South Ossetia: Defense against ethnic cleansing, or invasion? (Turns out, Georgia fired missiles first. it was self defense)

POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Sunday, August 23, 2026 15:28
VIEWED: 18595
PAGE 2 of 3

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 5:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
This is where you lose me: explain to me please how a half million Iraqi civies dead to topple Saddam's regime is a good trade off...I will paint you and others as indifferent to human life if you can't offer anything better than 'he would have become the new Hitler' or any of that nonsense...see, decisions about the economy, education, infrastructure all pale next to military decisions- if you're going to cause deaths, it HAS to be a GOOD REASON, not merely a differing 'belief'.
To send peeps to their next existence because yeah, well, everyone was SAYING he had WMD, I swear... just ain't good enough, by any reasonable standard.
Death is kinda final, see, so it provokes a stronger reaction than closing a school or something.

Struggling Chrisisall

The US killed far more people expediting World War II. (And half a million is a bullshit number, but that's neither here nor there.)

Arguments for and against the war have been presented on this board. I can’t believe that you aren’t away of all of them. You simple choose to accept superficially simple argument and hate those who don't, in order to protect yourself from the ambiguity of war. Such a way of thinking is nothing new - it has been going on for centuries and ironically is often the reason for sociopolitical divisions that often lead to war.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Arguments for and against the war have been presented on this board. I can’t believe that you aren’t away of all of them.

I'm aware of them, I just don't buy into all of them. You yourself have presented the best arguments for slamming Iraq (IMO), but they still seem somewhat sketchy and even apolgetic to me.
From what I knew back then, I didn't buy the WMD thing, I didn't want to expand into Iraq, I wouldn't have used 9-11 to push the Patriot act, and all has unfolded as I have foreseen (unfortunately).

Oh, and I was cavalier with that number, it's more like 100,000- a tenth of a million, not a half. My bad.

Corrected Chrisisall

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:34 PM

Quote:
This is my point. This is the way you justify, not agreeing with me

I don't need to "justify" not agreeing with you. I just don't, isall.

Quote:
by painting me as uncaring of human life.

Well, for someone who claims to care about human life you find a lot of acceptable reasons to kill. So I have to wonder how much do you care about human life? How much is it worth to you, and what are you willing to exchange it for, exactly? For example, do you believe in the death penalty?

ETA
AFA reasons for or against war: Although you acknowledge that projecting the possible consequences of going to war v not going to war is fraught with uncertainty, I have yet to read an acknowledgement from you that ANY of our "interventions" was a mistake, no matter how many lives were lost or how unclear the goal. (Vietnam comes to mind, but I could also point to most of South and Central America, large parts of the ME, Phillipines, and Indonesia.) To you, it's all good. Or if not good, it's **gets out the Magic Eightball** hazy at best. So are you saying that our military policy has always been correct, that we have never made a mistake and killed lots of people for no good reason?
---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
This is my point. This is the way you justify, not agreeing with me
I don't need to "justify" not agreeing with you. I just don't, isall.

That’s true. You don’t, but you still do. That’s why there‘s this:

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, for someone who claims to care about human life you find a lot of acceptable reasons to kill. So I have to wonder, exactly how much do you care about human life? How much is it worth to you, and what are you willing to exchange it for?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Arguments for and against the war have been presented on this board. I can’t believe that you aren’t away of all of them.
I'm aware of them, I just don't buy into all of them. You yourself have presented the best arguments for slamming Iraq (IMO), but they still seem somewhat sketchy and even apolgetic to me.
From what I knew back then, I didn't buy the WMD thing, I didn't want to expand into Iraq, I wouldn't have used 9-11 to push the Patriot act, and all has unfolded as I have foreseen (unfortunately).

I don’t fault you for disagreeing with the Iraq war. I have said many times that there are lots of good reasons not to support the Iraq war. I fault you for using support for the war as a justification to demonize as murderers those that don’t agree with you.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:47 PM

Quote:
That’s true. You don’t, but you still do. That’s why there‘s this

I am merely trying to do something that you claim I'm not doing: I'm trying to understand you. But when I take an idea of yours for a test drive I ram right up against another idea of yours. You value human life. But, not. Or, sometimes, as long as it doesn't conflict with some other values. Which is taking an idea to an extreme to justify violence.

My God, man! How do you even think{???

*grabs head*
---------------------------------
dizzyisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
That’s true. You don’t, but you still do. That’s why there‘s this
I am merely trying to do something that you claim I'm not doing: I'm trying to understand you. But when I take an idea of yours for a test drive I ram right up against another idea of yours.

That‘s some dishonest crap. I have never put forth the idea that I am uncaring of human life. You aren’t trying to understand me or take any opinion of mine for “test drive.” You are imposing upon me an opinion designed to demonize me.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:54 PM

Quote:
uncaring of human life

Hey, to me if you're caring of human life you will take care of it. It's not how you feel, it's what you do that counts. So, what have you done that shows that you care for human life?

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
uncaring of human life
Hey, to me if you're caring of human life you will take care of it. It's not how you feel, it's what you do that counts. So, what have you done that shows that you care for human life?

What have you done?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SWISH

Sunday, August 17, 2008 6:57 PM

Wwhere did this article come from, Participant? Because it's really atrocious. Just wrong. Examples:

They essentially invaded South Ossetia and installed a rather brutal military government.Hardly. There were clashes in the early 90s that hurt both sides, and neither side was blameless, but since then the Georgians have stayed out. Even though they didn't want to.

It's true they won't give Ossetia independence (which I think they should), but the Georgian government and military have had no authority and little presence within Ossetia for the past decade and a half. Ossetia is like the Wild West, Georgia claims to own it, wants to own it, but in reality they have no rule there.

It should also be understood that contrary to the 30 years old CIA report that is being circulated, Georgia is now over 60% Moslem, with Moslems controlling the government, and South Ossetia - which is surrounded on three sides by Georgia - is over 80% Orthodox Christian.Nope. Not even close. Has this writer actually been to Georgia? I have. More than once. It's almost entirely Orthodox Christian. Every little village has at least one Christian church, sometimes more. There are a few Muslims in Georgia, but not many at all.

I guess the easiest way to villify a nation these days is to call it Muslim, hmm? Might want to do some research first, or you just sound like an idiot.

Comes last Thursday and the Georgians attack the Russians in South Ossetia. Once again, they are trying to isolate and grab those two oil terminals.There are no oil terminals in Ossetia. The idea is proposterous - the Georgian government can't carry on any kind of engineering project is the area, because they can't even enter it. The oil and gas pipelines that run from Baku to the Black Sea pass through the southern part of Georgia, just south of Borjomi. This is nowhere near Ossetia.

