ATG wrote:
Thank you sir. I've done good so far. I really appreciate the sentiment.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Let's just say I've been expecting some party crashers from this vipers den;HunterOfSkulls wrote:
Well now I'm gonna lose that "brilliant" designation for asking "WTF is a dual sport motorcycle?"ATG wrote:
Clarify; are you a spy from a certain dual sport motorcycle web site here to cause trouble?
If you are, please just confess now.
http://www.advrider.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9
They kept threatening to gang rape me here because I've butted heads with them too harshly.
Nice job making me think you aren't from Jomamma.
What do you ride?
Oh god, finally some backup.Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, but equally you don't use it as an excuse to further your own imperialist agenda.ATG wrote:
And...what does Iraq have to do with the CIA agents in Italy, pray tell?
So, we were just supposed to clean up the mess the Muslim made in New York and pretend nothing happened?
Thanks Stingray24.
Do you realize that installing a Democracy in another state is by its very nature imperialistic?Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, but equally you don't use it as an excuse to further your own imperialist agenda.ATG wrote:
And...what does Iraq have to do with the CIA agents in Italy, pray tell?
So, we were just supposed to clean up the mess the Muslim made in New York and pretend nothing happened?
Do you know what sovereignty is or does it only apply to states that are democratic and apparently Jewish if its in the Middle East.
That would only be true if we hand selected the people who could be elected. We didn't, or else that rat bastard Sadr would not be a player.Fen321 wrote:
Do you realize that installing a Democracy in another state is by its very nature imperialistic?
Do you know what sovereignty is or does it only apply to states that are democratic and apparently Jewish if its in the Middle East.
I can see why some would see it imperialistic, but to me, subjects would do what we say or suffer harshly.
See that happening?
Imperialism is not limited to the after the fact style of rule you impose. Its the act of going to another country and saying "you don't rule correctly -- now i will remove you." Its this act that alone defines the nature of the situation -- the style of rule you set up afterwards will not determine the fact that your agenda condones going to sovereign countries and IMPOSING an election system that did not arise from the populace itself.
I respect what you are saying, but disagree.Fen321 wrote:
Imperialism is not limited to the after the fact style of rule you impose. Its the act of going to another country and saying "you don't rule correctly -- now i will remove you." Its this act that alone defines the nature of the situation -- the style of rule you set up afterwards will not determine the fact that your agenda condones going to sovereign countries and IMPOSING an election system that did not arise from the populace itself.
Were we heading an empire we would be pumping their oil straight into our tankers and not looking back.
Saddam was funding suicide bombers in Israel. That is not acceptable.
You don't install US citizens in Iraqi government because then it becomes really, painfully, sickeningly obvious to everybody who lives there that isn't blind or in a persistent vegetative state that their nation is just someone else's property. Why do something that blatant when you can just install some US-friendly local? That way you have someone who (hopefully) has a clue about the culture and the people, who knows something of the power-players in the society and the different dominant factions and best of all gives you plausible deniability. "See, we're not in charge, it's this guy here, he lives there."Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.
Of course most people don't buy that last bit, so mostly it's for the first two reasons. The USSR used to do the same thing. Unfortunately when they find a local willing to suck up to an outside power, invariably it's some egomaniac nutjob who could care less about anything besides what they stand to gain from it, see earlier examples of sponsored dictators. Our government needs to break out of this "bad guys to do good jobs" routine, it ain't workin'. The only innovative thing about it is that they're creating tomorrow's problems today.
Bleh, flame wars. My wife's dealing with something like that on another forum. As far as what I ride, honestly? Nothing at the moment outside of BF2. My license is tied up because of an unpaid fine in NY. I'd love to own a good motorcycle at some point in the future, but right now lack of license and finances prevent it.ATG wrote:
Let's just say I've been expecting some party crashers from this vipers den;
http://www.advrider.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9
They kept threatening to gang rape me here because I've butted heads with them too harshly.
Nice job making me think you aren't from Jomamma.
What do you ride?
Oh and congrats on the no smoking thing, still working on that here. The wife and I had quit for about a year, but all it took to mess that up was having to move twice in two weeks and then a cute little super-curvy redhead offering us a clove cig at an event. We're gearing up to try and quit again soon.
Good luck bro.
There are major flaws in that line of reasoning. The most obvious is the United States can see what a screwed up place Iraq is and is desperately looking for a way to get away from it without causing a huge humanitarian problem. Americans want to distance themselves from the Mid east. They have learned their lesson with regards to British intelligence.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
As Fen said, it's not the way the new Iraqi government was set up that makes it imperialistic, rather it's the very act of going into another country and imposing your idea of how the country should be run that is imperialistic.Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, but equally you don't use it as an excuse to further your own imperialist agenda.ATG wrote:
And...what does Iraq have to do with the CIA agents in Italy, pray tell?
So, we were just supposed to clean up the mess the Muslim made in New York and pretend nothing happened?
The US gets called imperialistic because it behaves in an imperialistic manner. If the US were to stop behaving in an imperialistic manner then it would cease being accused of imperialism.
I'm sorry but I find that extremely Ironic coming from someone in the UK..lol
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Pretty much... You put it better than I could.HunterOfSkulls wrote:
You don't install US citizens in Iraqi government because then it becomes really, painfully, sickeningly obvious to everybody who lives there that isn't blind or in a persistent vegetative state that their nation is just someone else's property. Why do something that blatant when you can just install some US-friendly local? That way you have someone who (hopefully) has a clue about the culture and the people, who knows something of the power-players in the society and the different dominant factions and best of all gives you plausible deniability. "See, we're not in charge, it's this guy here, he lives there."Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.
Of course most people don't buy that last bit, so mostly it's for the first two reasons. The USSR used to do the same thing. Unfortunately when they find a local willing to suck up to an outside power, invariably it's some egomaniac nutjob who could care less about anything besides what they stand to gain from it, see earlier examples of sponsored dictators. Our government needs to break out of this "bad guys to do good jobs" routine, it ain't workin'. The only innovative thing about it is that they're creating tomorrow's problems today.
Kmarion wrote:
ATG wrote:
Thank you sir. I've done good so far. I really appreciate the sentiment.
Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2007-02-18 18:41:30)
We imposed this war? Think again genius. Jihad was first declared in August 1989. When American Troops first landed (Publicly) in Saudi Arabia. Since its then whoever kills the most American (or allied) troops wins. Whether you agree or not, we ( the Armed Forces of the U.S.) have been at war since then. Other than giving women a chance to drive a car and vote, we have done nothing wrong.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
A state of war that you imposed upon yourself. A country can't just go "we're at war", ride slipshod all over international law, and then use the claim that "we're at war" to justify their actions.ATG wrote:
And if I were president I would advise any nations seeking to detain our men that the Marines would be there for them should anything happen.
Europe may not be at war, but we are.
I assume that's directed at me?Kmarion wrote:
I'm sorry but I find that extremely Ironic coming from someone in the UK..lol
Yes. I know. There is a certain irony in it, I accept we did these things in the past and I know we were complicit in the USs actions (by being a willing member of the coalition), but some of us have learnt from the mistakes of our imperialistic past.
Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2007-02-18 18:51:42)
Unfortunately smtt866 the US constitution does not allow for us to invade another nation to allow it's women to vote or drive cars. Faulty intelligence enabled us to believe Saddam was an imminent threat.smtt686 wrote:
We imposed this war? Think again genius. Jihad was first declared in August 1989. When American Troops first landed (Publicly) in Saudi Arabia. Since its then whoever kills the most American (or allied) troops wins. Whether you agree or not, we ( the Armed Forces of the U.S.) have been at war since then. Other than giving women a chance to drive a car and vote, we have done nothing wrong.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
A state of war that you imposed upon yourself. A country can't just go "we're at war", ride slipshod all over international law, and then use the claim that "we're at war" to justify their actions.ATG wrote:
And if I were president I would advise any nations seeking to detain our men that the Marines would be there for them should anything happen.
Europe may not be at war, but we are.
I was just saying it was ironic, that's it. Especially when you consider the screwed up borders and where they came from in that region.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I assume that's directed at me?Kmarion wrote:
I'm sorry but I find that extremely Ironic coming from someone in the UK..lol
Yes. I know. There is a certain irony in it, but I accept we did these things in the past and I know we were complicit in the USs actions (by being a willing member of the coalition), but some of us have learnt from the mistakes of our imperialistic past.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-18 18:50:06)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Yes. Again, I know...Kmarion wrote:
I was just saying it was ironic, that's it. Especially when you consider the screwed up borders and where they came from in that region.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I assume that's directed at me?Kmarion wrote:
I'm sorry but I find that extremely Ironic coming from someone in the UK..lol
Yes. I know. There is a certain irony in it, but I accept we did these things in the past and I know we were complicit in the USs actions (by being a willing member of the coalition), but some of us have learnt from the mistakes of our imperialistic past.
Because that would be too obvious.
wha?Bubbalo wrote:
Because that would be too obvious.
That's what I thought.ATG wrote:
wha?Bubbalo wrote:
Because that would be too obvious.
Because that would be too obvious.Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.
Sorry!
Last edited by Bubbalo (2007-02-18 20:55:45)
Gawd, I just love when liberals try to quote each other to make a point, quote a conservative instead, and put the conservatives words into a liberals mouth.Stingray24 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.
LOL Bubs, I wish I could karma you again.
How in the fuck did you manage that?!?Bubbalo wrote:
Because that would be too obvious.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Why haven't we installed US citizens in Iraqi government if we're so imperialistic? That line is so tired it's getting really boring to hear people keep repeating it.
Sorry!
Last edited by ATG (2007-02-18 20:52:11)
I got lazy and quote from a later post instead of the original, and accidently left the wrong user in.
I may need to interview you again about this.
Might as well, that threads on fire, huh?
Might as well, that threads on fire, huh?