Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > Other Topics > Politics

Notices

Politics political discourse

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-27-2012, 08:33 PM   #106
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
YouR_DooM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: facepalming my way into history
Posts: 7,292
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by leoslayer View Post
they can suicide bomb all they want versus military targets. big diff when the whole plan is lets go to a market and just kill as many women and children as possible.
Let's bomb them before they bomb themselves!
YouR_DooM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 08:35 PM   #107
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
cres's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,340
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by leoslayer View Post
they can suicide bomb all they want versus military targets. big diff when the whole plan is lets go to a market and just kill as many women and children as possible.
you might want to join the 20th century, and then make the jump to the 21st. It was your military that decided in IndoChina that a body count was more important than a strategic victory. Its been a long time since 2 foes met on a field of battle, then settled the score. The game is about making the other side lose the will to continue, and if that means taking out collateral damage to make he invaders go home, then that is what's done.
cres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:42 PM   #108
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Misreading your post.
Posts: 8,997
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

I'd guess the chances a terrorist would be able to hijack a plane and successfully pilot it into any high value target, in the US at least, would be minuscule now.
Money2Burn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2012, 09:47 PM   #109
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Misreading your post.
Posts: 8,997
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Money2Burn View Post
I'd guess the chances a terrorist would be able to hijack a plane and successfully pilot it into any high value target, in the US at least, would be minuscule now.
With or without the on-going War on Terror, that is.
Money2Burn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 03:08 AM   #110
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,556
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cres View Post
The game is about making the other side lose the will to continue, and if that means taking out collateral damage to make he invaders go home, then that is what's done.
Interesting that you presume the extremist goal is for the US to leave despite the ultimate goal of 9/11 which clearly indicated they wanted the US to become more involved in the Middle East.

It always amazes me this detail is always forgotten when discussing terrorism and foreign policy. I understand many have a fundamental disagreement on US policy in regards to terrorism and US purported transgressions, but this whole idea that they just want us to leave them alone is false. They purposely attacked the US to provoke US military action in the Middle East. They sent a calling card and we responded to it. Yet, the only thing people seem to talk about is "they do not want us their" despite it being exactly what the terrorist wanted.

You do not have to believe me, look up "ultimate goal" and the "9/11 commission report."
FleeingFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 03:26 AM   #111
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,916
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Terrorism:

1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Given this definition, I'd say the US is definitely guilty of terrorism. Even if you can't get behind 1 or 3 completely, you can not say that the media and Bush administration did not go bonkers trying to scare the **** out of everyone for years after 9/11 to push their agenda.
CastlesMadeASand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 09:06 AM   #112
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
[Phill]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 47,661
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

That definition is so imprecise it is useless. You are labelling every news organisation terrorist for example.
[Phill] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 10:05 AM   #113
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
cres's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,340
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FleeingFish View Post
You do not have to believe me, look up "ultimate goal" and the "9/11 commission report."
my subscription to chain mail emails has expired, I suppose that's why I was so uninformed
cres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 10:57 AM   #114
veteran
 
DiegoArmando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chips Ahoy View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Let me know when Iran has killed 290 American civilians.
I wouldn't be so quick to conclude here. An apparently innocent man was convicted of the Lockerbie bombing in which 200 odd Americans were murdered.

There have been numerous mentions of an Iranian connection, and evidence exonerating Libya.

Quote:
3. The Iranian connection

CONTEXT: In the book’s preface, Megrahi says he does not want to “point the finger of blame at anyone else”, but much of the material drawn together will lead readers to believe that Iran funded the PFLP-GC [Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command] to carry out the bombing, in retaliation for the American warship the USS Vincennes shooting down an Iranian passenger jet and killing all 300 people on board in 1988. The US apparently mistook it for an F-14 fighter.

EXTRACT: “The most difficult witness [for the defence team] to get to was the PFLP-GC bomb-maker and double agent Marwen Khreesat. Asked about the aim of his October 1988 mission to West Germany, Khreesat was unambiguous: ‘It was made very clear to us by Ahmed Jibril [leader of the PFLPC-GC] that he wanted to blow up an aeroplane. This was the whole purpose of being there. Dalkamoni and I travelled to Frankfurt in order to go to the offices of Pan Am to get information about their flight schedules. We did this. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Jibril wanted a Pan Am flight out of Frankfurt blown up.’ Although Khreesat remained adamant that his bombs were not of the twin-speaker type used for the Lockerbie bomb, he revealed that Dalkamoni had at least one other radio cassette bomb. If Khreesat was right, here at last was confirmation that the PFLP-GC had at least one twin speaker device in West Germany.”