BTW, you'll note that the Russian troops didn't stop at securing Ossetia. They passed south into Georgian territory, to Gori, and from there into the Borjomi gorge. Gori and Borjomi are Georgian cities, through and through. The people there aren't part of Ossetia and don't want to be. This is the root of the whole "over-reaching" charge.

The Russians come in to evacuate the Russian wounded and put fresh troops in place to keep the Georgians and South Ossetians from tearing up Russian cities and killing more Russian civilians in their own country.Again, ridiculous. Fighting between the small Georgian military and the much smaller Ossetia militia - if they even have such a thing in any organized way - is hardly big enough to "spill over" into Russia. Ossetia lies in the Greater Caucasus, a mountain range silmilar to the Alps or the Rockies, and it isn't densely populated at all. This whole idea of Russian cities getting torn up in the fray is pure fabrication.

The Russians tried to send in relief supplies (for all parties) and the Georgians tried to sink the unarmed, civilian transport ship.OK, now we're getting laughable. Transport ship? In the greater Caucasus? And what body of water was it sailing on?

Perhaps the writer is referring to the blockade the Russians set up in the Black Sea. That is no where near Ossetia.

Maps. They're not hard to find.

Because there is strong reason to believe that the US has been aiding the Georgians in the fight (just over 1,500 "advisors" on the ground from "Blackwater" that are demonstrable, and massive shipments of US arms and ammunition for the past 18 months)And what reasons are these? Any evidence at all? Where would all these US troops be materializing out of? Don't you think the press in the states and in Georgia might have noticed?

Still the Georgians have not completely ceased their offensive. They recently began shelling a Russian column that was withdrawing from South Ossetia along the only serviceable road in the region. They waited until the column was dead in the middle of the town of Gori before opening fire.Again the writer shows a complete lack of knowledge

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:03 PM

Quote:
What have you done?

I asked you first. I'll answer when you do.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
What have you done?
I asked you first. I'll answer when you do.

Why should I justify to you that I'm not a callous son of a bitch, when I've given you no reason to think that? Why should I validate your closed minded attitude towards other opinions? If you want to hate people because they don't share your opinions, then be my guest, but don't expect them to participate in it.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FREMDFIRMA

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:12 PM

Quote:
The question is: Now what?

How bout we stay the hell out of it and learn the merits of leaving well the hell enough alone unless it's actually our problem for once ?

Quote:
Let me know when you’re ready to have a discussion about Bush that doesn’t include equating him to Darth Vader, then we’ll find out.

Oh please, Bush couldn't shine Vader's boots with a manual and a dremel buffer...

Besides, Vader rewarded failure with a crushed larynx instead of "heckuva job", didn't he ?

We'd be knee deep in corpses if Shrub could even hold a penlight, much less a candle, to Vader.

Quote:
My God, man! How do you even think{???

It's called Doublethink, Neocon shills are as a whole quite good at it, because there's no actual coherent thought to get in the way, just a big wad of emotions, primarily fear, and automatic reflex when the right buttons are pushed.

Look at how easily PN drives Rap straight into a flying, foaming rage, for example, you GOTTA know by now he's doin that on purpose just to watch Rap flip out.

Once you know where the buttons are, whole masses of political folk become all too easy to manipulate - how else do you think I pull off some of the stuff I do ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by swish:
Wwhere did this article come from, Participant? Because it's really atrocious. Just wrong. Examples:

Interesting points. Demonstrating once again that blogs aren’t known for their accuracy.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:13 PM

Quote:
Why should I justify to you that I'm not a callous son of a bitch, when I've given you no reason to think that?

Just because you're for the death penalty and haven't met a war you didn't agree with and believe in bullying?

Hmm... yes, I see that I would have no reason to think you're callous.

How silly of me!!!!

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Why should I justify to you that I'm not a callous son of a bitch, when I've given you no reason to think that?
Just because you're for the death penalty and haven't met a war you didn't agree with and believe in bullying?

Hmm... yes, I see that I would have no reason to think you're callous.

How silly of me!!!!

Pretty silly, considering how wrong you are on all the points you attribute to me.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:20 PM

Well Finn, I now know that you lie.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Well Finn, I now know that you lie.

Awww I'm struck!!! NOW you think I'm a liar?!! After all this time of you treating me like a murderer, I can't see how you could possibly think I would care whether you think I'm a liar or not.

You went for the big hate too earlier. Once you tell someone you think they are callous towards human life - there really isn't much more you can say to them that will phase them.

Would you like to tell me that I molest children or talk at the theater?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Would you like to tell me that I molest children or talk at the theater?

LOL....we'd never accuse you of talkin' at the theater...
*BAH-DUM-BUM*

I don't hate you Finn, I just trying to force you into a position where you'll make sense to me of your *seemingly* contradictory ideas of acceptable human loss...I could say that 5% of aborted pre-human cell clusters would grow up to be criminals and/or killers, so why defend that which you have no idea of the outcome of? (wow what a poorly constructed sentence...

)
I just posit that to show how any loss of life can be twisted to be acceptable.
To give credit for having wisdom that surpasses that of you or I to government lackeys of mega corporations seem just a little too self-serving- you don't have the weight of conscious on you then, content that they are making fine decisions that we, the unenlightened masses, are incapable of.

In the end, I KNOW you care, what I really question the decision to trust in THEIR decisions.

Hope I'm understandable hereisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 8:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Would you like to tell me that I molest children or talk at the theater?

LOL....we'd never accuse you of talkin' at the theater...
*BAH-DUM-BUM*

That’s good. ‘Cause them’s fighting words.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
I don't hate you Finn, I just trying to force you into a position where you'll make sense to me of your *seemingly* contradictory ideas of acceptable human loss...I could say that 5% of aborted pre-human cell clusters would grow up to be criminals and/or killers, so why defend that which you have no idea of the outcome of? (wow what a poorly constructed sentence...)
I just posit that to show how any loss of life can be twisted to be acceptable.
To give credit for having wisdom that surpasses that of you or I to government lackeys of mega corporations seem just a little too self-serving- you don't have the weight of conscious on you then, content that they are making fine decisions that we, the unenlightened masses, are incapable of.

In the end, I KNOW you care, what I really question the decision to trust in THEIR decisions.

