A civil Iraq discussion thread: please leave your hyperbole at the door

[Siaf__csf]

Grunherz the swiss have always been greedy people, that's for sure. So they accepted gold. Big deal.

Who did they attack? Who did they kill? Whose internal relations did they mess up? Nobody. They just accepted bank savings from a wargoing country at a time when nobody outside germany REALLY knew about the attrocities taking place.

What were the swiss supposed to do with the nazi money? Hand it back over the the reich?

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Grunherz the swiss have always been greedy people, that's for sure. So they accepted gold. Big deal.

Who did they attack? Who did they kill? Whose internal relations did they mess up? Nobody. They just accepted bank savings from a wargoing country at a time when nobody outside germany REALLY knew about the attrocities taking place.

What were the swiss supposed to do with the nazi money? Hand it back over the the reich?

OMG I cannot belive what you just wrote, how evil and dismissive and callous it is towards the Swiss finacial services in help of the nazi war effort.

I will simply let the others tear up what you wrote.

[Monk]

So they made money off of Genocide, and it's OK.

Your freakin Einstein, my friend.

[Siaf__csf]

Grunherz the old coal miner: I simply love how she restored the UK economic progress by destroying the evil coal mining unions and putting those greedy unproductive bastards in their place.

How many tons of coal have you mined, man? Have you ever visited a coal mine?

Do you have any idea of the circumstances those guys had in the past and still have in countries like china?

Big big words, coming from an empty head. I'm beginning to think that Grun had to leave his homecountry because they decided he's better off in a rubber dingy somewhere far away.

[Siaf__csf]

It's so easy to judge afterwards.. The question is was the Swiss leadership and banks really aware of the source of the gold? Did the nazi leadership take them for a tour in the concentration camps to show off the source of the gold? I highly doubt that. The fact is that the allied troops were dumbfounded with the sight of the camps when they finally reached them. Now why is that? Nobody knew maybe?

Has that been proven? Because at least I haven't seen any documents stating that.

If accepting money was the limit, then swedes are equally guilty along with multiple countries that traded with nazi-germany.

Back in those days there were no CNN and satellite uplinks informing people of other countries.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Grunherz the swiss have always been greedy people, that's for sure. So they accepted gold. Big deal.

Who did they attack? Who did they kill? Whose internal relations did they mess up? Nobody. They just accepted bank savings from a wargoing country at a time when nobody outside germany REALLY knew about the attrocities taking place.

What were the swiss supposed to do with the nazi money? Hand it back over the the reich?

Sorry Siaf I think most people will pay attention to this stement of yours...

[Siaf__csf]

Grunherz by your logic, everyone who trades with a 'selected bad country' is taking part in the human rights violations et cetera?

So we should all collectively sue ourselves for trading with Saddams regime. You probably burned his oil in your gasoline. You're guilty. We should all collectively sue ourselves for accepting south african diamonds, collected with slave labour. We should all collectively sue ourselves for dealing with the americans, who accepted slave labour and massacred the natives... We should all collectively sue ourselves for importing oil from russia, electronics from China.. etc. Heck! It's illegal even to buy Japanese products as they committed war crimes during WW2. I've owned a toyota - sue me.

Trade has never gone hand in hand with morale. Iraq only proves that - even with the sanctions there were always willing buyers. Funnily enough, one pipeline went right to your own ally's territory.

[GRUNHERZ]

My oh my how you are starting to write up excuses and justifications when it hits close to home, eh...  

But I'll simply let you do the talking again:

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Grunherz the swiss have always been greedy people, that's for sure. So they accepted gold. Big deal.

Who did they attack? Who did they kill? Whose internal relations did they mess up? Nobody. They just accepted bank savings from a wargoing country at a time when nobody outside germany REALLY knew about the attrocities taking place.

What were the swiss supposed to do with the nazi money? Hand it back over the the reich?

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf

Just out of interest, what shifted the scale so much between Iraq and Iran?  

Did you miss the Iraqi invason of Kuwait?

Did you miss the Gulf War and 12 years of sanctions and endless UN resolutions?

Sorry, my mistake...there was an end to Iraq-SH UN resolutions as of last March.

[Siaf__csf]

No Grunherz that doesnt cut it.

Do you have proof that the swiss knew what they were accepting when they did it? If not, please find it before making accusations. If the same gold would have been handed to your own government (present or past) they'd take it. Maybe confiscate and use it, take it they would in any case.

Holden: Ok, Iraq invaded kuwait - so it's not ok to invade kuwait but it's ok to support them in an attempt to invade an another country? Right?

How about not meddling with other countries affairs at all and do things only when asked? If a country is attacked and asks for help - fine. Everyone should help. That's what the UN was built for. That's what the 'police' did right. I fully support the coalition kicking Saddam out of Kuwait. But to induce and support conflicts within countries? That's where I pull my line.

[Holden McGroin]

Kuwait invaded somebody? Where? When?  They allowed staging on their territory, but did they put in troops?

It can be argued that the invasion by 'Coalition' forces are in response to violations of various UNSC resolutions, only the last one of which was 1441.

1441 said that consequenses would follow if not adhered to.  That the international community did not have the backbone to back up their words and only coalition did is the issue IMHO.

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Nice way of trying to twist my words wulfie. You must have an unconcious ability of selective reading as you missed totally the parts where I explicitly expressed my support to the TROOPS that were out there. I HATE to see any american serviceman die because of a stupid powermonger in the politic position. The policies are the only thing I'm criticising...

Now, that enemies have changed, you call me French (which is dumbfounding, how did they become your enemy nr.1 as theyre still your ally.)...

Wulfie, I'm not here to make an essay of international relationships as you grasp it. I'm here to raise questions about the true motivations for going to Iraq, the implications and the background of cold-war induced dirty work which created the current situation to start with.

US is not the only one to blame...

Just out of interest, what shifted the scale so much between Iraq and Iran? How come Iran ceased to be the bad guy and your ex friend became the monster of all times?...

Sorry but when you ask Americans on this BBS if 'we're happy now' about our guys 'getting b***f*****' I'm not buying the oh so typical dodge "I hate America's Leaders, not the troops". You had an axe to grind and you came out looking for a fight. Don't look for a fight if you don't really want one. Call the CiC an idiot? Give me a break - do you really think there is no more to the situation than you know or that what you hear on the TV?

I'm sorry, but right now the French Government is not an ally of the United States. Maybe on paper, but in terms of actions no way in hell could you call them an ally. The French foreign minister *refused to answer when asked by reporters who he wanted to prevail - Hussein or the U.S.*.

So you're not here for essays. Well, I hate to break this to you but you're dealing with extremely complex topics, so a 2 paragraph statement or response is never going to be enough. There's too many points to address. What you do is the equivalent of asking a question like "Abortion should be punishable by death - yes or no - make your case in less than 3 sentences". Sounds great, if your lifetime goal is to debate on the Jerry Springer show.

You say now the U.S. is not the only one to blame - that's sure a different tune than what you were singing initially. I seem to recall something to the effect of 'The U.S. is reaping what it sowed'. The funny thing is there is no one to blame at all. Throughout the history of mankind there are not many examples of an international relations-level crisis that had a 'perfect solution', especially when 'hindsight' was applied. What was done was the correct thing. This concept will probably elude you for your entire sheltered life however. Tell me what the U.S. should have done differently during the Iran-Iraq war? Tell me what the U.S. should have done differently in Vietnam? Your attitude seems to be that the U.S. was wrong and arrogant to even get involved. The history of Nations that try to 'avoid getting involved' is usually not a pleasant one. Switzerland pulled it off because they were very tough in terms of their military and they occupied a part of the Earth that was not a 'must have' most of the time. Not every Nation has these circumstances to work with.

Last but not least - Iran shifted from being the #1 bad guy when they lost the ability to wage offensive warfare with any reasonable chance of success. The war with Iraq depleted their manpower reserves, destroyed the majority of their high tech warfighting gear, and anything that wasn't destroyed was useless as their was no one around to repair and/or maintain it. Then Iraq, with an experienced army with good equipment decided to annex Kuwait and begin massing military units on the border of Saudi Arabia. Of course in your twisted world the U.S. knew this would happen all along. All part of our master plan to take over the free world. This master plan is boring. We take too long and give people too much of a chance to whine. I want a new master plan, where we get to act like stormtroopers. If everyone with the intelligence to turn on CNN and commit everything they hear to memory is going to hate us for no reason, the least we could ask for is a chance to do something fun to earn the hatred.

Your opinion of what went on in Afghanistan, of what's going on in Iraq, of what has happened in the Middle East and Vietnam in the past...has nothing in common with reality. You state things as facts that I know to be wrong based on real life experience. Posts like the ones you make and the majority of the responses to those posts are like listening to a bunch of 8 year old virgin boys who are natives of Wisconsin argue over the best way to get laid in Thailand. It's amazing, in a very sick and painful way. Someone writes a post that is totally inaccurate. Then 20 people argue for 150 posts about the details of the initial post - none of which have anything to do with reality.

We'll go back to Jerry Springer mode now, and break it down to a really simple level, so you won't have to deal with 'essays':

1. You stated "we're getting b***f*****". When you look at the history of guerilla warfare, we're doing very well. I guess because CNN doesn't report on all the bad guys who are being captured and killed you just assumed it wasn't happening?

In other words, your assumption - the one in your 'I'm looking for a fight with any American on this BBS' post - is wrong. I point out why in great detail and you tell me you don't have the time to read long words.

2. You stated that there was no end in sight. What do you base this analysis on? The fact that a TV news reported commented 'there's no end in sight here in Iraq'? I've got Friends over there right now. I hear more about what's really going on day-to-day from 'small talk' than you will probably ever learn about in your entire life. So I'm telling you you are wrong. If you weren't on such a mission to piss people off, I might take 15 minutes and give you some directions to some really good international (in terms of sources) research material. But why bother? Your mind is made up.

You are the epitome of 'amateur hour'. An equivalent would be my telling the assembled starting forwards of World Cup Soccer what they were doing wrong in terms of offensive tactics on a BBS.

Based on your attitude on this BBS and the words and tone you chose, I think you are an idiot. This is not because you are not 'pro-U.S.'. There are people on this BBS that don't agree with the current U.S. policy whom I do not consider to be idiots. We have discussions about things. Every so often someone catches themself thinking or saying "I honestly did not know that" or "I never thought of that". You blew any chance of being part of such a discussion when you made your eloquent 'getting b***f*****' statement. How many Iraqi and/or foreign guerilla fighters have been killed or captured since the 'official end of major hostilities'? Do you know? I do and I don't think you do. The ratio would not lead your average unbiased observer to come to the conclusion that the Coalition forces (composed of the U.S. and a few dozen other Nations that you don't consider to be 'on the planet') are 'getting b***f*****' by the insurgents they are facing.

So we'll sum up:

You: "America is getting b***f***** in Iraq!"

Me: "You don't have a clue as to what you are talking about".

You: "There is no end in sight!"

Me: "You are wrong."

Is that non-essay enough for you?

For everyone else - a link to a story on examples of media bias and media coverage of the current situation in Iraq:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/856672.asp?0cv=CB20&cp1=1

Mike/wulfie

[GRUNHERZ]

Let me put this in once more just in case Siaf starts his grand philosophizing about the evil USA again...

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Grunherz the swiss have always been greedy people, that's for sure. So they accepted gold. Big deal.

Who did they attack? Who did they kill? Whose internal relations did they mess up? Nobody. They just accepted bank savings from a wargoing country at a time when nobody outside germany REALLY knew about the attrocities taking place.

What were the swiss supposed to do with the nazi money? Hand it back over the the reich?

BTW very nice wulfie, well though out, well written and nice link to an excellent article - I posted that one too.

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
No Grunherz that doesnt cut it.

Do you have proof that the swiss knew what they were accepting when they did it? If not, please find it before making accusations.

http://www.axt.org.uk/antisem/archive/archive2/switzerland/switzerland.htm

Lots of good reading there.

"Switzerland's war-time record is complex and often appears contradictory. Historians argue that Switzerland suggested to Nazi Germany in 1938 that a 'J' (denoting Jude or Jew) be stamped in German Jewish passports to facilitate recognition by Swiss border police."

"In the late 1950s details about Switzerland's decision in 1942 to refuse entry to at least 30,000 Jewish refugees began to emerge. But it was not until the 1990s that the questions of dormant bank accounts and trading in gold with Nazi Germany became high-profile issues. Critics say these ties to the Third Reich show that Switzerland profitted from the war, while defenders say they were necessary to maintain independence from the fascist powers. Many Swiss historians who have been scrutinizing the nation's past for the last decade have come to feel that the reason Hitler did not invade Switzerland was because its value as a financial clearing-house and a source of hard currency was much greater than its value as an occupied land."

Ouch. "Don't beat her to death she's too good in bed". How does it feel to know you were a *****potato for the Nazis. Hershey's chocolate for me from now on, thankyouverymuch.

"Amid the row over the shredding of historical evidence by UBS, the WJC released documents charging the UBS with storing paintings stolen from prominent Jewish collectors until they could be picked up by middlemen working for Hermann Goering."

"The report claims that Swiss bankers showed 'indifference to the needs of the victims of the Holocaust and their heirs which persisted until the current international pressure came to bear'. It also criticizes other neutral countries and the Allies. In response to the report the Swiss authorities acknowledged that it had entered into 'questionable deals' with the Third Reich but denied helping to prolong the war."

A lot of reading there. A couple of essay's worth I'd say.

So let me get this straight - there's no proof of this, but the Swiss Banks agreed to pay out hundreds of millions anyways?

I really like the parts about how people in Switzerland were still as of a couple of years ago calling the investigations into the wartime conduct of Swiss banks 'part of a Jew conspiracy'. Switzerland is screwed. Between the Jew bank conspiracy and the U.S. conspiracy to take over the entire world, well, they've got nowhere left to hide.

Mike/wulfie

[Monk]

Hmmm.......very nice Wulfie.

I think I found a running mate for Toad.