A Most Eloquent and Compelling Argument

[RedTop]

Hi Mav,

I guess what I mean by Isolastionist is this.....

I totally understand that in todays world you cant become completely that way. We are way to dependant on others for things. What I mean is this....

Unless we are goiing to as Hang would say go in full bore , no holes barred beat down of a nother country , then simply don't even say a thing to them other than thanks for the oil. Thanks for the good. Period. If a country has a dictator , and he is making thier life misery , then that's there problem.

Basically just let the rest of the world do there thing whiole we keep quiet and trade as we have and deal with that and that only. NK gets a nuke? Hopefully we shoot it down. that type of thing. If 10,000 NK's die from Kim Jong is Ill then so be it. Not our problem.

I know it wont work , as we are in a new world.

But that was basically what I was saying.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Maverick
I use the term sack for a very specific reason. There is no reason to destroy their complete infrastructure unless we were going to take over their assets. Once we have done the deed and destroyed their ability to fend for themselves and eliminated their nation, then what?

Secondly what are you going to do with the populations of those nations once you have destroyed the infrastructure? Who will police it, feed it and keep it in line?

Sadly Maverick, I think that our own actions need to be dictated by the lowest common denominator--one that was set by them, not us. You ask what would we do once the infrastructures are illiminated, who will feed and police them? My question to you is, what do you think they'll do if the day comes when they're able to illiminate our infrasctructure? Do you think they're worried about who will feed and keep our disorganized masses in line? No, they're not. They don't care. All that matters for them is destroying the enemy. They will use any means at their disposal.

We should act no differently. Will must be met with will.

No restructuring, no Westernization, no aid after the fact. **** them just like they want to **** us, period. They were desperate on 9/11, where is our desperation? We've never resorted to it because the cost is too high, but what happens when it's truly a case of use or them? **** them like they want to **** us, and let them rot. Let the maggots redistribute what remains. Call this by its true name. Not operation Iraqi anything. It's war, one group verses another.

It will never happen, because, as you said, we can never isolate to the point of self-sufficiency, and PR will always matter, but the only way to beat them is to do to them what they want to do to us, only quicker. Carthiniginian peace, it was called a long time ago. Leave no two bricks stacked together. They fear god... Good. They may become a very passive bunch indeed when they witness, first hand, what it means to have Allah's finger descend upon your capital city in the form of a 2 megaton MIRV.

[RedTop]

Originally posted by Neubob
Sadly Maverick, I think that our own actions need to be dictated by the lowest common denominator--one that was set by them, not us. You ask what would we do once the infrastructures are illiminated, who will feed and police them? My question to you is, what do you think they'll do if the day comes when they're able to illiminate our infrasctructure? Do you think they're worried about who will feed and keep our disorganized masses in line? No, they're not. They don't care. All that matters for them is destroying the enemy. They will use any means at their disposal.

We should act no differently. Will must be met with will.

No restructuring, no Westernization. Just plain destruction. Let the maggots redistribute what remains. Call this by its true name. Not operation Iraqi anything. It's war, one group verses another.

It will never happen, because, as you said, we can never isolate to the point of self-sufficiency, and PR will always matter, but the only way to beat them is to do to them what they want to do to us, only quicker. Carthiniginian peace, it was called a long time ago. Leave no two bricks stacked together. They fear god... Good. They may become a very passive bunch indeed when they witness, first hand, what it means to have Allah's finger descend upon your capital city in the form of a 2 megaton MIRV.

[Toad]

Would we then become a very passive bunch if a few nuclear weapons are smuggled into our ports and detonated?

I don't think so.

Yet you seem to think something like that would pacify them.

[Hangtime]

Originally posted by Maverick
Ok Hang,

For the sake of argument we decide to take out syria and iran. Exactly what do you expect the rest of the world to do? I am assuming you plan to do this as a totally unilateral operation without any other countries assisting as I certainly don't see anyone in europe or even Great Britain helping out.

The idea of an isolationist nation in an industrialized time is fantasy. It isn't and cannot happen due to scarcety of resources. It happens we simply cannot maintain the economy at the current level if we close all our ports, international airports and rail lines. Our economy is tied for better or worse to much of the industrialized world. What are you going to do if the nations of europe decide to cut trade and monetary functions as we grandly sack those 2 countries?

I use the term sack for a very specific reason. There is no reason to destroy their complete infrastructure unless we were going to take over their assets. Once we have done the deed and destroyed their ability to fend for themselves and eliminated their nation, then what?

Secondly what are you going to do with the populations of those nations once you have destroyed the infrastructure? Who will police it, feed it and keep it in line?

