no cursing at Washington for stirring up the shit, because we won't do it -- the Saudis have been doing a fine job of that themselves through their casual disregard of Islamic Law for themselves while giving it lip service for the masses. The hypocracy stinks, and they're smelling it clear to Egypt.

I like how you just assert that "France, China, Russia and maybe the UK" will just blithely veto any move to stabilize the region, considering the amount of oil at stake should the region go up like the tinderbox it is. Why would they veto?

But let's say they do. Or, perhaps, there is no revolution and Saudi Arabia 'peacefully' slides into a Fundamentalist, Wahabi, Sunni state. Consider:

- Sunni and Shi'ite Islamic sects do not consider each other to be 'true' Muslims, and this especially goes for their respective fundamentalist wings. The relationship is not far from the early Protestant - Roman Catholic one, and is likely more extreme. Some adherents I've read and spoken to insist that the other are not Muslim at all -- that's how they can say that Islam has no divisions with a straight face, they utterly deny that the other sect is anything other than a heresy that has no place.

- All Muslims must go on Haj, if at all possible, at some point in their life.

- Only Muslims are allowed to enter the holy city of Mecca.

- Whoever controls Saudi controls Mecca.

What happens when a fundamentalist Sunni cult, which denies that Shi'ites are even Muslim, gains control of the holiest city in Islam?
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.


Last edited by The Mad Monk; 20-04-2003 at 07:12:06.
The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:16:17   #73
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
1. Wahabism is not monolithic. It is best described as a purist movement, quite similar to the Puritans and other fundamentalist protestant cults - and just look at the US how many splinter groups they have created.

2. "In Lebanon.... to be about 4,000 strong." Bummer. 0.1 %. Btw, there are some funny anecdotes about the attempts to export Wahabism to Bosnia.

3. "the killers of 6,000 or more Americans on Sept. 11." - I suppose it's an older article. But for those who asked where I see the fantasizing-away of the 500 non-americans killed in the attack, voila.

4. "When Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, the founder of Saudi Arabia and father of the current rulers, conquered the peninsula in the 1920s, he used the Wahhabis to drive out his Hashemite rivals, who now rule Jordan. The Wahhabis eventually turned on Abdul Aziz for not adhering to their fundamentalist view of Islam"

Poppycock. The Sauds have been the champions of Wahabism. The Turks more or less controlled Nedjd at times, and the Sauds temporarily lost control in the late 19th century. Since about 1900 they controlled the central inner part of the arab peninsula. As in every fundamentalist movement, you have varying degrees of radicalism. Your article itself refers to Bin Laden's ideology as "New Wahhabism".

5. It is possible that the Saudi regime falls on its own. In that case, a military intervention would be madness. The Bush admin is already fighting malaria by enlarging the swamps, that would be the coronation of that "strategy".

"veto any move to stabilize the region" - occupation does not equal stabilization. Ask Israel.

6. "Sunni and Shi'ite Islamic sects do not consider each other to be 'true' Muslims, and this especially goes for their respective fundamentalist wings." - Most consider the other direction part of the Ummah, nonetheless. AFAIK the most disputed shiite faction are the Alawis in Syria, but that hasn't isolated Syria. There's also a difference between infidels and heretics, and the christian analogy is a bit faulty.

"What happens when a fundamentalist Sunni cult, which denies that Shi'ites are even Muslim, gains control of the holiest city in Islam?"

That they will want the Great infidel Satan to pave the way for them? Nope.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:20:41   #74
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
So Europe will stand by and let the Mideast be consumed in a Sunni-Shi'ite holy war for the control of Mecca?
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:22:51   #75
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
If it comes to that, I'd say that's the better of two horrible alternatives.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:25:07   #76
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Noted, but is it what they will do?
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:26:14   #77
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Describe the alternative.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:32:45   #78
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
That's just the point. Either a UN intervention, backed by both the Muslim and Non-Muslim worlds and enforced by a coalition take the Wahabists down quickly and finally, or we have something similar to the Iran-Iraq war, only involving the entire region and grinding on for years.
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:34:32   #79
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Actually, either way probably works for US interests in term of terrorism. They'll be focused on each other and leave us alone.
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 08:50:11   #80
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
So you suggest we side with Iran against radical Wahabites?

"Actually, either way probably works for US interests in term of terrorism. They'll be focused on each other and leave us alone."

Temporary at best. One way or another, the result will be one more radical islamist regime.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 11:22:32   #81
Shining1
Evil Fanboy
 
Shining1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: New Zealand
Take em out.

Before they make the nukes.
__________________
Welcome to Destiny!
Welcome to War!
Shining1 is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 12:04:09   #82
Lazarus and the Gimp
Howling at the moon
 
Lazarus and the Gimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The radioactive Somerset coast
One step at a time. Let's do something about Burma and the Congo first.
Lazarus and the Gimp is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 17:30:13   #83
The Mad Monk
The REAL Nick Fury!
 
The Mad Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarrier
Oddly enough, this is what I got on the second (and first working) link running a search on Burma and Congo:

http://www.mopic.gov.ps/bilatreal_relations/index.asp
__________________
At least he died doing what he loved. Insulting someone else's mother.

