Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Pujo, Mar 22, 2006.
As I have said over and over, the middle east is unsalvagable. We need to either :
1) Make some agreement with them to get the oil we need at a reasonable price and leave permanently.
2) Drill through the middle of the earth and have a big pipe to suck the oil to us.
3) Start a Manhattan Project style thing to eliminate the need for oil and let the middle east rot.
p.s. #2 was a joke.
I vote for emphasis on 1 & 3...BIG TIME! Especially 3. It is uf the most urgent priority to our national security in the next century.
Yet another example that the "religion of Peace" claim is PC Bullsh!t.
Yeah, right, the religion of peace is busy invading Iraq and causing the deaths of close to 100,000 civilians and creating anarchy. In fact, the religion of peace has been invading Africa, the Middle East, and South America for about two centuries, and has killed vastly more people than Osama bin Laden has probably killed in his fondest dreams.
I don't know, Harry Boy, I grew up in the Soviet Union which was atheist but committed these same kinds of atrocities. People were executed every day for not supporting the status quo. When people in power are hellbent on imposing their will, they'll find justification in just about any creed. That's different than Islam the religeon - that's Islam the state religeon.
Besides, this is one of our "liberated" countries, a top ally in the middle east. Something is out of whack.
I never thought we should have gone into that sand pit of Irag- you'll get no argument from me there. We should pull out yesterday.
How Ironic that Hussein the Butcher was the only one who could keep those primitives from killing each other. The present anarchy however is self inflicted by the Iraqi people who are too cowardly and/or ignorant to fight for their country. We have no business trying to referee their Civil War.
Yeah you're right on about the evil Christians. I mean who hasn't seen countless images of Christians engaged in: suicide bombings, civilian beheadings, the barbaric treatment of women who dare to walk by themselves or show their ankles in public...
Yup the "peace loving Muslims" have a lot to fear from them...
When government fails or is destroyed, it creates a power vacuum with all sorts of mixed results. Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Milosevic Yugoslavia, are just a few examples. In Iraq, there is a power vacuum and the radical groups attempting to take over are certainly no worse than the Nazis.
The anarchy was created by our invasion. We created the problem. It's our responsibility. We need to shift authority over to international groups, and we need to be prepared to foot a large share of the bill. Also, the Iraqi people are fighting for their country--the problem is they don't have a common view of what their country should be like. (If we were in a state of anarchy, do you really think liberals, conservatives, fundamentalists, and so on would be fighting hand-in-hand?)
In the last 150 years, western nations have committed atrocities far worse than those committed by the lunatics in Iraq. King Leopold II of Belgium killed 8,000,000 Congolese; Hitler killed 6,000,0000 jews; the French (like the Bush regime) engaged in torture and terrorist to try to quell the Algerian and Moroccon independence movements; in the 1930s, there are many examples of the National Guard and police killing striking workers; we also had lynch mobs and the murder of civil rights workers up until the 1960s. Your memory is terribly convenient.
I'm not defending the right-wing in Iraq any more than I would defend it here. Saddam and the Muslim fundamentalists both share a right-wing view of law and order. Follow their rules or the consequences are even more severe than 3 strikes you're out or our relatively civilized form of the death penalty. At any rate, war always sets a country back, and the bes hope for the Middle East is to find a way to get out and leave them alone for a generation or two.
The ally we put in power has the right according to its Constitution to kill people who reject Islam and Bush is saying nothing much about it? And the righties are keeping awfully quiet on this subject? Let's just face it: Bush is an incompetent idiot who allies himself with people just like himself, and many of the righties are an unprincipled lot who simply suck up to Bush. One can only wonder what the basis of there infatuation with Bush is.
I agree with you- the Muslims nuts are like (Islamic) Nazi's.
I agree we created their problem that's become OUR problem. We never should have went into that sandpit in the first place. The International suggestion is a good one but that's a bit of a fantasy, I don't see the UN or any other countries lining up to establish Authority or restore order over there. Do you?
My memory, or should I say my attention is focused on the here and now. I do not dispute your History references but you're arguning from a History book philosophy, I'm talking about what is or is not, in the US best interest in the present day.
I agree about leaving them alone but it's a Utopian fantasy to believe they'll change from within. I highly doubt they'll ever evolve to the point where they shed the primitive, anti- female, kill the infidel mentality that is rampant over there.