Who do you think will continue to trade with this nation? What about the debts we owe other nations. Are you planning to tell them to forgive our debts as we forgave allied nations debts after WW2? Why should they?

Looking at the other option you raised. Simply pull back and leave them alone. What are you going to do to keep all those who were fighting us over there from now being free to plan how they are going to fight us over here? What is going to stop them from just loading up tons of explosives in shipping containers and sending them to multiple ports for a simultaneous attack in several cities?

Is it not clear that you simply can't operate in the world as if it were a vacuum?

Oh, yeah.. since we've already sold out to foriegn and corporate intrests we MUST resolve to a 'forever' string of low order conflicts and hope they negotiate for our wealth and women before they finally do nuke us. . Since they have the means here NOW, we must just accept the status quo and just follow the Corporate Masters of Our Destinies on down the garden path to UN rule and The New World Order. They will save us.. because we can't possibly save ourselves.

Yah, go ahead, Mav; roll over. Submit to the continuing long decline. Just keep sending other peoples kids off to be terrorist training targets so you don't have to worry about dealing with 'em personally down at the post office in your retirement.

Please tell your wife to stay in the house. Meanwhile, I'm betting on the bear in any one-on-one that may develop between you two. I suspect the bear has better motivation, but will be dissapointed by the taste.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Toad
Would we then become a very passive bunch if a few nuclear weapons are smuggled into our ports and detonated?

I don't think so.

Yet you seem to think something like that would pacify them.

Well, Toad, you can bet on one thing. The instant they're able to smuggle those weapons in, they will. No questions asked, no saber rattling. They'll just do it and the first we'll know about it is when the bomb goes off.

To pacify them would be nice. But until they see that we're willing to accept victory by any means available, including full-scale escalation, with full-implementation of everything we've got, they will continue on the present course of action. They have the will, but not the means. We have the means, but not the will. They're working on getting the means.

Who's going to be the first to have both? Them or us?

[Toad]

Originally posted by Neubob
They have the will, not the means. We have the means, not the will.
 

You're willing to accept that they will maintain their will and attain the means.

Yet you don't seem to be able to credit the other side of the scale, that we will be able to maintain our means and attain the will.

You didn't answer the question: Do you think a few nukes going off in the US with concurrent claims of responsiblity by A-Q or somesuch will pacify us?

Or do you think it might help us attain the will? And why do you think it would be any different with them on the receiveing end?

[Maverick]

Redtop,

I understand what you are saying but the same questions still remain. What will you do with the population of the country you have just overcome?

Lets use an example. We decide to eliminate syria. We attack and destroy their military and eliminate tyhe entire upper level of government including their royalty. The military collapses after a mere few weeks of intense air operations and a fast strike with ground forces into the capital. You've won the conflict.

Now what are you going to do? Are you just going to pack up and say "thanks for the target practice, we'll be seeing ya"? Are you going to keep troops on the ground to watch over the oil fields? Who will keep the entire population from becoming a guerilla force over night? What is the next step? If you leave, do you think thewy will trade with us, take money for oil or do you thknj they will do everything they can to keep us from getting the oil? Will the entire population of the country be considered an enemy combatant?

Neubob,

You mention the nuclear alternative. Obviously the entire population is considered a viable target. How will you get the oil out if you turn the country into a glass crater?

What do you expect the other nuclear nations to do when you push the button? What makes you think they would not simply figure we cannot be trusted at all and must be eliminated with extreme prejudice? How will your scenario end except with the elimination of humankind and an uplifting of the cockroaches as the highest form of life on the planet? More to the point, where the hell do you think you'll be living if this happens?

[AWMac]

Originally posted by storch
they understand force.  both on a personal and collective level, just like anyone else.  the problem is that we have become weak.

Storch is this like when I killed you in MA and you complained that you had a dead stick? Then you went off claiming that's the only way I get kills... then you talked watermelon about the MAWs?  

LMAO I had to squelch you... what a hissy fit you were havin!!!

Storch you Sir are a true Budweiser Man of Genius...

*Budweiser Song Playin, with over announcement Man*

Man: Yes you virtual flying pilot...Flyin High..A True Man of Genius.
Song: Virtual flyin maaaaan....
Man: Killin alot, but when it comes to landing...
Song: I'm a Dead Stick Flyin Maaaaaaan....
Man: It's not always that way.. 'cept for some of them all...
Song: Shot down by a MAWWWWWW....
Man: So you Virtual Deadstick Pilot Man you jump on 200 with yer lip!!!!
Song: Gotta give Mac alotta chit... I was Deadstickkkkkkk...
Man: So we Salute you Virtual Flying Deadstick Man... a True Man of Genuis...
Song: A Deadstick I swearrrrr!!!
Man: Well then Budweiser is your beer...This Bud is for You!!!



Mac

[Maverick]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Oh, yeah.. since we've already sold out to foriegn and corporate intrests we MUST resolve to a 'forever' string of low order conflicts and hope they negotiate for our wealth and women before they finally do nuke us. . Since they have the means here NOW, we must just accept the status quo and just follow the Corporate Masters of Our Destinies on down the garden path to UN rule and The New World Order. They will save us.. because we can't possibly save ourselves.

Yah, go ahead, Mav; roll over. Submit to the continuing long decline. Just keep sending other peoples kids off to be terrorist training targets so you don't have to worry about dealing with 'em personally down at the post office in your retirement.

Please tell your wife to stay in the house. Meanwhile, I'm betting on the bear in any one-on-one that may develop between you two. I suspect the bear has better motivation, but will be dissapointed by the taste.

Hang,

If you can't anwer the issues then at least say so. The tired argumentum ad hominum doesn't get it. All I did was to ask you to explain your position in a thoughtful manner. I have neither referred to you disrespectfully nor flamed your posts.

[lukster]

Originally posted by Maverick
What do you expect the other nuclear nations to do when you push the button? What makes you think they would not simply figure we cannot be trusted at all and must be eliminated with extreme prejudice? How will your scenario end except with the elimination of humankind and an uplifting of the cockroaches as the highest form of life on the planet? More to the point, where the hell do you think you'll be living if this happens?

At least we won't have to worry or hear anymore about global warming.  

[Neubob]

toad,

Since my little scenario of our delivering a first strike is pretty far into the realm of impossibility, I think that the question is answered. They'll win. They'll eventually get their briefcase bomb, it'll wind up here, and a city will go up in smoke.

Our response will be, however ticked off, still a half-measure, and they'll end up doing it again. Any response on our part will always be tempered by our need to remain on good terms with the civilized world. All the while, the uncivilized world will run rampant, doing what they want. Again, it's will verses no will. Our only advantage, the means, will eventually go away.

Where will I live? Frankly, if they get the means to do what they want before we become as desperate as they are, I don't even care. It won't matter. They'll do to us what they've been chanting for years, and we'll be too busy pandering to stop it.

[AWMac]

Caught argumentum ad hominum in Asia once...

Worse than Crabs cross bred with Pitt Bulls.... These you didn't scratch.. you threw Frisbees and shot them with a 12 Gauge as they jumped...."PULL...."

Then the shots came... never drank that much Tequila.


Mav





Mac

[RedTop]

Scary how outlooks from different people can be alike.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Toad
You're willing to accept that they will maintain their will and attain the means.

Yet you don't seem to be able to credit the other side of the scale, that we will be able to maintain our means and attain the will.

You didn't answer the question: Do you think a few nukes going off in the US with concurrent claims of responsiblity by A-Q or somesuch will pacify us?

Or do you think it might help us attain the will? And why do you think it would be any different with them on the receiveing end?

Unfortunately, to attain the will, we must accept that doing the unthinkable may become necessary. Let's say, they blow up a major port city. What's a just response? More troops to seek and kill Bin Laden? Unseat a government and install a new one which will begin feeding cash and moral to terrorist cells the moment we start pulling out?

Bin laden and his ilk live off the will and support of the regular, everyday guy that lives with his family, eats dinner, prays five times a day and either covertly or overtly wishes for the demise of Western dominance. Killing Bin laden will, inevitably, only create a vaccuum, which will then create a new one. You must kill the support system of the Bin Ladens of this world. You must create a situation where there is no longer a possibility of a vaccuum.

You can't re-indoctrinate them all. You can only convince them that in a fight, they're not going to win. Thus far, we've convinced them that we're only willing to go so far. How do we prove them wrong?

9/11 should have been answered not with a search for Bin Laden, but with a summary bombing of Riyad, Dubai, or any other symbol of their civilization. Sure, it'll polarize them against us, but they will learn to fear as they've never feared before. If we don't lower ourselves to their playing field, we'll take our self-righteous respect for life to our grave.

You know after 9/11, I recall somebody sayingthat we shouldn't go in full scale, we should go on a limited basis, immediiately, and begin murdering the families, friends, acquaintences, friends of friends, business associates, friends of business associates, pets, houseplants...etc...of everyone connected with the WTC attacks. Murder the young, the innocent, and murder them in the same way they murder us, only quicker and on a wider scale. Make their fear overwhelm their willingness to see us burn. Maybe that's the in between we should be looking for.