I will crush you. With happy little apples.

I am a happy little sig. virus. Please put me in your happy little sig. so I can continue to happily replicate. A little.

The Mad Monk is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 17:42:56   #84
Chairman Yang
Registered User
 
Chairman Yang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sweden
Hell, why not annex entire Africa, Asia and South America in one big pre-emptive strike.

Or just nuke them all to eliminate the threat of nuclear weapons.
Chairman Yang is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 18:24:43   #85
Lazarus and the Gimp
Howling at the moon
 
Lazarus and the Gimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The radioactive Somerset coast
Who mentioned annexation or nukes? Burma and the Congo are disaster zones. It takes a special kind of person to sit back in smug isolation while millions (yes- millions) die, and I'm not that sort of person.
Lazarus and the Gimp is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 23:01:33   #86
Chairman Yang
Registered User
 
Chairman Yang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sweden
The irony!
Chairman Yang is offline  
Old 20-04-2003, 23:23:33   #87
Sean
Rhubarb
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: God knows
What irony? Is it ironic because he’s British, or something? Or perhaps because he hasn’t taken the next balsa-wood canoe to the Bay of Bengal and sorted it all out by himself?
Sean is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 00:22:59   #88
Shining1
Evil Fanboy
 
Shining1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: New Zealand
The choices are:

* Sit back and let millions die to evil men, famine, and oppression, meanwhile generating training and recruitment grounds for the next wave of terrorists.

* Do something good.


I don't buy the 'invading generates new terrorists' arguement at all. People start to hate you when you have the power to help them and you DON'T do it.
__________________
Welcome to Destiny!
Welcome to War!
Shining1 is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 00:49:28   #89
Colon
prima!
 
Colon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Antwerpen
Quote:
Originally posted by Shining1

I don't buy the 'invading generates new terrorists' arguement at all. People start to hate you when you have the power to help them and you DON'T do it.
The corollary of that argument is that if you're hated you haven't helped. And a lot of Arab hate the US, right?
The flaw with what you're saying is that you actually have to be helping or perceived as doing such. That doesn't appear to be the case.
Colon is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 01:04:49   #90
Uncle Sam
member
 
Uncle Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally posted by Shining1
The choices are:

* Sit back and let millions die to evil men, famine, and oppression, meanwhile generating training and recruitment grounds for the next wave of terrorists.

* Do something good.


I don't buy the 'invading generates new terrorists' arguement at all. People start to hate you when you have the power to help them and you DON'T do it.

Agree 100%
__________________
I want to go home. I'm tired.
Uncle Sam is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 06:20:24   #91
Lazarus and the Gimp
Howling at the moon
 
Lazarus and the Gimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The radioactive Somerset coast
Let me give a salient example- Sierra Leone. A horrible civil war in a country threatening to become the next Rwanda. British troops went in unilaterally (it was not a UN action- I'm not sure if it was even discussed by the UN. Bloody typical), and within a couple of months they'd re-establish a relief infrastructure, got food and medical supplies in where they were needed, and given a few nutter militia groups a slap.

Loss of lives was less than 1000. Lives saved- innumerable. A textbook operation, and not a mention of fascist pig-dog imperialist annexation. That's how it's done.
Lazarus and the Gimp is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 07:43:28   #92
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
There are several SC resolutions on Sierra Leone, and I think one authorizing that intervention. Congo would be crying for such an intervention too, but it's too big for one country to handle, and the US won't do anything about it.

"I don't buy the 'invading generates new terrorists' arguement at all. People start to hate you when you have the power to help them and you DON'T do it."

Invading creates new terrorists elsewhere first. But it's the smaller problem. The real trouble starts when the Bush admin screws up its Iraqi occupation.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 09:11:29   #93
Shining1
Evil Fanboy
 
Shining1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: New Zealand
If my history is correct, Osama bin Laden started out as 'the Toyota Warrior' of Afghanistan. His reputation was based around fund raising and morale raising of resistance fighters amoungst the Afghanis fighting the soviets. Much of his hatred towards the U.S was generated by the U.S's half-hearted support of the Afghan resistance, which was cut off before the end of the war there.

This was then compounded further when the U.S walked into Iraq, told the Kurds and the Shiites (Sunni? Er, damn) to rise up against Saddam, which they did, only for the U.S to once again walk away before the job was completed. (This time, however, the bad guys REALLY stuck it to the fall guys).

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia hosts the U.S military while receing billions in oil money from the west, money that helps ensure the stability of the repressive, awful, undemocratic dictatorship there (que Sharia law rants etc). So Bin Laden sees Arabs in two countries supported and then abandoned by America, while his own country remains a slave to middle east fascism thanks to the support of western oil interests.

To paraphrase Chris Rock most foully, I'm not saying he should have blown up the World Trade Center, but I understand.


Ergo, overall I would say that the main reason the U.S is so massively unpopular in the middle east is because it too often promised false hope and then betrayed those who needed it. To walk away now would just be a continuation of that betrayal.

