Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Niki

I can't speak for Gino, Frem or Kwicko, but I know this one thing about SignyM: on 9/11 her question wasn't 'why' but 'what took so long' ?

Millions of innocent people have died directly as a result of US military intervention and support. Many times more have died by US-backed economics.

The fact that a combined millions of East-Indians, Chinese and East Africans hated the British for imposing their empire on them doesn't make the US any less hated for doing the same in its own time, for its own ends, to its own areas of interest.

As for Canada, it has some small stain on it for its treatment of natives. OTOH they gave back something like 1/3 of the country to the Inuit and other native groups. Compare that to the miserable pittance called reservations the US has forced its natives to live on.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

It doesn't take violence; in our case, it could easily be economics.

---

Quote:

---

the places it had spread itself thin rebelled.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
The British Empire didn't die because Britain got bombed;

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
BTW, there is another aspect of the British empire which is still going on today and that is Northern Ireland. In the not to distant past the crown evicted the Irish from their lands and then 'gave' large landholdings to loyal British supporters as rewards. Both the takover and the rebellion were violent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
There was alot of violence involved in the dissolution of the British empire

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
1. That the people who were fighting Britain, had the means of attacking Britain itself... they would have

2. That these attacks would have accelerated that decline

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

That is a past still remembered.

Hey what can I say ... in the US political memory only lasts about 2 years. Time enough to do your damage and then buy yourself a new image for the next election. Unless you are from the south, in which case your memory might go back to the mid 1800's.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
There was alot of violence involved in the dissolution of the British empire

---

I said relatively, and considering contenders are places like France, it's fairly accurate. Certainly more accurate than your statement :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
1. That the people who were fighting Britain, had the means of attacking Britain itself... they would have

2. That these attacks would have accelerated that decline

---

Indeed, if only the IRA had had the means, say, to attack Britain itself. Of course they could never quite manage it because of lack of funding, probably because nations that are staunchly anti-terrorist, like say the US, would never send them bomb money.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
I wasn't referring to Ireland... different situation I think. Almost more of a internal matter than a foreign war that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

more Sudan, the Mahdi revolt, the Boer war, the Zulu wars, the Marahatta confederation in India

examples like that, maintaining forces that far away from home ( even though East Indian Company forces were largely Indian ) was insanely expensive

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
I am not wrong though to point out that the British settled in Northern Ireland by force.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
I wasn't referring to Ireland... different situation I think. Almost more of a internal matter than a foreign war that.

---

I know, I was taking a swipe at the Americans there.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

more Sudan, the Mahdi revolt, the Boer war, the Zulu wars, the Marahatta confederation in India

examples like that, maintaining forces that far away from home ( even though East Indian Company forces were largely Indian ) was insanely expensive

---

The East India Company was dissolved about a century before the dissolution of the British Empire though? Much of what you cite would seem to be part of the expansion, rather than dissolution of the British Empire.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

---

Quote:

