Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: anonymous on July 26, 2004, 01:10:37 PM
-
a pal of mine gave me the heads up on this: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005398. also somebody do a dinosaur a favor and tell me what a blogger is?
-
A blog is kind of like a BBS, except only the moderator or owner posts topics. You can only respond..you can't start threads.
That's what my experience is with "Blogs".
-
In spite of repeated warnings from the Taliban that women should neither register nor stand for office, 2.1 million women have now registered to vote, according to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, the body overseeing the process. This means that 38% of the current electorate are women, overturning predictions that few would register.
that is so frikn good..way to go..USA and our real allies...
-
wow..that thing sure lists alot of Positive ...Hope our dam President will Highlight this
what a turnaround....
-
Greencloud...not so sure lazs could possibly agree with your conclusions...but I do.
-
God bless em their trying despite the terrorist,threats and history and those that cried,dont go in the blood will run.
-
scholz re: who said that
I have no knowledge of what anyone elsewhere said.Here in America it was the usual suspects.
The so called intellingent eilite, college professors, media eilite, a few democract leaders, most far left leaders.
ahhh America is arrogant, what makes us think we can just go to afganistan. Why look at their history, even the ussr couldnt beat them....ahhh another veitnam etc. etc. etc.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
scholz re: who said that
I have no knowledge of what anyone elsewhere said.Here in America it was the usual suspects.
The so called intellingent eilite, college professors, media eilite, a few democract leaders, most far left leaders.
ahhh America is arrogant, what makes us think we can just go to afganistan. Why look at their history, even the ussr couldnt beat them....ahhh another veitnam etc. etc. etc.
So.. you don't know any names?
-
Midnight Target...just a reply
Not off the top of my head,I dont want to take time to find it but will try if you really need them.
One was a professor from yale ,he was on the dennis prager show for a half hr. Also I think 1 was a congresswoman from ca.On al rantal on kabc, words from their own mouth.
-
Point being there were very very few who stood against the war in Afghanistan. Silly to make a point against those 3 or 4 people as if it was some kind of movement.
-
Midnight
Come on midnight I disagree with you 95 percent of the time,but have always treated you with respect and as though you were intellingent . Unless you have had your head in the sand you have heard it to and know it was a great number of people .If I had to guess Id say a few million. 3or4....heck,100,000
I would not have wasted my time.
-
There was/is a big difference between the reactions to the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq.
Afghanistan was relatively popular and I think you know that. Your rail against those that cried,dont go in the blood will run.
is just another straw man.
-
MIDNIGHT....just a reply
I am sorry you feel that way, it was not a straw man and I dont play those games. I am right in what I said,and they were out of touch with most Americans maybe even you . Doesnt change the fact of what they said.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
There was/is a big difference between the reactions to the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq.
Afghanistan was relatively popular and I think you know that. Your rail against those
is just another straw man.
you are the first in the thread to compare the two. Really they are too different for that.
Go back to Dec. 2001. America wanted blood BUT there were those that thaught we should continue negotiating w/ the Taliban. AND there were numerous other talking heads on TV that said it would be Years vrs. months that we'd be doing real hard core fighting there.
Yes we are still fighting in Afghanistan but not nearly as much as those that opposed it wanted you to think.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
you are the first in the thread to compare the two. Really they are too different for that.
Go back to Dec. 2001. America wanted blood BUT there were those that thaught we should continue negotiating w/ the Taliban. AND there were numerous other talking heads on TV that said it would be Years vrs. months that we'd be doing real hard core fighting there.
Yes we are still fighting in Afghanistan but not nearly as much as those that opposed it wanted you to think.
every time the media or the left has commented on "how it will be bad and how it will turn out" they have been dead wrong. Yet people still listen to them. :confused:
-
Hmm everything seems a bit less rosy in Afghanistan today: Medecins Sans Frontieres pull out after 24 years (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3931995.stm)
-
I don't remember a Yale professor against Afganistan, but there was the "Million Mogadishu" Professor from Columbia. Of course that was in the context of Iraq.
Aside form the "Bomb them with bread" folks, and the Lyndon LaRouche folks, I don't remember many people here in the states being against the war in Afghanistan.
-Sik
-
sikboy ......there were many and yes I heard a proff fron yale against.....didnt you hear mm last night said he wouldnt have gone to afganistian
Dead......SOUNDS french it is it is french,even left their doctors bag lol.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
America wanted blood BUT there were those that thaught we should continue negotiating w/ the Taliban.
holy... that's good stuff.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
Dead......SOUNDS french it is it is french,even left their doctors bag lol.
"Marine Corps" sounds French and is French too. Still don't let that distract you from your knee-jerk racial stereotyping. ;)
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Go back to Dec. 2001. America wanted blood BUT there were those that thaught we should continue negotiating w/ the Taliban. AND there were numerous other talking heads on TV that said it would be Years vrs. months that we'd be doing real hard core fighting there.
Yes we are still fighting in Afghanistan but not nearly as much as those that opposed it wanted you to think.
Name and quote them.
-
Originally posted by -dead-
Hmm everything seems a bit less rosy in Afghanistan today: Medecins Sans Frontieres pull out after 24 years (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3931995.stm)
Only to simple minded ones among us who believe that like a movie, this should all be easy and without sacrifice.
-
Originally posted by Rude
Only to simple minded ones among us who believe that like a movie, this should all be easy and without sacrifice.
Ahh... so to the complicated-minded such as yourself losing the services of 1,480 aid workers in an NGO with over two decades of experience in Afghanistan is progress and a step in the right direction, eh? Well let's crank up the Ethel Merman (http://www.reelclassics.com/Audio_Video/Music3d/merman_gypsy_everythingscominguproses.mp3), and sing along then...
-
They're a long way away from being "turned around".
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/07/29/uk.afghan.iraq/index.html
-SW
-
Originally posted by -dead-
Ahh... so to the complicated-minded such as yourself losing the services of 1,480 aid workers in an NGO with over two decades of experience in Afghanistan is progress and a step in the right direction, eh? Well let's crank up the Ethel Merman (http://www.reelclassics.com/Audio_Video/Music3d/merman_gypsy_everythingscominguproses.mp3), and sing along then...
Perhaps you prefer the 800,000 Africans slaughtered while the UN sat around and sipped cherry and smoked cigars....of course, loss of life would have been necessary to quell that atrosity now wouldn't it?
Bottom line....folks like me will be dying for years and years to come to save the likes of you...your welcome.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
sikboy ......there were many and yes I heard a proff fron yale against.....didnt you hear mm last night said he wouldnt have gone to afganistian
Dead......SOUNDS french it is it is french,even left their doctors bag lol.
Hey I heard this conservative once who said we should nuke the middle east.
Dam conservatives are nothing but death merchants!
(for the under-educated and right-wing that was sarcasm)
-
msf is going to be very missed. but there are others there doing great work. also wrong for them to claim us aid and policy is at fault for their kia. funny how article on them leaving doesnt list us buying all the medical supply during sov-afghan war. :)
-
Originally posted by Rude
Perhaps you prefer the 800,000 Africans slaughtered while the UN sat around and sipped cherry and smoked cigars....of course, loss of life would have been necessary to quell that atrosity now wouldn't it?
Bottom line....folks like me will be dying for years and years to come to save the likes of you...your welcome.
remember dude sheepdogs arent allowed to get pissed at the sheep no matter what. :)
-
RUDE.......bottom line
Damn Rude dont know who you are ,what color you are ,if you french ,russian, indian,american or come from venus with 8 arms I would be proud to shake your hand.
DEAD, if it means we need to stop feeling up 91 year old greatgrandmas and start shearching men[ and women if need be]
from the middle east before we let them on a plane or elsewhere and stop this stupid quota system of searching them/
If it means I am smart enough to understand that these aid workers are running out now when they are most needed,and doing it only for polictial reasons/
If it means taking a stab at the french because they have once again sided with there buddies the arabs in the sudan in my opinion and again europe and the u.n.are doing nothing about the killing of blacks [maybe a million by december] because the arabs say they are an inferior race/
If because I have come to believe that maybe 65 percent of american blacks are narcissist people along with 45 percent of all americans/
Then so be it I am a racist thru and thru.
But I tell you this, If I was president, I promise you that by a week from to day , there would be no more arabs making slaves of blacks or killing blacks and others in the sudan. I would not ask permission of europe or un.No resalutions nothing.And even If the blacks for what ever reason ended up hating us I would just say thank you very much and leave. If that makes me a racist then so be it.
-
Originally posted by Rude
Perhaps you prefer the 800,000 Africans slaughtered while the UN sat around and sipped cherry and smoked cigars
Why not say, "while the world sat around..."?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Why not say, "while the world sat around..."?
the world minus a few really ballsy french foreign legionaires. didnt seem like much but they probably saved twenty thousand civvies just by having the balls to move into the area.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
RUDE.......bottom line
Damn Rude dont know who you are ,what color you are ,if you french ,russian, indian,american or come from venus with 8 arms I would be proud to shake your hand.
DEAD, if it means we need to stop feeling up 91 year old greatgrandmas and start shearching men[ and women if need be]
from the middle east before we let them on a plane or elsewhere and stop this stupid quota system of searching them/
If it means I am smart enough to understand that these aid workers are running out now when they are most needed,and doing it only for polictial reasons/
If it means taking a stab at the french because they have once again sided with there buddies the arabs in the sudan in my opinion and again europe and the u.n.are doing nothing about the killing of blacks [maybe a million by december] because the arabs say they are an inferior race/
If because I have come to believe that maybe 65 percent of american blacks are narcissist people along with 45 percent of all americans/
Then so be it I am a racist thru and thru.
But I tell you this, If I was president, I promise you that by a week from to day , there would be no more arabs making slaves of blacks or killing blacks and others in the sudan. I would not ask permission of europe or un.No resalutions nothing.And even If the blacks for what ever reason ended up hating us I would just say thank you very much and leave. If that makes me a racist then so be it.
No 'ifs' about it. You are a racist.
-
Midnight....racist
I can never tell with you what you really think,so since I didnt think you would respond to this one and you did,Ill say this.
If you believe that try for once to say something more than a 1 liner expand why do you think I am a racist?
The first day I was on you asked me what I would do about the sudan, I told you,I have done 70 percent of what I said.What have you done?
Again if it was another throw a way line than this post isnt for you.
-
Not a throw away line at all. I'm basing that statement on your "beliefs"
I have come to believe that maybe 65 percent of american blacks are narcissist people
No problem. You are who you are. I like your stand on the Sudan.
-
Originally posted by anonymous
the world minus a few really ballsy french foreign legionaires. didnt seem like much but they probably saved twenty thousand civvies just by having the balls to move into the area.
Actually that's not true at all as far as I can tell, do you have a source.
The following countries contributed to the United Nations Assistance Mission In Rwanda (UNAMIR), which was under Canadian operational command.
"CONTRIBUTORS OF MILITARY AND CIVILIAN POLICE PERSONNEL
Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Germany, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Guyana, India, Jordan, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Netherlands, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovak Republic, Spain, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Zambia and Zimbabwe"
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/co_mission/unamirF.htm
So when Rude says, "Perhaps you prefer the 800,000 Africans slaughtered while the UN sat around and sipped cherry and smoked cigars....of course", it's a not true.
It wasn't the UN that was sat around. It was the members states that didn't contribute anything, or enough, to solve the problem.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
It was the members states that didn't contribute anything, or enough, to solve the problem.
So who is the UN then?
I mean, obviously, it's not the "member states" right?
-
Midnight...beliefs
Midnight you are one of those that in your case I believe unwittingly made the word racist of no meaning.
Truth can not be racist. The line you said made me racist has nothing to do with race.I also said 45 percent of Americans are narcissist, does not 45 percent of Americans far outnumber 65 percent of blacks. I refurred to blacks first because surprise blacks are the ones being killed now not any other race.
I have nothing in common with charles rangel,I do not agree with anything he stands for almost,but I was cheering for him 4 weeks ago when he tried to do something about it.Dont hear anything from him because he couldnt get any support from the good ole boys like jj and enfume etc. If I say all blacks take 2 days longer to draw circles than anyone else and it has never been researched that is bigotted. If I say blacks are a inferior race,or say they have to sit at back of bus ,or make them slaves,[or any other group including white people] that is racist.
Look at what they are trying to do to bill cosby,even given him orders and threatening him,of course the liberal whites are just saying oh hes just misguided.they all have problem,he has guts,he is very smart ,he is respected and he has a hell of a lot of money.Well see.
Anyway sorry you feel that way,but I am at peace with my self.
condaleeza rice for president in 2008.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So who is the UN then?
I mean, obviously, it's not the "member states" right?
Right. The UN is a venue and a charter. The UN can't compell member states to militarily support a resolution. It can only grant them permission to so. If member states decide not to, there isn't anything the UN can do about it. So it seems silly to blame the UN when the member states don't do so.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
scholz re: who said that
ahhh America is arrogant, what makes us think we can just go to afganistan. Why look at their history, even the ussr couldnt beat them....ahhh another veitnam etc. etc. etc.
Yeah, we should have just hid under our fugging beds after 9/11 and let 'em be.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
So it seems silly to blame the UN when the member states don't do so.
So you're saying the UN has no real substance? After all, a venue and a charter really don't amount to anything at all do they?
Hmmmmmmmm...... yet feathers get ruffled when it's pointed out that the UN is basically useless when it comes to actually DOING something. Charter, venue, member states........ slice it as you like, things that need doing simply don't get done.
30,000+ dead and more to come in the Sudan being the current case in point.
Rwanda yet another.
But........ you know that.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Actually that's not true at all as far as I can tell, do you have a source.
The following countries contributed to the United Nations Assistance Mission In Rwanda (UNAMIR), which was under Canadian operational command.
"CONTRIBUTORS OF MILITARY AND CIVILIAN POLICE PERSONNEL
Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Germany, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Guyana, India, Jordan, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Netherlands, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovak Republic, Spain, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Zambia and Zimbabwe"
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/co_mission/unamirF.htm
So when Rude says, "Perhaps you prefer the 800,000 Africans slaughtered while the UN sat around and sipped cherry and smoked cigars....of course", it's a not true.
It wasn't the UN that was sat around. It was the members states that didn't contribute anything, or enough, to solve the problem.
my source is buddies in the legion who i talked to after they were there. they were there they went into the area before the "official" response began.
-
"So you're saying the UN has no real substance? After all, a venue and a charter really don't amount to anything at all do they?"
Capitol Hill, and the Consitution? :)
"Hmmmmmmmm...... yet feathers get ruffled when it's pointed out that the UN is basically useless when it comes to actually DOING something."
Then perhaps it should be the security council that should be blamed? But one could go further and dicuss the flaws in the Charter itself.
But Rwanda seems different to me. The SC gave permission to the members to go in there and do something about. And the members states decide not to do enough. Under what other system could it be different? Only if the UN could compell the nations to help stop the slaughter.
Same thing with Sudan.
-
thrawn heres one listing i found doing quick search http://www.angelfire.com/fl/marcwitteveen/campaignslist.html. the guys i know were part of reconaissance unit and crossed over border before official decision came down if i remember right.
-
Well, fortunately, things DO get done on Capitol Hill by people acting through the Constitution when it comes to Americans getting slaughtered in thousands.
Can't say the same about the UN venue, charter and "citizens of the world" though.
Lay blame wherever you like. There's plenty to go around. However, laying blame does not absolve the refusal/inability to act when action is clearly needed.
Rwanda? This turned my stomach. Clearly, it was not my country's finest hour. Unfortunately, my country had plenty of company in the Hall of Shame that is the UN / UN Security Council.
100 Days of Slaughter (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/etc/slaughter.html)
Although disease and more killings claim additional lives in the refugee camps, the genocide is over. An estimated 800,000 Rwandans have been killed in 100 days
Be sure to check out the links to the various speeches and especially the reports embedded in the timeline. Just about assured to make one abandon all hope.
Heck, maybe I should just adopt the Finnish attitude.
Originally posted by Fishu
Theres many places alike Sudan, in africa and around the world.
It would require too much resources to help these countries become peaceful...
That's the ticket; there's too many of them, so why even bother to try?
-
"Just about assured to make one abandon all hope."
Yep, that pretty much did it. I read your links. And I concede any and all points. No offence ment, I just don't see the point.
I recall the end of the movie "The Mission".
Hontar: We must work in the world, your eminence. The world is thus.
Altamirano: No, Seņor Hontar. Thus have we made the world... thus have I made it.
-
Makes ya wanna puke, doesn't it?
See, I'm the type that would have volunteered. Wouldn't have beached if Clinton sent my kids.
That Rwanda thing........ nearly a MILLION people........ and the world sat on it's hands. A MILLION.
Would that it was only Rwanda; but it wasn't, isn't and apparently never will be.
Sudan's only at 30K so they say; wonder how far they'll run up the score against no opposition?
The UN does what?
NM, I know.
-
SUDAN IN LAST TEN YEARS IS NEAR 1 MILLION
-
The UN is only as good as it's member states so it thye who must bear the blame, especially the one on the SC and most especially the permanent members.
Last time I checked the US was one of those permanent members.
It's no good blaming the UN as if it is entirely seperate to the US because it's not. Blame the UN and you blame the US as well. It's not as if the US was any different to the UK, France, Russia etc. in failing to do anything about Rwanda or at the present time Sudan.
As to Afghanistan it may not have been popular with the Muslim world and the far left but every reasonable nation recognized that the US had a genuine causus belli. It was Iraq that divided world opinion and split the SC, for right or wrong. The causus belli for Iraq was much less clear and much less emotive, whatever the long term benefit that may accrue from it.
-
Originally posted by Rude
Perhaps you prefer the 800,000 Africans slaughtered while the UN sat around and sipped cherry and smoked cigars....of course, loss of life would have been necessary to quell that atrosity now wouldn't it?
Bottom line....folks like me will be dying for years and years to come to save the likes of you...your welcome.
OK, non sequitur upon non sequitur...
So can we just clarify - do you think MSF leaving Afghanistan is a good thing or a bad thing?
Now onto the new non sequitur
IIRC the US did not go into Afghanistan as part of a humanitarian or peacekeeping mission. There was no civil war to stop, no slaughter going on in Afghanistan. They went in for a regime change and to take out al qaeda. Whether you agree with the US's reasons or not (I agree, but think the US was a little short-sighted in going for regime change, as it may have caused more problems than it solved), you cannot deny that the US going in caused more civilian deaths in Afghanistan than not going in. You can justify these casualties but you can't deny they happened, or that they wouldn't have if the US had not gone in.
So what does Africa have to do with it? Or the UN? And really your example just begs the question - so why hasn't the US gone to stop these killings? I wasn't going to ask, nor do I particularly blame the US for not doing so - it's clearly not in their interest and right now they may not really have the manpower for it - but this African question isn't my high horse: I am intrigued, though. So why, in your opinion, has the US sat around and "sipped cherry and smoked cigars" while 800,000 Africans were slaughtered?
That aside you really seem to have missed the point a bit - my original contention is that Afghanistan isn't all good news. In fact some of it is very bad news. MSF leaving is, in my opinion, bad news, and it may have a serious knock-on effect.
Perhaps the most curious thing is why you, as a complicated-minded man who does not "believe that like a movie, this should all be easy and without sacrifice" are trying to downplay the bad news? After all, there's bound to some difficulties, eh? Nothing to be ashamed of, surely?
BTW do please let me know when you've died to save me, and I'll send some flowers. You're welcome too.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Yeah, we should have just hid under our fugging beds after 9/11 and let 'em be.
Now now Rip, maybe we should have just asked the french for
permission first :D
-
Originally posted by Pei
It's not as if the US was any different to the UK, France, Russia etc. in failing to do anything about Rwanda or at the present time Sudan.
Disagree.
U.S. wants Sudan militias disarmed (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/africa/07/29/sudan.aid.resolution/index.html)
...The United States had pressed for sanctions, but after opposition from some countries on the 15-member Security Council, U.S. officials deleted the word "sanctions" from the draft resolution Thursday...
Once again, "some countries" are for no action, no resolutions that promise consequences. The US isn't one of those wrt Sudan, however.
Now I'm guessing there'd be another world uproar if we unilaterally went in there and disarmed them.
Not that we could do it now anyway, of course. Point is we are rebuked for acting unilaterally but otoh none will act at all.