Hope I'm understandable hereisall

Consider this: How many innocent people died directly because of Saddam Hussein’s brutal treatment of the Iraqi people? How many people died in the wars of expansion that he fought? To punish Hussein the international community sanctioned his regime, yet this resulted in even more dieing because Hussein used these sanctions to punish his own country just to defy the international community. Why don’t I accuse you of being callous of human life because you didn’t want to remove Hussein? And it’s not because I think leaving him in power would have resulted in fewer death - I actually believe the war may very likely save lives. In fact over a 10 year period 1.2 to 1.5 million people died in Iraq due to sanctions according to the UN (or Hussein’s mistreatment of those sanctions.) That’s 0.6 to 0.75 million in 5 years - the same time we’ve been in Iraq, during which time far fewer then that have died. So we already have a net lives saved. You see, I can paint you as a son of a bitch for being against the war. So why do you think I don’t accuse you of being callous of human life because you don’t support the war?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Sunday, August 17, 2008 8:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I actually believe the war may very likely save lives. In fact over a 10 year period 1.2 to 1.5 million people died in Iraq due to sanctions according to the UN (or Hussein’s mistreatment of those sanctions.) That’s 0.6 to 0.75 million in 5 years - the same time we’ve been in Iraq, during which time far fewer then that have died. So we already have a net lives saved.

Now I think I'm closer to fully understanding your reasoning...but we didn't go in there to free anyone, we went in because of his world-threatening WMD...the mission statement morphed, I guess...

Quote:
You see, I can paint you as a son of a bitch for being against the war. So why do you think I don’t accuse you of being callous of human life because you don’t support the war?

Umm..because it's an untenable
position?

Or 'cause you're being civil, more likely.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/24/earlyshow/main1649689.shtml

This 2006 article shows both sides of it, I think. I just don't believe an invasion was the way.

BTW, thanks for hashing this out, I appreciate it.

Chrisisall

SIGNYM

Sunday, August 17, 2008 8:56 PM

Quote:
I actually believe the war may very likely save lives. In fact over a 10 year period 1.2 to 1.5 million people died in Iraq due to sanctions according to the UN (or Hussein’s mistreatment of those sanctions.) That’s 0.6 to 0.75 million in 5 years - the same time we’ve been in Iraq, during which time far fewer then that have died. So we already have a net lives saved.

Yep, you always got a good reason for killing. Except...if we had let UNMOVIC do their job, sanctions would have been lifted. It was in the works. So that reasoning falls down.

Magic Eightball says Try again.

Mmmm.... BTW that special hell... it's warmin' up fer ya!

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

KWICKO

Monday, August 18, 2008 4:09 AM

Quote:
Well this is nothing new. The Anti-War Philosophy has always been one that is prone to hateful fanaticism.

I think the exact same thing could be said of the Anti-Choice Philosophy.

[quote[This is the reason why hippies spat in the face of soldiers coming home from Vietnam.

And the same can be said of the reason why right-wing nutjobs set off bombs at women's health clinics.

Quote:
You don’t agree with the Iraq War, which is a perfectly reasonable position to take, but then you take people that you think feel that the Iraq War was necessary and you paint them as feeling that way to satisfy from need for killing or uncaring of human life, because you don’t want to accept their point of view, which is completely unreasonable.

You do agree with the Iraq War, which is a perfectly... well, I find it perplexing, but to each his own... position to take, but then you take people that you think feel that the war was unnecessary and you paint them as un-American, unpatriotic, and feeling that way to satisfy the need to justify the killing, because you don't want to accept their point of view, which is completely unreasonable.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, August 18, 2008 4:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Now I think I'm closer to fully understanding your reasoning...but we didn't go in there to free anyone, we went in because of his world-threatening WMD...the mission statement morphed, I guess...

The reasons why we went into Iraq had more to do with Hussein pissing off the West then anything to do with saving Iraqis. Nonetheless, based on the track record of the last twelve years we did end up saving lives. Now no one can know what might have been, but no reasonable rational person can accuse me of being callous towards human life once they understand my position, whether they agree with it or not. Some people, like Sigynm, however aren’t interested in what I think, only in hating me because I don’t think what they think. I know that you prefer Signym’s point of view to mine and that you probably don’t agree with me. I have no problem with that, but I ask that you don’t take Sigynm hatred of others for their opinions along with her point of view.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
This 2006 article shows both sides of it, I think. I just don't believe an invasion was the way.

There’s no doubt that invasion was the worst possible option, but every other option required faith in the system, which we didn’t have. We couldn’t trust weapon’s inspectors, because they had been lead around by Hussein too many times. We couldn’t trust the UN because the UNSC had been bought by Hussein. There were options that theoretically were in place to deal with rogue nations like the Ba’ath regime, but we pissed around with our fingers our asses for 10 years and allowed a ruthless dictator to control the process, until we would have to have been stupid to have had any faith at all in the system. Hopefully we won’t make that mistake again, because we’ve seen where it leads.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You do agree with the Iraq War, which is a perfectly... well, I find it perplexing, but to each his own... position to take, but then you take people that you think feel that the war was unnecessary and you paint them as un-American, unpatriotic, and feeling that way to satisfy the need to justify the killing, because you don't want to accept their point of view, which is completely unreasonable.

I have never done that. That’s your own imagination, so don’t stick that on me.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, August 18, 2008 10:25 AM

Bullshit.

CITIZEN

Monday, August 18, 2008 11:54 AM

I think it's pretty clear what has happened in Georgia, it's what the defence community was talking about some time ago during the initial NATO bid. Georgia isn't contiguous with either the EU or the NATO allies, and it's not even in Europe, there's no reason within the mandate of either NATO or the EU for Georgia to become a member. The reasons it's desired are clear though. Georgia, stupidly, chose to thumb it's nose at Russia, by joining it's classical ex-soviet rivals, rather than playing both off against each other which would have been the best course of action, Georgia picked sides. NATO on the other hand, has never stopped fighting the cold war. Russia did, actually, but NATO did not. Georgia would be the latest ex-Soviet state to join the encircling NATO forces, which is driven more by a desire to humiliate Russia, show it who won, than any firm military requirement.

Yes, Russia is returning to authoritarianism slowly but surely under Putin. But don't forget why Putin is in and holds power, it's because of the upsurge in Russian nationalism at the grass roots, and that is being driven by us, NATO and the western allies. We're humiliating Russia at every turn, hemming it in and encircling it with a military cordon. What the fuck did people expect to happen?

It's clear what's happened. Russia wanted to punish Georgia for attempting to join it's political enemies, and it's been planning this all for sometime, and using the breakaway regions as pawns, as it has done since Georgia became independent in the early 90's. South Ossetian insurgency has increased, undoubtedly with Russian backing. Georgian troops entered South Ossetia, a perfectly legal thing to do, given that South Ossetia is Georgian territory, and claims of genocide appear to have more truth to them in respect to South Ossetian's against Georgians than vice-versa. Russia played a game of chess, and Saakashvili fell into their trap. Russia launched its forces, which were clearly in place and prepared ahead of time, to invade a sovereign country over a purely internal matter.