---

"At any rate, Coon says I should hire your Colonel Hammer to clear undesirable elements off Tethys. I suppose you agree with that?"
She was not really hostile toward him, Danny decided. She was just very frustrated in general. Very possibly Marilee had watched his arrival through the window now behind her, and her subconscious preferred to over-compensate for the embarrassment she must feel.
Aloud Pritchard said, "Well, I might disagree on moral grounds if I thought it would work, ah, madam. But since I never have known it to work in circumstances like yours on Tethys, I'll pretend to be a practical man and disagree on practical terms instead."
The tall woman paused in mid-stride as her brain correlated the words her ears had heard a moment before. She looked at the man who lounged at ease, smiling at her. "Major—" she began in a tone more diffident than that of her angry assurance an instant previous.
"Please," said Danny Pritchard. "That was Alois' little joke, I'm sure, when he announced I was coming. Mister Pritchard. Or Danny, which I'd prefer. But I'm not a soldier anymore."
Marilee sat down with the abruptness of a gun returning to battery. She laughed as she looked out the window through which she could see nothing but sky from her present low angle. "Well," she said, "Danny, I suppose you'd better explain that. I hadn't expected to hear from a mercenary that force doesn't accomplish anything."
"Ex-mercenary," Pritchard corrected. The smile was back. "And force accomplishes a lot of things. They just aren't the ones you want here. Bring in the Slammers and we kick ass for as long as you pay us. Six months, a year. And we kick ass even if the other side brings in mercs of their own—which they'll do—but that's not a problem, not if you've got us." Unit pride lasted even after the unit's work became a matter of distaste. Pride beamed now from Danny Pritchard's face, and his hand caressed a tank that only his mind could see.
"So," the man went on. He got up without thinking about the action because he was focused on plans, on possibilities. "There's what? Three hundred thousand people on Tethys?"
Marilee's eyes narrowed. "On the Council Islands, about. There's a lot more in little holdings on the unclaimed islands, but I don't think anyone can be sure of numbers."
"So," Pritchard repeated. The word was his equivalent of the Enter key when his mind was computing possibilities. "You want to kill fifty kay? Fifty thousand people, let's remember they're people for the moment."
"I don't want to kill anybody!" the woman snapped. She swung abruptly to her feet again. Her boots rapped on the inlaid floor over which her visitor's heels had glided unheard. "I don't even want to kill Bev Dyson. I grew up with him, after all, I . . . maybe he did kill my husband. But I don't want to know that for sure. And I don't want him killed."
"You see," said Danny Pritchard, as if he had not heard his companion expose a part of herself that she had not known existed, "if we go in quick and dirty, the only way that has a prayer of working is if we get them all. If we get everybody who opposes you, everybody related to them, everybody who called them master—everybody."
"They aren't all dangerous!" Marilee shouted. She turned to the wall of trophies and went on in nearly as loud a voice. "They aren't any of them dangerous, except maybe a few. What are you talking about?" She spun back to Pritchard.
The ex-soldier nodded in agreement. "They're not dangerous now, but they will be after the killing starts. Believe me—" he raised a hand to forestall another protest— "I've seen it often enough. Not all of them, but one in ten, one in a hundred. One in a thousand's enough when he blasts your car down over the ocean a year from now. You'll see. It changes people, the killing does. Once it starts, there's no way to stop it but all the way to the end. If you figure to still live here on Tethys."
"M—Danny!" the woman said. "I told you, I don't want killing. Why do you keep saying that?"
"What do you think the Slammers do, milady?" asked Danny Pritchard. His grin was wide as a demon's, as cruel as the muzzle of the guns he remembered using so well. "Work magic? We kill, and we're good at it, bloody good. You call the Slammers in to solve your problems here and you'll be able to cover the Port with the corpses. I guarantee it. I've done it, milady. In my time."
He was still grinning. Marilee Slade gasped and turned away.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

How long was the British Empire in decline

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
The problem with the decedents of the British is that they have disproportionate economic and political power TODAY. And the separation of N Ireland from the rest is not an indigenous one but a result of the British colonizing an already-populated area.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

How long was the British Empire in decline

---

Real decline? Probably started in the early 20's when the economic effects of the sudden expansion of the Empire, combined with the cost of the First World War began to hit home.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Some of the books I have read put it earlier...

most around 1900, with the Boer war, the increase in influence of Germany and Turkey... The rise of other nations with large Navys... US, Japan, Germany, France...

They also suggest a period of stagnation 1860 or so on... post Kowloon.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Some of the books I have read put it earlier...

most around 1900, with the Boer war, the increase in influence of Germany and Turkey... The rise of other nations with large Navys... US, Japan, Germany, France...

They also suggest a period of stagnation 1860 or so on... post Kowloon.

---

Those weren't real periods of decline. That was more like what the US is experiencing now, as the rest of the world pulls out from under the cloak of the Second World War. Actual decline though wouldn't seem to be coming until after the First World War.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

---

Quote:

---

posted by SignyM-

ANTI- you can stop shoveling YOUR load of crap. I'm not buying it.

If you say that we're so "benevolant", then I ask you: Why did we do that?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by antimason:

Quote:

---

posted by SignyM-

ANTI- you can stop shoveling YOUR load of crap. I'm not buying it.

If you say that we're so "benevolant", then I ask you: Why did we do that?

---

im not making excuses.. i believe i meant relatively, but if i forgot to state that.. isnt it clear by now my view on all this? you should know my opinion by now, after all this time.. i gripe about our role constantly. my solution was to become more libertarian, less involved in peoples lives, no matter where in the world

i just dont believe America is the most evil of them all

i tend to believe the 100's of millions of deaths this century, that were a consequence of the various forms of collectivism, marxism et al- to be the real evil we confront. after all what is it but ideology that compells a nation to intervene(for better or worse)? i somehow doubt Chili or Iran, if placed in our position, would behave dramatically different. 'power corrupts..' no matter who you are! we're all human. if the Chinese was the world power, we'd probably have a global single child policy, censorship of expression, political assassinations.. the whole works.

why not work towards some positive policy changes, instead of just ripping AMerica to shreds every post? its just not really constructive

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
I just have to comment on the title "It’s over: MPs say the special relationship with US is dead".

Part of me wants to note that it was probably over between us after 1776 ...

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

And if WW2 had not of occurred and Nazi Germany was the world power

would you be making the argument that the Japanese would be worse...

---

Quote:

---

Madeline Albright

Mass Murder and War Criminal

do you let her slide because somebody else may have done worse...

---

Quote:

---

posted by Gino-

but we still cannot forget justice for crimes that have been committed is necessary before one can really move on. Without that how can we have trust and understanding.

Especially crimes of the magnitude we are discussing

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by antimason:

Quote:

---

posted by Gino-

but we still cannot forget justice for crimes that have been committed is necessary before one can really move on. Without that how can we have trust and understanding.

Especially crimes of the magnitude we are discussing

---

i agree, who doesnt want to see the guilty brought to justice. unfortantely when its government policy, the accountability gets diluted through the beauracracy. if the UN didnt exist, or the US wasnt a participant, its likely any unwarranted meddling wouldnt be so easily condoned. in your example with Albright, Clinton and the democrats didnt seem to regard what happened as evil or war crimes. to prosecute people for these things, we're going to have to expose the ideologies behind policies that promote coercion and intervention. thats my only point.. its a battle of ideas, hearts and minds more then anything.

---

Quote:

---

Experienced generals TOLD THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION THAT IT WOULD TAKE MANY MORE TROOPS TO SECURE THE COUNTRY.

---

Quote:

---

MAYBE because in Germany we specifically sought to rebuild to protect ourselves from an economically-driven repeat of the WWI reparations, but in IRAQ Richard Bremmer sought to spread Iraq's legs for corporate rape and make Iraq pay for it's own invasion? (Like what was done to Germany post WWI.)

---

Quote:

---

And you seem to think, naively as possible, that everything we do is for the best, that we're always for "freedom", despite mountains of evidence laid at your feet. The U.S. is ALWAYS out only for what's best for the U.S.; we don't give a fuck about the rest of the world, except as it impacts our business interests.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:

Quote:

---

And you seem to think, naively as possible, that everything we do is for the best, that we're always for "freedom", despite mountains of evidence laid at your feet. The U.S. is ALWAYS out only for what's best for the U.S.; we don't give a fuck about the rest of the world, except as it impacts our business interests.

---

But the ideas are not incompatible, sometimes U.S interest in foreign countries IS for stability, prosperity and freedom. Like Europe post ww2, and during the cold war. Whatever the motivations the positive benefit of U.S 'intervention' in these cases has been incalculable. Make sure you have that fact in your heads, lefties.

Heads should roll

---

Quote:

---

the NEGATIVE impact of U.S. intervention in just about anyplace south of the US-Mexico border has been just as incalculable.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kpo:

Quote:

---

Experienced generals TOLD THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION THAT IT WOULD TAKE MANY MORE TROOPS TO SECURE THE COUNTRY.

---

I think Bush is an idiot, you think he's a gleeful war criminal(?). Both explain the above, but my theory is somewhat less wild. But 'idiot' and 'psychotic war criminal' are not interchangeable just because they can have the same end result.

Quote:

---

MAYBE because in Germany we specifically sought to rebuild to protect ourselves from an economically-driven repeat of the WWI reparations, but in IRAQ Richard Bremmer sought to spread Iraq's legs for corporate rape and make Iraq pay for it's own invasion? (Like what was done to Germany post WWI.)

---

I don't like the WW1 comparison; there was no talk of 'punishing' Iraq for its actions, and no desire to cripple it's future power like Germany's. Are you saying the Iraq invasion was a kind of corporate imperialism? I'm ready to hear your 'capitalism's sinister role' argument.


Heads should roll

---