South Osetia under attack

[moot]

Every nation deserves it's government.

LOL  That makes my day.

[Boroda]

Hehe. Where were your heads? In Georgia?
Would you feel it normal if Poland entered Russia because of the Russians having a beat at some county riots at the Polish border?
(And withing Russia, remember, South Ossetia is a part of Georgia)

You miss my point completely.

The _only_ reason for all this propaganda hype with "free Western media" shutting up victims trying to speak up, stopping Russian news and all things is that _no_one_ ever thought that Russia will dare to use military force against aggressors and protect it's citizens, instead of just shaking air and watching US puppets kill Russian peacekeepers, internationally recognized in that area.

[Elfie]

And remember, in Yugoslavia you directly supported terrorists. KLA was declared a "terrorist organization" by US congress in Autumn 1998.

Wrong again Comrade. NATO (not just America, all of NATO) stopped the genocide and ethnic cleansing that was going on in Kosovo. The west was not supporting the terrorists and would not have even gotten involved if it hadn't been for the genocide and ethnic cleansing that was going on. You just can't seem to get that in your head that your buddies the Serbians were in the wrong. Of course, the same kind of genocide/ethnic cleansing crap had been happening all over the former Yugoslavia for years. That doesn't excuse what Serbia was doing in Kosovo and I am of the opinion that something should have been done much sooner to stop those crimes against humanity.

Just a heads up, Yugoslavia doesn't exist anymore, and didn't when NATO intervened in Kosovo. Why you act all butthurt over Kosovo is beyond me simply because the genocide and ethic cleansing that was going on was well documented.

[Kermit de frog]

At least he didn't kill 10% of his population in 5 years like "liberators" did, and didn't have never-ending civil war and humanitarian catastrophe.

"Democracy" can't be brought by cruise missiles and carpet-bombings. It was up to Iraqi people, just like Saakashvili is up to Georgians now. Every nation deserves it's government.

No one deserves a government where genecide is enforced.  He was a mass murderer and was tried by his own people.  Found guilty and sentenced accordingly.  The U.S. had the power to arrest him.

[Hangtime]

You miss my point completely.

The _only_ reason for all this propaganda hype with "free Western media" shutting up victims trying to speak up, stopping Russian news and all things is that _no_one_ ever thought that Russia will dare to use military force against aggressors and protect it's citizens, instead of just shaking air and watching US puppets kill Russian peacekeepers, internationally recognized in that area.

Well, you sure showed us the error of our modern ways... imagine, the utter stupidity of the west, to assume that russia would pursue diplomatic means of securing it's interests in the region!

Now we get to watch 'russian peacekeepers' on western tv calmly stand by while osset thieves commit murder, robbery, rape.

classic... freakin classic russian diplomacy.

[Yeager]

UN inspectors left Iraq only after US declared an attack.
====
The inspectors were being denied access to required facilities for years by Hussein all to help create the appearance that he was developing WMDs.  It was a bad call on Husseins part, he eventually met his death at the end of a hangmans rope.  I know Hussein was a good friend of the soviets but thats just the way the ball bounced.

I find it very difficult to believe the US attacked Iraq for some WMD, 20000km from mainland US. Your regime wanted Iraqi oil, and didn't mind killing a million civilians to get hold on it.
====
We attacked Iraq for many reasons, no?  We wanted to secure free flow of oil to global markets (which it is doing today), We wanted to punish Hussein for being wicked cruel soviet style dictator (which we did).  We wanted to be sure Hussein was not developing WMDs (he was deceiving the world into believing that he was, so we went and found out for sure).  We wanted to insert 150,000 combat troops into the very center of the armpit of the earth, the middle east, to attract terrorists scum like bugs to a bug zapper......I would guess 80,000-100,000 thousand of them have died.  Your nonsensical number one million civilians is genuine soviet style vodka enhanced hyperbole at its worst, or best......depending.

Aggression against Iraq was unprovoked and criminal.
====
It was lawful sanctioned by both the US congress and the United Nations.

Iran didn't do anything nearly compared to your crimes in Yugoslavia and Iraq.
====
silly boroda, its not about what Iran "has done" with russian supplied nuclear technology, it about what the "WILL DO" with it if allowed to.  If Puten wants to make war with the US over Iran or Israel he better be prepared to experience mutually assured destruction, because that system is still in place and ready to go.

And remember, in Yugoslavia you directly supported terrorists. KLA was declared a "terrorist organization" by US congress in Autumn 1998.
====
Could be...who were these "terrorists" killing at the time we were supporting them?  

[Elfie]

I don't see it possible to deny their possession of the stuff when we provided it to begin with.

Thats not entirely accurate Hang.

It is true that we sold Iraq dual-use chemicals but so did lots of other countries and we weren't even the biggest supplier. Then, when we found out he was using chemical weapons, we stopped the sale of all chemicals that could be used in the manufacture of weapons. Also, iirc, the equipment to manufacture the weapons came from western europe.

[Wolfala]

Another round of insults...  This is pointless.

Dimka,


I will have to say, again this is Alex, that I’m a very Marxist Military Officer, meaning, I do not vote. The reason I’m like this is because I am an extension of my politicians and I have a personal feeling that I cannot do my job to the best of my ability if I show favoritism to one party. Brain washed no, but I have a duty to my Commander In-Chief and my Soldiers to bring them home safely or die trying! Yes, I took my work very seriously. Regardless of who enters office, I will do their bidding. As an Officer, you are taught the acronym DIME. Diplomatic, Information, Military and Economics, of course I represent the M. However, I will say that I feel we are the last resort!

The largest complaint I have about our Politicians is the fact that we do not educate our POTUS to the same level as our Military Generals, when it comes to initiating the M. I know that we have civilians in charge so that America will not become the next Roman Empire, and I agree with that, but a little education never hurt anyone. There is a difference in being a lawyer versus being a Commander in a field of battle.

I don’t know what it would have been like, sitting in the Oval Office on Sep 11, 2001. I don’t believe that I could have made a better decision than President Bush. I know with my security clearance, I still don’t know everything! I have to believe someone when they say that Iraq had Chemical Weapons, since they used them against Iran! So how would it feel sitting there, having all your top aids tell you this is what we need to do? America in general wanted Blood. If I remember correctly, both the House and the Senate agreed to the war! But what would you have done, sitting there and someone just killed your sons and daughters? I for one love my country and will do whatever it takes to keep her safe! If I make a mistake, I’m sorry!

But my ending point to you and perhaps the most important one for you to take is this:  since you are going from Enlisted to Officer in a very short time - you really need to take a hard look at where you stand. You are an instrument of policy for the United States of America. You do not have the luxury of deciding on the rationality of that policy. If you cannot be comfortable with that responsability - you better take a hard look at your chosen profession my friend.

Best quote ever
"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat." President Theodore Roosevelt “Citizenship in a Republic” 1910.

Regards,

Wolf

[bongaroo]

So you are saying that Saddam should still be alive and in control of "his people"?

I guess I am.  If the U.S.A. is going to play world police we've got a lot of countries to invade.  African warlords using chirldren warriors, the Burma Junta slaughtering peacefully protesting monks, etc. etc. etc.

Afghanistan harbored and worked hand in hand with the terrorists who hijacked and flew planes into the WTC, Pentagon, and probably tried for the White House.  Iraq had no hand in this.

All we did by invading Iraq was begin another fight we have no clear way to exit (ala Vietnam), open a new front for terroists to train and work in (arguably spreading islamic-fanatical influence), and weaken our credibility worldwide.

I won't argue that Saddam was an evil man.  But I will argue that it wasn't our job and we're crazy for opening that can of worms.

<S> froggy

p.s. neener neener neener, you can't edit this post  

[FrodeMk3]

So you are saying that Saddam should still be alive and in control of "his people"?