But, it's no more or less than what the US has been doing for over a hundred years in south America, or other Western Nations for that matter. There's parallels with a number of conflicts, indeed Russia's reasons for entering Georgian territory, are identical to those given by the UN and NATO over operations in Bosnia. Also, George Bush denouncing another power over violating a nations sovereignty is so laughable, I find it incredible he managed to keep a straight face. Russia has a more credible claim to legitimate operations within Georgian territory, than the US does in Iraq. For those who see, as I do, Russia's excuses for it's invasion of Georgia as legitimate as little more than flaky rationalisations and propaganda, remember that to them our excuses for Iraq are just as obvious. When all's said and done, Russia thought it could get away with it's invasion, because we got away with ours in 2003.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Monday, August 18, 2008 2:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
George Bush denouncing another power over violating a nations sovereignty is so laughable, I find it incredible he managed to keep a straight face. Russia has a more credible claim to legitimate operations within Georgian territory, than the US does in Iraq. For those who see, as I do, Russia's excuses for it's invasion of Georgia as legitimate as little more than flaky rationalisations and propaganda, remember that to them our excuses for Iraq are just as obvious. When all's said and done, Russia thought it could get away with it's invasion, because we got away with ours in 2003.

I'm forced to agree here, Cit.

Hey- Pakistan's President just resigned, and someone we don't like might take his place, and they really DO have WMD, shall we invade them now???

Opportunemomentisall

SIGNYM

Monday, August 18, 2008 11:25 PM

Quote:
I have never done that. That’s your own imagination, so don’t stick that on me.

Because that's different, man!

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
George Bush denouncing another power over violating a nations sovereignty is so laughable, I find it incredible he managed to keep a straight face. Russia has a more credible claim to legitimate operations within Georgian territory, than the US does in Iraq. For those who see, as I do, Russia's excuses for it's invasion of Georgia as legitimate as little more than flaky rationalisations and propaganda, remember that to them our excuses for Iraq are just as obvious. When all's said and done, Russia thought it could get away with it's invasion, because we got away with ours in 2003.

I'm forced to agree here, Cit.

Really? Where was the Chapter 7 resolutions against Georgia? I can’t even remember there being any Chapter 6 resolutions against Georgia. According to United Nations Law, Georgia has done absolutely nothing to warrant invasion at all.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

KPO

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:25 AM

It's true, there can be no moral equivalence between Georgia and Iraq.

But I do remember thinking as it became clear that charges of Iraqi WMDs had been exaggerated, that invasion under the circumstances was setting an ugly precedent.

Heads should roll

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Really? Where was the Chapter 7 resolutions against Georgia? I can’t even remember there being any Chapter 6 resolutions against Georgia. According to United Nations Law, Georgia has done absolutely nothing to warrant invasion at all.

Where was UN support for the invasion of Iraq? Oh, that's right, there wasn't any, the security council voted no. Just because you buy our excuses, but not theirs, doesn't mean that they do the same, or even that ours are really any better.

Both the Invasion of Iraq and the Invasion of Georgia were undertaken as unilateral and illegitimate invasions of another countries sovereign territory. Russia has, arguably, more of an excuse to invade Georgia, because they are on the same continent, and share a common border. Iraq, on the other hand, is thousands of miles away from the US, on another continent on the other side of the world. An argument for Iraq being in the US's field of influence and interest is far flimsier than that of Georgia being under Russia's, especially now you've unilaterally declared that oil is no longer a valid excuse for influence.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Really? Where was the Chapter 7 resolutions against Georgia? I can’t even remember there being any Chapter 6 resolutions against Georgia. According to United Nations Law, Georgia has done absolutely nothing to warrant invasion at all.

Where was UN support for the invasion of Iraq? Oh, that's right, there wasn't any, the security council voted no. Just because you buy our excuses, but not theirs, doesn't mean that they do the same, or even that ours are really any better.

Twelve years of UN Chapter 7 Resolutions and so many sanctions that it created a whole bureaucracy within the UN just to deal with Iraq. Where was that for Georgia? Oh, that’s right, there wasn’t any.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Where was the Chapter 7 resolutions against Georgia? I can’t even remember there being any Chapter 6 resolutions against Georgia. According to United Nations Law, Georgia has done absolutely nothing to warrant invasion at all.

Wait, uhhhh...you want to use UN resolutions as the ticket to an invasion of Iraq, but want to ignore that the UN didn't give the go ahead for it....? See- that's the 'have your cake & eat it too' mentality here...cherry picking to suit 'the cause'. I mean, SEVERE cherry pickin'.

isall

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Twelve years of UN Chapter 7 Resolutions and so many sanctions that it created a whole bureaucracy within the UN just to deal with Iraq. Where was that for Georgia? Oh, that’s right, there wasn’t any.

So the UN is an inept bureaucracy? So why are their Resolutions so important then?

Your whole reasoning for the war just fell apart for me, Finn. Seriously, YOU can't see the logical fallacy in this series of statements?

IF: UN Resolutions important
THEN: UN voting no to invasion is not

Signy's magic eightball says: Try Again.

isall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Where was the Chapter 7 resolutions against Georgia? I can’t even remember there being any Chapter 6 resolutions against Georgia. According to United Nations Law, Georgia has done absolutely nothing to warrant invasion at all.

Wait, uhhhh...you want to use UN resolutions as the ticket to an invasion of Iraq, but want to ignore that the UN didn't give the go ahead for it....? See- that's the 'have your cake & eat it too' mentality here...cherry picking to suit 'the cause'. I mean, SEVERE cherry pickin'.

The UN decided not to follow it’s own laws because key members of the UNSC were bought off by Hussein. That’s a problem, I agree, but curruption within the system is nothing new. But it doesn’t change the fact that the UN applied Chapter 7 resolution after Chapter 7 resolution to Iraq, until finally two key members of the UN decided to act on the law the UN as a whole refused to act on itself. If you make a law that says murder is illegal, but refuse to act on it, eventually someone’s going to get tired of murderers, whether the law as a whole will do anything about it or not.

But in the case of Georgia, there was no resolution, there was no debate, there was no seeking law to define the issue--it was just Russia practicing Soviet-Era politics.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Twelve years of UN Chapter 7 Resolutions and so many sanctions that it created a whole bureaucracy within the UN just to deal with Iraq. Where was that for Georgia? Oh, that’s right, there wasn’t any.

So the UN is an inept bureaucracy? So why are their Resolutions so important then?

Your whole reasoning for the war just fell apart for me, Finn. Seriously, YOU can't see the logical fallacy in this series of statements?

Can you? Because so many of you threw fits about how important the UN is in justification for the Iraq war, but when Russia invades another nation on the fly, the UN is completely irrelevant to you.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Twelve years of UN Chapter 7 Resolutions and so many sanctions that it created a whole bureaucracy within the UN just to deal with Iraq. Where was that for Georgia? Oh, that’s right, there wasn’t any.