LUCY ADAMS VERDICT: The initial investigation into Lockerbie in 1989 all pointed towards the culpability of a German cell of the PFLP-GC. There is much within the book, including the above statement by bomb-maker Marwen Khreesat which appears to confirm this view. There are also notes showing that Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher blocked a public inquiry in the bombing and an explanation that politically it was not expedient to fall out with Iran – whose oil was relied upon – in the run-up to the Gulf War against Iraq. A great deal of the evidence incriminating the PFLPC-GC was not disclosed at the original trial or appeal. The heavily referenced allegations in the book make it seem more likely that they were behind the Lockerbie bombing than Libya. To have dismissed the evidence against them at the time raises questions about the role and potential bias of some of the security agencies involved, and the murkiness of the international politics which has always shrouded the Lockerbie case.
http://libya360.wordpress.com/2012/0...nerates-libya/
DiegoArmando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 12:05 PM   #115
banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,556
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cres View Post
my subscription to chain mail emails has expired, I suppose that's why I was so uninformed
Is the "chain mail" argument the current standby response to information in which opposes an one's opinion?

The third and “ultimate objective,” according to Al Adl, “was to prompt [the United States] to come out of its hole.” Al Adl claims that Al Qaeda wanted to provoke the United States into attacking areas of the Islamic world associated with the organization and its affiliates. In doing so, Al Adl claims, Al Qaeda hoped to make it easier to attack elements of U.S. power and to build its “credibility in front of [the Islamic] nation and the beleaguered people of the world.

Reflecting on the subsequent U.S. response to the attacks, Bin Laden and others have described the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq as new “crusades” and highlighted both the considerable economic impact of the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent costs of the U.S. military response as indications of Al Qaeda’s effectiveness. Al Adl and others have conceded that the attacks on New York and Washington were not totally successful, while arguing that the September 11 attack“was enough to prompt the Americans to carry out the anticipated response” —namely direct military action within the Islamic world.

Al Qaeda appears to have been less successful in using the purportedly hoped for U.S. military response to “help the [Islamic] nation to wake from its slumber,” as it claims to have planned. Both Bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri have criticized the population and governments of the Islamic world for failing to answer their calls to arms and for cooperating with the United States and its allies. These criticisms have been coupled with renewed calls for armed “resistance” against the United States and its allies from
Al Zawahiri, Al Adl, the late Al Zarqawi, and others


Once again, the constant proclamation that "they just want us to leave them alone" is contradicted by direct evidence suggesting terrorist wanted increased military involvement from the US in the Middle East.
FleeingFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 02:36 PM   #116
adept
 
Wardrums's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: behind the drums
Posts: 971
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by leoslayer View Post
well the question was interfere militarily. not invade. no i dont support going in and looting for goods. but for example if iran tried to close the straight like they threaten to then yes we need to bomb them and open it back up.

if a country tries to do something to tank our economy. then yes do what we have to to thwart it.
Then you should contact your local selected member of congress, and tell them you fully support military action against North Korea. NK of course is currently the largest country who produces counterfeit US currency.
Wardrums is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 08:18 PM   #117
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
cres's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,340
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FleeingFish View Post
Is the "chain mail" argument the current standby response to information in which opposes an one's opinion?


Once again, the constant proclamation that "they just want us to leave them alone" is contradicted by direct evidence suggesting terrorist wanted increased military involvement from the US in the Middle East.
While those conclusions could be reached, the underlying reason for their efforts was/is to not be under imperial control from a far distant government. Which if you are an American should resonate with you. Your ancestors were traitorous terrorists, who partook in a war to free yourselves from the reign of a distant monarchical society. The 'founders' as you have canonized them, were not interested in bringing a fight, just for a fight sake. They were intent on militarily achieving what negotiation could not deliver.

Look at the current state of Iraq, it was a difficult journey to actually get the US to leave. Then there is Western Europe, where that same military stance has plagued the landscape for 70 years. And why so, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, some 3 decades ago. Still no voluntary step to leave the scene.

Those brown people are not stupid. They study history, both current and distant. So while you may look at your citation as the only acceptable one, it would behove you to look at other cause & effect reasons. They want to fight us, its the only reason they would attract us is assuming the conclusion. The same was done with the yellowcake from Niger.
cres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 08:50 PM   #118
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
krmont22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 7,994
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Small group of random terrorists speaks for all sovereign countries in the middle east itt.
krmont22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 09:33 PM   #119
veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,906
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

sorry cres you are wrong with about 80% of what you said.
leoslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 09:57 PM   #120
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Misreading your post.
Posts: 8,997
Re: When should we interfere militarily in other countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by leoslayer View Post
sorry cres you are wrong with about 80% of what you said.
Top notch refutation!
Money2Burn is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive