The Military

[Musopticon?]

USA is (one of) the founding member(s) of the NATO...

 

Are you really sure you do not confues the UN and NATO?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aah, now it dawns on me.

 

I'll withdraw.

[Surreptishus]

And if we are (which I never heard before) we would try to solve it by preventing Iran from getting parts for a nuke,

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Too late.

[BattleCookiee]

Just like Irak had nukes too... and could launch them on the US within 24 hours

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Just like Irak had nukes too... and could launch them on the US within 24 hours

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That was never the case. The case was for WMD's which even if they didnt have them at the time, they certainly had them before.

 

Maybe if Saddam hadnt been such an arse with the inspectors he may have gotten away with it.

[BattleCookiee]

It's not like the American Intelligence Services like the CIA already were 100% sure Irak had no WMD's before the war...

[Lucius]

"Europe" (as in my part of it) is not scared of Iran, dear Commie, at least they haven't been worthy of any particular mentioning in our media (you know, national medias, we're not a single country as you might recall.)

Edited December 18, 2005 by Lucius

[Surreptishus]

At this point, whether or not Iran can have nuclear weapons is completely up to Iran. They have the technology to enrich uranium and if they ignore the IAEA and continue enriching uranium they can have nuclear weapons in a few years. Iran say they are developing the nuclear programme for peaceful ends but for a country so rich with oil and natural gas its a bit pointless.

 

So anyway, how do you prevent from such a situation from arising? (iran is the one making a grab for power in this case)

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

So anyway, how do you prevent from such a situation from arising? (iran is the one making a grab for power in this case)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

M.A.D

 

Only in this case it would be kind of one sided.

[Cantousent]

You know, the indoctrination sounds bad because of the way it's used. For that reason, it sounds creepy. ...But the word doesn't mean brainwashing. It used to be a euphemism for brainwashing. Because of that, it has a bad connotation.

 

It's basic meaning is still "to teach."

[Surreptishus]

I dont see a problem with indoctrinating people so that they can follow orders.

[Commissar]

I believe with regards to RIP, indoctrination simply means he's going to have an NCO smoking him until it's time for said NCO to go home, at which point a fresh NCO takes over the smoking. Rinse, repeat for three weeks.

[Cantousent]

By the time someone gets to RIP, they're probably already "brainwashed," if that's what we want to call it.

[Commissar]

By the time someone gets to RIP, they're probably already "brainwashed," if that's what we want to call it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is most definitely not.

[BattleCookiee]

By the time someone gets to RIP, they're probably already "brainwashed," if that's what we want to call it.

 

Yup. Just see the thread starter of the original topic...

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Yup. Just see the thread starter of the original topic...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He seems to have a pretty solid idea of how the real world works. Where as you want it to be some sort of fantasy land with no basis in reality.

 

So while you feel all smug and superior think about this. The only reason you get the luxury is because people like him fought and died to grant you the privilage.

[213374U]

Trying to have BW understand the workings of the real world is like having an infant solve differential equations.

[Surreptishus]

Trying to have BW understand the workings of the real world is like having an infant solve differential equations.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There have been reports of such instances...

[BattleCookiee]

He seems to have a pretty solid idea of how the real world works. Where as you want it to be some sort of fantasy land with no basis in reality.

 

So while you feel all smug and superior think about this. The only reason you get the luxury is because people like him fought and died to grant you the privilage.

 

So, if you don't support armies and admit that the only "never happining" way of peace would be if all armies were taken away you live in a "fantasy world"?

 

Yeah, sure, I can be free now because they invade countries in the middle east for a bit of oil..., [sarcasm]Oh, I am so gratefull for you to give me my freedom[/sarcasm]

 

Why do so many people use the "But the US saved you guys from WO II" if they defend the US military force.

Guess what, the soldiers 60 years ago were different. And the people we should be gratefull for are now around 80 or dead.

 

I am not gratefull for a bunch of invasionists who just attack any country for cash, and then use the honor THEY don't deserve from our hero's 60 years ago to give themselves that wanted pep-talk...

[Commissar]

I am not gratefull for a bunch of invasionists who just attack any country for cash, and then use the honor THEY don't deserve from our hero's 60 years ago to give themselves that wanted pep-talk...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, that cash cow known as Afghanistan is sure paying off.

[213374U]

When you get a grasp of the motives and circumstances of the real world, and become able to discuss in a manner that doesn't involve spewing the oversimplified propaganda that some left-wing bozo has spoonfed you, perhaps your discourse will resemble that of an adult.

 

There may be hope for you yet.

[BattleCookiee]

Yes, that cash cow known as Afghanistan is sure paying off.

 

It sure did during the Cold War. It just backfired some years later.

 

In Irak the backfire process is just way faster at the moment

[Commissar]

When you get a grasp of the motives and circumstances of the real world, and become able to discuss in a manner that doesn't involve spewing the oversimplified propaganda that some left-wing bozo has spoonfed you, perhaps your discourse will resemble that of an adult.

 

There may be hope for you yet. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey, I'm left-wing. Or at least, definitely left of center.

 

I also don't support the involvement in Iraq...now. At the time of the onset of hostilities? Sure did, on the basis that I, like everyone else - the majority of European intelligence agencies and political leaders included - believed that the country possessed significant stockpiles of weapons the UN said repeatedly they weren't allowed to have. That turned out to be wrong, and I dearly wish we'd gotten better intelligence, since I don't think it's a necessary fight.

 

You can't simply immediately pull out, however. Like it or not, the current attempts at democracy need Americans with guns. I support a withdrawal as quickly as we can manage it and still keep the place from falling apart.

 

It is, however, absolutely ludicrous to suggest that the members of the military involved with fighting the war there should've refused to do so. As I said, they, like everyone else, believed Iraq to have banned weapons.

[Commissar]

Yes, that cash cow known as Afghanistan is sure paying off.

 

It sure did during the Cold War. It just backfired some years later.

 

In Irak the backfire process is just way faster at the moment

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My point was that we didn't go into Afghanistan for money.

[Lucius]

I don't agree with either of you, but I will admit that it annoys me when people say someone 'owes' it to present day soldiers what their ancestors did. I owe both my grandads that they fought various German kingdoms in the 1850'ies, but that doesn't mean that I owe anything to present day soldiers.

[mkreku]

And all I wanted was some pictures of the newest weapon technologies..