The security council voted what Finn?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Where was UN support for the invasion of Iraq? Oh, that's right, there wasn't any, the security council voted no. Just because you buy our excuses, but not theirs, doesn't mean that they do the same, or even that ours are really any better.
Twelve years of UN Chapter 7 Resolutions and so many sanctions that it created a whole bureaucracy within the UN just to deal with Iraq. Where was that for Georgia? Oh, that’s right, there wasn’t any.

The security council voted what Finn?

17 Chapter 7 Resolutions over 12 years.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Can you? Because so many of you threw fits about how important the UN is in justification for the Iraq war, but when Russia invades another nation on the fly, the UN is completely irrelevant to you.

A) Who said the UN was irrelevent?
B) Nice diversion from the argument at hand.
EDIT: C) "eventually someone’s going to get tired of murderers" Advocating vigilantism now?

Chrisisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Can you? Because so many of you threw fits about how important the UN is in justification for the Iraq war, but when Russia invades another nation on the fly, the UN is completely irrelevant to you.

A) Who said the UN was irrelevent?
B) Nice diversion from the argument at hand.

It’s not a diversion. You argued with me, concerning the Iraq war, that the US/UK (key members of UNSC) had to have strict adherence to the UNSC, despite corruption within the UN and years of UN law, so why do you refuse to acknowledge now that Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Georgia is less legitimate then the Iraq war?

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
EDIT: C) "eventually someone’s going to get tired of murderers" Advocating vigilantism now?
Chrisisall

At some point, yes. If the authorities will not act to enforce their own law, then you have chaos unless someone else is willing to take charge. There's a difference between vigilantes (US/UK) who act to uphold agreed upon law that the authorities refuse to enforce, and the criminals (Russia) who act without any base in law at all.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
17 Chapter 7 Resolutions over 12 years.

Well, I thought you wouldn't need it pointing out, but obviously you do:

No Finn. To an invasion of Iraq the security council voted no. The invasion of Iraq was every bit illegal as the invasion of Georgia. The UN's inability to prevent the imperialistic invasion of Iraq by the United States of America gave the Russian Federation the go ahead. If the UN can't stop America, why should it be able to stop the Russians? America sees the laws as not applying to it, so the Russians think "why should we be bound by the UN?".

You can't ignore the UN when it says no, then use it as justification. America went into Iraq without the support or blessing of the UN, Russia went into Georgia with the same. That you use UN resolutions (while ignoring the decision of the UN no less) as a flimsy excuse for unilateral invasion, while Russia uses protection of it's citizens and 'prevention of ethnic cleansing' as it's flimsy excuse, makes no odds. They're both flimsy bad excuses for entirely illegal wars.

In Iraq you say there were resolutions, they still don't give you the right to Invade. That's still a decision for the Security Council. In Georgia the Russian's say they were protecting their citizens, still not a right to invade, but better than your Iraq resolutions. Then we have the two other excuses, WMD and ethnic cleansing respectively, both of which turn out to be bullshit. The parallels are greater than you admit, and all you can say is "resolutions! resolutions!". Funny how important UN resolutions are to you, given how you ignore the UN's decisions when you don't like them.

You bought our excuses, they didn't. You don't buy their excuses, they do. Personally for me there's a deep smell of manure off what both sides are shovelling. You can't use the UN as a legal justification for war while ignoring the decision of the UN. If you had a murder in court, and the court found them not guilty, you don't have the right to shoot them dead because you think they're guilty and the court is wrong. The UN security council decides how UN resolutions are acted on, not the president of the United States of America, nor Finn Mac Cuhmal of fireflyfans.net.

At the end of the day, the Iraq war was what allowed the Russian's to invade Georgia, it set the precedent for UN member nations to invade sovereign countries without UN backing, and it showed that the UN couldn't really stop America doing whatever the hell it wants, and so why would it be able to stop Russia doing the same?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
17 Chapter 7 Resolutions over 12 years.
Well, I thought you wouldn't need it pointing out, but obviously you do:

Why didn’t Russia seek a UN resolution against Georgia? The US/UK did. Many, many times.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
why do you refuse to acknowledge now that Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Georgia is less legitimate then the Iraq war?

Okay, it's certainly less legitimate...

as in 'less pregnant'

But if the UN is so riddled with corruption, of what relevance is anything it has to say about anything now?

Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Why didn’t Russia seek a UN resolution against Georgia? The US/UK did. Many, many times.

Like Cit said, we set the precedent, they don't have to ask the UN for squat.

Chrisisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
why do you refuse to acknowledge now that Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Georgia is less legitimate then the Iraq war?

Okay, it's certainly less legitimate...

But if the UN is so riddled with corruption, of what relevance is anything it has to say about anything now?

Therein lies a much better explanation for why Russia may have decided to ignore the UN, then Citizens blame-America idea. I think many people warned that the UN risked becoming irrelevant if it spent too much time ignoring it’s own law. The UN isn’t perfect - it is often riddle with corruption and unresponsive, but it does provide a seed around which international policy can advance from 19th century concept. Until the UN becomes mature enough to have the full faith of nations, some nations will always have to act on their own, but that is not a justification for Russia to completely ignoring the UN. At the very least, Russia should have sought Chapter 7 Resolutions against Georgia - although I suspect that Russia had no real evidence of any of the claims they used as casus belli and probably would not have been able to get Chapter 6 much less the more actionable Chapter 7 Resolutions - in which case, Russia is really just practicing Soviet-Era politics.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Why didn’t Russia seek a UN resolution against Georgia? The US/UK did. Many, many times.

Like Cit said, we set the precedent, they don't have to ask the UN for squat.

Cit is wrong. 17 Chapter 7 Resolutions prove that.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Until the UN becomes mature enough to have the full faith of nations, some nations will always have to act on their own

This is the essence of the NeoCon ideology IMO, the rule of law applies- until we think (in our outstandingly objective view) it doesn't.

Meh.

Chrisisdone

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Until the UN becomes mature enough to have the full faith of nations, some nations will always have to act on their own
This is the essence of the NeoCon ideology IMO, the rule of law applies- until we think (in our outstandingly objective view) it doesn't.

It’s not the essence of “Neocon” ideology. You need to learn more about Neoconservatism.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
This is the essence of the NeoCon ideology IMO, the rule of law applies- until we think (in our outstandingly objective view) it doesn't.

How would you feel about a country taking unilateral action in Darfur?

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

How would you feel about a country taking unilateral action in Darfur?

That's a STUPID question. What do they have that anyone wants? Might as well ask me how I'd feel about Cheney getting a sex change.

isall

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
It’s not the essence of “Neocon” ideology. You need to learn more about Neoconservatism.