Keeping him in power, and bringing him back under our "wing", so to speak (we helped to put him in power in the first place) would have been a better long-term solution to our geopolitical problems' in the region than what we have today. You see, we tolerated him being a dictator because admittadly, Dictators' do have some advantages. He could act swiftly and unilaterally in times' of need. For example, with Iranian Nuclear ambitions' on the rise again, at the moment, our options' are kinda screwed. Apart from some kind of overt U.S. military act, what else can we do? Maybe we could goad the Isreali's into hitting those target's for us. However, it's not as simple as Osirak in the 1980's...The Iranian's have a dozen or more facilities, spread out over a larger area, at the extreme limit's of the range of Isreali-based strike fighters. And don't forget, now you have a resurgent Russia, which is now determined to try to act against us in our foreign policies', that would most likely spring to Irans' aid.

However...with Saddam still there, we could get HIM to do this for us instead. Being another Arab war would give the Russian's little precedent for direct intervention themselves. We could just remind Saddam that even thought the ground conflict was important, that he's gonna want to make sure that he sends' his airforce to kill all of the Iranian Nuclear weapons' related production facilities at the same time. We could make our real-time satellite recon satellites' available for this task, and help him make sure everything's done right.

Now I do know that Saddam was brutal and ruthless. He did kill thousands' of his own people. But if the unrest we see of people in the region is any indicator, you start to see that it might be hard to rule there on a pacifist basis. And one other advantage of having him there, is that he would have been there right now, and all of our troops' that are currently garrisoning Iraq would be free for deployments' in other parts' of the world. Like Georgia, or the Ukraine.

I read somewhere once, on the subject of the U.S. supporting dictators' in support of it's interests' abroad, that whilst they may have gov't. death squads, or gas their own people, that it kept americans' from fighting and dying so that they could still do the same things' to each other later on. When you look at the 4,000+ American lives' that have been lost in Iraq, and consider that they are still blowing each other up in market places' today, you can see where that statement eerily rings' true.

[Elfie]

(we helped to put him in power in the first place)

I have not seen any information that indicates we helped put Saddam in power.

Links Please!

[Kermit de frog]

I guess I am.  If the U.S.A. is going to play world police we've got a lot of countries to invade.  African warlords using chirldren warriors, the Burma Junta slaughtering peacefully protesting monks, etc. etc. etc.

Afghanistan harbored and worked hand in hand with the terrorists who hijacked and flew planes into the WTC, Pentagon, and probably tried for the White House.  Iraq had no hand in this.

All we did by invading Iraq was begin another fight we have no clear way to exit (ala Vietnam), open a new front for terroists to train and work in (arguably spreading islamic-fanatical influence), and weaken our credibility worldwide.

I won't argue that Saddam was an evil man.  But I will argue that it wasn't our job and we're crazy for opening that can of worms.

<S> froggy

p.s. neener neener neener, you can't edit this post  

-We both agree Saddam was an evil person/ murderer.  If it wasn't our job, then who's job was it?  Hint; it was someone who had the power to arrest him.

-Iraq does have a clear way out.  Once they can secure themeselves, we can leave, until then, we shall protect them, as we did to Japan for 50 years after WWII.

[AKIron]

For example, with Iranian Nuclear ambitions' on the rise again, at the moment, our options' are kinda screwed. Apart from some kind of overt U.S. military act, what else can we do? Maybe we could goad the Isreali's into hitting those target's for us.

You're kidding right? If we hadn't been tugging on the reins Israel would already have decimated Iran's dreams of nuclear grandeur.

[angelsandair]

You're kidding right? If we hadn't been tugging on the reins Israel would already have decimated Iran's dreams of nuclear grandeur.

Probably would've turned Iran into a Glass Parking lot for a new WalMart Super center....

[Motherland]

-We both agree Saddam was an evil person/ murderer.  If it wasn't our job, then who's job was it?  Hint; it was someone who had the power to arrest him.

The citizens'.
200 years ago the United States fought for independence from the most powerful country in the world, and won, because we didn't like the way they taxed us.
The most we should have done in that situation was helped out a resistance movement with equipment and maybe training. It is not America's job to play world police.