Cynicism about U.S interests in the middle east is VERY well founded. I'm just an incredibly naive schmuck who thinks that for once they might have to do what they've promised.

Why? Iraq = OIL. LOTS of OIL. So much motherfucking Oil that there's no chance they will allow a nasty awful dictator to take it away from them again. And even a Saudi-style regime is light years better that life under Saddam.
__________________
Welcome to Destiny!
Welcome to War!
Shining1 is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 09:32:38   #94
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Who knows what's going on in Bin Laden's head, but I doubt he'd be happy with the US if just their interventions were more committed.

"So much motherfucking Oil that there's no chance they will allow a nasty awful dictator to take it away from them again."

So we'll end up with a nasty awful dictator who is nice with the US. What are the goals if you don't believe that the washington rightwingers give a flying fuck about the wellbeing of a bunch of arabs?

Bases - Pentagon already has its hands out.
Strategic gain - occupation creates a bit of a dilemma for Syria and Iran, in part Saudi Arabia.
Oil - Garner will make sure of that.
Pork - Bechtel et al are already fat in business.

And what could thwart that rosy situation? A freely elected Iraqi government. So the best outcome would be a dictator less bad than Saddam. The worst outcome is the country decending into anarchy with the fundamentalists gaining.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 09:58:49   #95
Darkstar
will bitch for beer
 
Darkstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rocket City
Roland. It's funny, but we know what was going on in OBL's head. He told us. On video. Throughout the years.

The only thing worse then an infidel is an infidel that starts to assist you, and then betrays you. Or something like that...

As far as extremism goes... anytime you are fighting to survive, day by day (and worse), you get jealous of those that don't. Stay in that state long enough, and it turns to hate. And people will hate you much more for trying to help them, then if you stay aside, out of the way, out of sight, and therefore out of mind.

You will be more hated for trying to help, then for staying at home and letting people across your city burn to death. Fail, when trying to help, and some will hate you. Succeed, when trying to help, and still some will hate you. Fail and bail when you started out trying to help, and lots will hate you.

People Hate. That's just how it is. You meet enough people, some of those people are just going to hate you. No matter what. Interact with people, and the number of people that are going to hate you, will go up. Be a jerk, and that number goes up futher.

People Hate. If you cannot deal with that, you need to get some brain work done. It isn't reasonable to kill every human alive to stop the potentional of them hating you, and most people aren't interested in killing themself. So, time for some brain work. Maybe some nice drugs and drink as well...
__________________
> clue++;
> display clue;
-878923403
Darkstar is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 10:25:00   #96
Sean
Rhubarb
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: God knows
Quote:
Originally posted by Dyl Ulenspiegel
There are several SC resolutions on Sierra Leone, and I think one authorizing that intervention. Congo would be crying for such an intervention too, but it's too big for one country to handle, and the US won't do anything about it.
First part is correct, second part is false. The British troops were unauthorised by the UN and the head of the UN forces spoke out against the British troops. That’s not to say our actions there were entirely correct, but the UN troops were…not at their most effective.

Quote:
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Loss of lives was less than 1000. Lives saved- innumerable. A textbook operation, and not a mention of fascist pig-dog imperialist annexation. That's how it's done.
Yep, that worked a treat. Except that the country is hardly in good condition right now (2).
Sean is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 11:31:51   #97
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
DS:

"The only thing worse then an infidel is an infidel that starts to assist you, and then betrays you. Or something like that..."

Or an infidel that messes around in the fidels' business?

"People Hate. If you cannot deal with that, you need to get some brain work done."

No idea what you mean there. Hatred usually has some reason, no matter how unrational.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 11:36:45   #98
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Sean:

"The British troops were unauthorised by the UN and the head of the UN forces spoke out against the British troops"

On one particular operation. Anyway, did the UK intervene on behalf of the recognized government? That would not require UN authorization. I remember some UN authorization, but that may have been separate.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 13:32:57   #99
Sean
Rhubarb
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: God knows
. Yes, the head of the UN forces spoke out on one particular operation, but Kofi Annan was not talking about one particular operation.

Also, you said that there was an SC resolution authorizing that action, which I disputed. Just because something does not require UN authorization does not mean it has been given authorization, so why is that relevant?
Sean is offline  
Old 21-04-2003, 13:56:52   #100
Dyl Ulenspiegel
voorvechter van modernearchitectuur
 
Dyl Ulenspiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rotterdam
I said: "There are several SC resolutions on Sierra Leone, and I think one authorizing that intervention." If I'm not sure about something, I do not make definitive statements. So UK troops went in on behalf of the government, not the UN, and separately established the UN force.

And Annan did not oppose their involvement as such. "Britain passed the resolution establishing the force in Sierra Leone." - So the issue was about UK troops being under UN command or not. The UN wasn't doing nothing and wasn't in a conflict with the UK about intervening there, at least from what your article says.
__________________
Dyl Ulenspiegel is offline  
 
Forum Jump

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 19:21:41.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Counterglow 2001-2012. All rights reserved.