You're obsessed with correct labeling- this is a living system, fluid and changing- history will figure out the precise descriptions later, my commenting upon the essence of the current, prevalent ideology is correct, IMO.

isall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

How would you feel about a country taking unilateral action in Darfur?
That's a STUPID question. What do they have that anyone wants? Might as well ask me how I'd feel about Cheney getting a sex change.

Now that's a diversion.

Or what about Rwanda, where the UN had policy and standing, but refused to act - if someone had acted unilaterally in that case to prevent the wanton slaughter of a million Rwandans what would you say about that?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Or what about Rwanda, where the UN had policy and standing, but refused to act - if someone had acted unilaterally in that case to prevent the wanton slaughter of a million Rwandans what would you say about that?

That's a STUPID question. What do they have that anyone wants? Might as well ask me how I'd feel about Cheney getting a sex change.

Real answer? If the RIGHT THING was done, I'd applaud it. Trouble is, that's rarely the case. And I'd rather see mistakes made within the law than outside it.

GRRRRRisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Real answer? If the RIGHT THING was done, I'd applaud it. Trouble is, that's rarely the case. And I'd rather see mistakes made within the law than outside it.

Well, Chris, that’s a good answer, but it’s not one I completely agree with. I don’t want to see a million die because of some strict adherence to an ideology, even if that ideology is just “the rule of law.” Even though that ideology is one I agree with and one I think should be pushed as far as it can go, but when the system is shaky and Capones are in charge, some latitude needs to be given to those who are willing to try something else.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
but when the system is shaky and Capones are in charge, some latitude needs to be given to those who are willing to try something else.

But who decides who the Capones are?
Who is the Decider?

isall

SIGNYM

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:46 PM

Quote:
Until the UN becomes mature enough to have the full faith of nations, some nations will always have to act on their own

And that is exactly what Russia did.

I know what you're going to say...

"But, but... that's different!"

But, but... it's not.

Pleas see the signature below about any idea.

ETA BTW Finn, I don't hate you. I just think you're terribly confused. You state principles very globally... "some nations will always have to act on their own"... without realizing that principle, applied universally and w/o caveats, could create the things you claim to despise.

I know that you have limitations to your statements. The biggest limitation is that you apply your principles selectively. For example, what you REALLY mean is... "Only the USA and other nations that I like can act on their own". Other nations acting on their own would be anathema. Another example is "I value human life". If that were the case, then you would be against any killing whatsoever, except in cases of direct self-defense of defense of others. But you're not. You don't apply that idea as universally as you make it sound. What you REALLY mean is "I value human life, as long as it's innocent or doesn't get in the way of greater ideals, such as freedom".

I simply want you to be explicit about your context and limitations. And that means that you have to recognize them, something you're not doing now.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:57 PM

Finn is flat out wrong. A no vote by the security council and American unilateral action proves that.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Why didn’t Russia seek a UN resolution against Georgia? The US/UK did. Many, many times.

The US and the UK didn't have prior proof and precedent that you don't need UN support in order to invade a sovereign nation. Russia did, provided by the Unilateral invasion of Iraq. Something you've singularly failed to argue against with your childish protestations of mine being nothing but a "blame America" argument. It is indeed much more nuanced than that, and certainly much more nuanced than your own, evidenced by the fact that you can lay out your opinion in as many words as it takes me paragraphs.

So you think that America setting a precedent of not listening to the UN and doing whatever the hell it likes, has nothing to do with Russia thinking it can get away with not listening to the UN and doing whatever the hell it wants? Seems monkey see monkey do to me, but of course in order to recognise that, one might have to drop one's nationalist line "America perfect! America infallible! America always right!"

Nationalism is condemning one country for doing nothing more than yours did yesterday. Good luck with that.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Finn is flat out wrong. A no vote by the security council and American unilateral action proves that.

But it wasn't really a no vote, it was a yes vote that had been bought into being a no vote, so since it was actually a yes vote, and not a no vote, yes, you'd have to say invading Iraq was totally legit, no?

Now you see, yes?

Dizzyisall

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
But it wasn't really a no vote, it was a yes vote that had been bought into being a no vote, so since it was actually a yes vote, and not a no vote, yes, you'd have to say invading Iraq was totally legit, no?

Now you see, yes?

The UN's headquarters is in New York, not Florida Chris.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

The UN's headquarters is in New York, not Florida Chris.

Don't tell me; you'll be here all week, right?

LOLisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 9:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
So you think that America setting a precedent of not listening to the UN and doing whatever the hell it likes, has nothing to do with Russia thinking it can get away with not listening to the UN and doing whatever the hell it wants? Seems monkey see monkey do to me, but of course in order to recognise that, one might have to drop one's nationalist line "America perfect! America infallible! America always right!"

Nationalism is condemning one country for doing nothing more than yours did yesterday. Good luck with that.

Where are the 12 years of UN debate on the issue of Georgia like that the US conducted prior to the war in Iraq? Where are the 17 Chapter 7 UN Resolutions against Georgia like those that the UN issued against Iraq during those negotiations conducted by the US? Where are the sanctions and attempts to deal with Georgia peacefully to avoid invasion, that were the product of those resolutions issued against Iraq?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 9:41 PM

None of those resolutions, debate or anything besides gave the US the right, legal or otherwise, to invade Iraq. QED.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 9:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
None of those resolutions, debate or anything besides gave the US the right, legal or otherwise, to invade Iraq. “QED”

That’s your opinion, and it’s not held by everyone, but regardless, Russia did none of those things - Russia never attempted for a moment to alleviate the matter without war. Invasion was their first resort - classic Soviet-Era politics.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
but when the system is shaky and Capones are in charge, some latitude needs to be given to those who are willing to try something else.

But who decides who the Capones are?
Who is the Decider?

When it gets to that point, people or nations are acting on what they feel is right or in their best interests. Which is why the UN needs to ACT, so that it doesn't loose the faith of nations - something I tried for the longest time to explain to people.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Where was UN support for the invasion of Iraq? Oh, that's right, there wasn't any, the security council voted no. Just because you buy our excuses, but not theirs, doesn't mean that they do the same, or even that ours are really any better.
Twelve years of UN Chapter 7 Resolutions and so many sanctions that it created a whole bureaucracy within the UN just to deal with Iraq. Where was that for Georgia? Oh, that’s right, there wasn’t any.
The security council voted what Finn?

17 Chapter 7 Resolutions over 12 years.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

And how many resolutions against Israel ???

why ain't you all bomben them

Lets party like its 1939

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
And how many resolutions against Israel ???

why ain't you all bomben them

Most of those resolutions deal with both Israel AND the Palestinians, and none of them are actionable - they are all Chapter 6 Resolutions which require no enforcement of UNSC decisions, unlike the Chapter 7 resolutions.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
That’s your opinion, and it’s not held by everyone,

*sigh*
Opinions again...
Like Chris Rock said in Lethal Weapon 4, No means NO!