As a side comment- I was against Bush 100% going into Iraq but I was 100% in favor of going after Afghanistan as there was irrefutable evidence the Taliban hosted and supported Bin Laden and the Al-Q. Unfortunately Bin Laden and his crew are still breathing as we continue to be pre occupied with our PR campaign to get the Iraqi primitives to "like us".
Surely you think the Afghanistan action was warranted after 9/11 no?
I backed this war from day one but now am begining to realize that these Muslim country's are worse than even I thought they were. We should now get out of there as fast as we possibly can, the middle east is the land of savages, they enjoy pain suffering and KILLING.
Saddam should be released and put back into power, he will have peace restored to Iraq in six months, if there are those that resist Saddams peace offerings he will Gas them, behead them, cut their arms and legs off, rape their children, and cut their tongues out. Their women will never be able to vote again, their women won't even be allowed out of the house unless their smelly husbands are with them.
If they don't sell us their oil at a fair price tell them we are going to "Nuke Them" that is the only language they understand, "violence".
STOP THE WAR, BRING THE BOYS HOME, GIVE IRAQ BACK TO SADDAM.
SADDAM KNEW HOW TO KEEP THEM IN LINE.
CINDY SHEEHAN AND MICHALE MOORE ARE HAVING SEX (CLOSE YOUR EYES AND PICTURE THAT)
Nuke them? Seems like if it's their land it's their oil and we're not entitled to it if they don't want to sell it to us.
Not if we can attack them and they can't defend themselves . . . see : American Indians. If you can't defend your land, you lose it. And everything that goes with it.
So we should just beat them up because we're bigger?
If that's your opinion, that's a-ok, but remember that we would completely have to give up any moral high ground we have. We would be morally equivilant with the Muslim terrorists and couldn't pretend we're somehow more right than they are. Of course it would also increase terrorist activity (how many daily suicide bombings do you think we'd have if we invaded the Middle East?) and don't forget that a sympathetic nuclear power (Pakistan, or maybe Russia or China) may decide America is too dangerous to the world and join our enemies. By the way - how many troops do you think we have? And how many people do you think live in the ENTIRE Middle East?
No way, I think you need to think about what you're saying a bit more.
Aside from the oil issue (I would actually prefer to "just" develop an alternative energy, I don't believe we can't), yes I am in favor of eliminating the middle east. It's a sad and horrible thing to say but it's clear to me that it's not redeemable at this point. We've let the freaks over there take hold and the momentum is too strong.
If they were telling the truth that they would not attack us if we left the middle east I would be fine with that. But I don't believe them. Their society has de-evolved into something that used to be leaders in education to a society that knows nothing except terrorism. If they stopped terrorism what would they do ? All go back to their houses and watch TV ? No, it's too ingrained in them now. It's like when your house in inundated with fleas, you need an exterminator to bomb the house, you can't just kill one flea at a time.
Are you really crazy, or Hitler? You're advocating genocide. (Kill the innocent with the guilty?) If we nuked the Middle East it would be a matter of years before the US became defunct. How do you think China or Russia (who could both level us to the ground) would react if the US claimed the right to wipe out a people. They'd realize either of them could be next and strike first. And who would help us? Europe would be setting up courts to try Americans as war criminals (which we'd be).
I can't believe you're actually advocating a "final solution".
I probably am.
I mean crazy like Hitler, not crazy like Homer Simpson.
We'll see how people feel when, not if, the terrorists unleash some form of nuclear explosion in a big city and kill hundreds of thousands. It will happen because they can just walk across the border from Mexico and assumble pieces here. Not a full fledged nuclear bomb but something which will make 9/11 look like a walk in the park.
This is part of the mentality of the current administration. Lets upgrade our conventional bombs with nuclear components. We haven't got enough oomph in these bombs we are using now. So we'll have the nuclear bombs to blast the mountainous regions in Afghanistan. At the same time, we do not want anyone else to use nuclear weapons. We have this right, because we are a democracy, we are the United States of America. We want your society to be democratic, thus we will shock and awe you till you say Uncle Sam.
My answer is diplomacy and a new energy program. There is no doubt that we could cut our dependency on Middle East oil by at least half. We didn't nd the Cold War by bombing Russia. Someone just needs to step up and show true leadership. I guess you'd also have to nuke North Korea too, they have already said they could strike us first. So now we have the domino effect and the world is over as we know it.
Separate names with a comma.