Quote:
Russia never attempted for a moment to alleviate the matter without war. Invasion was their first resort - classic Soviet-Era politics.

America strained at the UN leash to alleviate the matter with war. Invasion was their first choice - classic Bush-Era politics.

Chrisisall

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 11:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
That’s your opinion, and it’s not held by everyone,

No, it's not my opinion. In this instance it's a statement of fact. Of course portraying fact as opinion serves you well in bolstering your opinion, but it's still an opinion held by those who do not know, or do not understand the facts.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 11:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
That’s your opinion, and it’s not held by everyone,
No, it's not my opinion. In this instance it's a statement of fact. Of course portraying fact as opinion serves you well in bolstering your opinion, but it's still an opinion held by those who do not know, or do not understand the facts.

Said the person who can't tell the difference between 12 years of 17 Chapter 7 UN Resolutions and an outright invasion of a neighboring state.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CITIZEN

Tuesday, August 19, 2008 11:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Said the person who can't tell the difference between 12 years of 17 Chapter 7 UN Resolutions and an outright invasion of a neighboring state.

Said the person that thinks that using the organisation that told you not to do something to legitimise that which you did is a cogent argument...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 12:17 AM

"BEHAVE YOURSELVES!!!!"

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 12:27 PM

FINN (Takes deep breath) we've been through this before with Rapo. I quoted the last UN Resolution on Iraq at length, and linked the entire text. There was NO authorization of use of force in that last Resolution... yanno, the one where the UN was deciding what to do with Iraq and all of the previous resolutions.

And why???

The plain fact of the matter is that Saddam was about to be found in compliance with UN resolutions. And why was that?

Because he was.

He had, in fact destroyed his WMD (except the relatively few canisters, shells, and drums that got lost) and did not carry forward WMD research. Everything that Colin Powell said to the UN was fabrication, exaggeration, or paranoia, and fortunately they have better bullshit meters than you. I'm not saying the UN is always right, but in this instance they were.

I listened closely to the US member of the UNMOVIC team Scott Ritter who was convinced that Saddam did NOT have WMD as well as the concerns of David Kay who was (even before his assignment to the post-invasion USA inspection team) a cautionary voice. There was no evidence whatsoever of ongoing WMD production or storage.

Now,you may argue "What if sanctions had been lifted, and Saddam could go forward with his plans" (however you might imagine them) "with oil revenue behind him?" I can see how that would be a concern. But there are about a dozen ways to deal with that issue and Saddam was so far behind at that point on the WMD curve that it is a specious reason on which to base an invasion... especially an invasion that was billed as being a matter SO URGENT that they couldn't even let UNMOVIC finish its job.

Ultimately, that was what led me to realize the purpose of the invasion WAS to PREVENT UNMOVIC from issuing a report. Spring was thought the best time to invade, the window was closing, UNMOVIC was going to conclude some time in fall (at the latest). Cheney could have waited until the following spring if an invasion was deemed necessary, especially since the inspections were turning up nothing upon nothing and the matter was looking less and less urgent, not more and more so. But that was the LAST thing the Admin wanted.. Invasion was a foregone conclusion and their excuse was about to be taken away. That's why they had to jump the gun and kick out the inspection team by invading.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FOSTER

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:45 PM

You know that the Russian excuse is the same one that Hitler used to invade Poland back in the day.

They were "German" people living in Poland and so he was just protecting them from genocide and discrimination. Answer for the world "well if they are your people and your protecting them then it is OK to invade"

It is all just a little bit of history repeating

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Spring was thought the best time to invade, the window was closing, UNMOVIC was going to conclude some time in fall (at the latest). Cheney could have waited until the following spring if an invasion was deemed necessary, especially since the inspections were turning up nothing upon nothing and the matter was looking less and less urgent, not more and more so.

I was paying close attention back then, and I fully remember the rush to invade before all the evidence was in.

isall

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:07 PM

I finally found a picture of, er, the President that I like....

BadChrisisall

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:41 PM

Quote:
You know that the Russian excuse is the same one that Hitler used to invade Poland back in the day. They were "German" people living in Poland and so he was just protecting them from genocide and discrimination.

Except the Poles did not attack Germans living in Poland with tanks and missiles, so your analogy falls short.

If S Ossetia gains it's independence then that will be a good thing, in my book.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:43 PM

Quote:
Spring was thought the best time to invade, the window was closing, UNMOVIC was going to conclude some time in fall (at the latest). Cheney could have waited until the following spring if an invasion was deemed necessary, especially since the inspections were turning up nothing upon nothing and the matter was looking less and less urgent, not more and more so.- Signy

I was paying close attention back then, and I fully remember the rush to invade before all the evidence was in.- Chrisisall

I think Finn is stuck here, because if he says that the REAL concern was the prospect of Saddam acquiring WMD in the future, he will have just admitted that the Administration lied.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:52 PM

Meh, that's tame compared to Chavez.

I swear, he's about as pimpdaddy as you can get without the gold tooth, seriously.

-F

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 6:40 PM

I guess Finn must be busy.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 6:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I guess Finn must be busy.

Or maybe he didn't see your last post.

You be sure to keep needlessly bumping this thread until you get what you want m'kay.

CITIZEN

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 8:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Foster:
You know that the Russian excuse is the same one that Hitler used to invade Poland back in the day.

They were "German" people living in Poland and so he was just protecting them from genocide and discrimination. Answer for the world "well if they are your people and your protecting them then it is OK to invade"

It is all just a little bit of history repeating

Indeed, and the Bush administrations excuse for invading Iraq was pretty similar to Hitler's excuse for invading Russia. That's the problem with pre-emptive strikes.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 8:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
I was paying close attention back then, and I fully remember the rush to invade before all the evidence was in.

I was paying close attention back then too, and what I remember was a complete lack of faith in a system that had been so heavily corrupted over the last 12 years that it was deemed a waste of time, money and credibility to spend any time at all on it. And quite frankly, I agreed then and given the same 12 years of information, I would still agree.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And quite frankly, I agreed then and given the same 12 years of information, I would still agree.

So, how is it that MY estimation that we shouldn't invade, that they had no WMD, that we'd be there for YEARS & YEARS has turned out to be correct? Why was your evaluation of the same info I had at my disposal so differently digested?
Did I just make a 'good wild guess'?
Should I be working at the Pentagon? I think not- I'm sure they knew at least what I knew, & a great deal more. As the Emperor said, it's all proceeding according to plan- I just saw into parts of it where you trusted the rhetoric, as far as I can tell.

The self-confident Chrisisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
So, how is it that MY estimation that we shouldn't invade, that they had no WMD, that we'd be there for YEARS & YEARS has turned out to be correct? Why was your evaluation of the same info I had at my disposal so differently digested?
Did I just make a 'good wild guess'?

Like most anti-war types you where willing to trust the ruthless dictator.

And you didn’t know any more then I did that there were or weren’t WMD’s and everyone knew we would be there for a long time. The issue wasn’t as much about disarming Hussein, as much as it was about removing the UNSC from his pocket.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 9:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The issue wasn’t as much about disarming Hussein, as much as it was about removing the UNSC from his pocket.

Chrisisall's Magic 8-Ball says:
Reply hazy, try again

The WHOLE push behind the invasion was that he had ties to Al Qaeda & viable WMD in his country, both of which have proven untrue. At least, those were the reasons we were told.
So, we're back to you being okay that they lied to you, or you're okay with an administration that starts wars on faulty, incomplete evidence, or you just like to see ruthless dictators pounded on no matter what the reason.

Listen to what you type, Finn...we removed the UNSC from his pocket by INVADING HIS COUNTRY???

Were you just typing fast or something??

EDIT: plus, Re: my foreknowledge of history- you could have pulled a Spock and called it 'gifted insight' or something

isall

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:15 PM

FINN

Quote:
Like most anti-war types you where (sic) willing to trust the ruthless dictator

Who said Trust but verify? I dunno... I can't seem to remember. Must be getting Alzheimer's or something.

Anyhoo.... YOUR problem is, you went on broad assumptions: The UN is corrupt and UNMOVIC is just window-dressing. Unlike you, I tried to find out what was REALLY going on. Verifying. You didn't. You screwed up because you heard what you wanted to hear and didn't go any further.

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Who said Trust but verify?

The Magic 8-Ball?
Hope ya don't mind my latchin' onto that Signy, I know it's your thing, but it's so damn funny...I'll stop using it now.

Chrisisall

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:36 PM

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO!

Don't stop!

YOU'RE too d*mn funny!

---------------------------------
Any idea, no matter how much you may agree with it, can be radicalized and employed as an excuse for violence. There is no such thing as a righteous or untouchable philosophy, and when you start thinking that there is, you have become an extremist.- Finn Mac Cumhal

KWICKO

Thursday, August 21, 2008 12:39 AM

Quote:

Like most anti-war types you where willing to trust the ruthless dictator.

That's a lie; I've NEVER trusted George W. Bush.

Quote:
And you didn’t know any more then I did that there were or weren’t WMD’s and everyone knew we would be there for a long time.

Again, a lie. Quoth Donald Rumsfeld:

Quote:
...the Iraq war "could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months," and stating in August 2003, "My impression is that the war was highly successful."

So, mission accomplished, eh? War's done, we're outta there in August of '03!

Quote:
The issue wasn’t as much about disarming Hussein, as much as it was about removing the UNSC from his pocket.

Again, a lie - at least according to George W. Bush's State of the Union Address:

Quote:
quoth George W. Bush:

“The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa .”

So, I guess it was about disarming him, before it WASN'T about disarming him.

I guess when you look at it your way, invading Iraq and sacrificing thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians was totally worth it - if we could just make sure that we got the UNSC out of Saddam's pocket. Why, hell, that justifies the whole damned thing! Why didn't you just say so in the first place?

Oh, yeah - because it's a bullshit reason. And yet another lie you tell to make yourself feel better.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

KWICKO

Thursday, August 21, 2008 12:42 AM

Signy, can I borrow your Magic 8-Ball? Mine's busted. All it says when I ask it Finn's questions is "That's a Lie."

Well... maybe it's working right, after all. :)

Mike

CHRISISALL

Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:07 AM

Peeinghiskiltisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, August 21, 2008 2:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
or you just like to see ruthless dictators pounded on no matter what the reason.

Doesn’t everybody? There really can never NOT be a good reason to pound on a ruthless dictator. It just comes down to whether you want to put the resources in it, that’s all.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Listen to what you type, Finn...we removed the UNSC from his pocket by INVADING HIS COUNTRY???

Were you just typing fast or something??

It worked.

And unlike weapons’ inspections no one ever doubted that it would. Now the next time a rogue nations compiles 17 Chapter 7 Resolutions, they’ll be looking over their shoulders, because the world and the UN knows that nations will not sit around while the UN dicks around and rogue nations start buying votes.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

KWICKO

Thursday, August 21, 2008 2:58 AM

Quote:
It worked.

Yes, swimmingly - why, we hardly had to even flick our finger. And it was all over so FAST. I can't believe we went in, fixed all the problems in Iraq, and got out so quickly.

Oh, wait - we didn't. I guess we sure showed those Frenchies, though - now they know that you don't bribe anyone in Iraq without putting the vig into Halliburton/KBR's pocket first!

Thank goodness there's no more corruption, scandal, bribery, or tomfoolery going on in Iraq now that we've saved the day for them.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

KWICKO

Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:03 AM

Quote:
There really can never NOT be a good reason to pound on a ruthless dictator.

Well, unless he's YOUR ruthless dictator, bought and paid for with your tax money. And, you know, you kind of like him... the way we Americans tend to kind of like so many of the world's ruthless dictators.

So tell me, when do you plan to start pounding on Saudi Arabia?

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
It worked.

Yes, swimmingly - why, we hardly had to even flick our finger. And it was all over so FAST. I can't believe we went in, fixed all the problems in Iraq, and got out so quickly.

This is really the only problem with this option. Too many people think that it should happen without “flick[ing] a finger,” and that it should be “over so FAST.” Too many people want easy fix solutions, which don't exist and have never existed, which means too many people are too willing to give up.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
So tell me, when do you plan to start pounding on Saudi Arabia?

Why would I bomb Saudi Arabia?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

KWICKO

Thursday, August 21, 2008 4:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
So tell me, when do you plan to start pounding on Saudi Arabia?
Why would I bomb Saudi Arabia?

Something about there not being a good reason to not pound on a ruthless dictator. Seems like I read that somewhere. Must've been someone else posting that...

Plus it seems like they're quite the ripe ground for terrorists. Let's see... Osama bin Laden - Saudi. Fifteen of nineteen 9/11 hijackers - Saudis. Naahhh, you're right - Iraq is the real threat. Or is it Iran this week?

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

KWICKO

Thursday, August 21, 2008 4:10 AM

Quote:

This is really the only problem with this option. Too many people think that it should happen without “flick[ing] a finger,” and that it should be “over so FAST.”

Yes, people like the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of Defense... you know, the people who said it would be over in days, weeks, months (doubtful), "mission accomplished", and all that. It ISN'T that easy, and never has been - that's why military force isn't the first option, but the LAST option. And one that we were never anywhere near needing to opt for.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE