The Patriot - useless after all?

[Martin]

You allowed the world to play war games far too long than you should have, which is common policy with the United States even today.

You know, considering that you live in the longest running war zone in recent history, that statement borders on hilarious. A country whose military responds to rocks with grenades.

The US, if you bother to read history, was involved in the Second World War supplying arms and food to help the British last out the impending invasion. They supplied the French Resistance, as well as the Dutch Resistance, with arms and food to allow them to keep fighting. The US, after losing so many of it's young men in the first German war of aggression, for which they gained absolutely nothing except a lot more funerals, was naturally hesitant to enter yet another war started by Germany.
The US entry in the Second German War of Aggression had nothing at all to do with Pearl Harbor. The last thing in the world the US wanted was to fight a major war on two fronts on 2 different sides of the globe.

The reason I brought the whole thing up wasn't "the US saved your asses, so be their *****", it was pointed out as an explanation as to why the French still hate the US. Again, if you read your history, Charles DeGaulle had nothing at all to do with the liberation of Paris, or much of France for that matter. He was allowed to enter the city first not because he played a role in its liberation, but because the French needed a hero. The French antipathy has nothing to do with US arrogance. That would be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

I guess, though, getting back to the first part of my post, Israeli aggression would not be possible were the US not supplying the Israelis with money and arms to continue the fight. Perhaps we should heed your advise and just stop warmongering everywhere?

The simple fact of the matter is, that we have a continent that has spent the last thousand years colonizing the world, at constant war with each other, raping other countries of their natural resources and enslaving their populations, and constantly looking to expand their borders calling the US imperialistic and accusing the US of wanting nothing more than control of Iraqi oil, when the only reason they are defending Saddam is so they can have control of that same oil. It's only been about 40 years since the last European colony in Africa was granted independece, unless you want to count South Africa, then it's been less than 20. It's still European mining concerns harvesting the natural resources and wealth of these countries and keeping them at an economic disadvantage.
Do you see, perhaps, why I can't take anything that comes out of Europe about US aggression seriously?

[Martin]

Does George spin a special wheel whenever he's bored and decides to take out the lucky chosen leader?

George is just pissy about the contract Saddam put on Daddy's head. This war really isn't about oil. It's about giving a vengeful child too much power. The man (and I'm speaking of The Shrub here) really scares me.

[bigmattyh]

George is just pissy about the contract Saddam put on Daddy's head. This war really isn't about oil. It's about giving a vengeful child too much power. The man (and I'm speaking of The Shrub here) really scares me.

*smack*



Happiness and dread rose together yesterday from this desolate border village, where some of the first Iraqis liberated by American and British troops found the joy of their deliverance muted by the fear that it was too good to last.


"They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head." (from an ex-human shield)

"God help you become victorious."

You are perfectly free to sit back in your luxury and deride America for what it is doing. Attack Bush, if that makes you feel better. Lay into him all you've got, if that's what it will take to validate your world-view that America is the enemy.

Because, hey. Your comfort and cynicism is far more important to preserve than the freedom of the 20 million people we are now liberating.

[Chen]

You know, considering that you live in the longest running war zone in recent history, that statement borders on hilarious. A country whose military responds to rocks with grenades.

How can you possibly criticize our actions when your army murders more than 250 people in one night as part of an illegal war? I don't see what gives you the right to criticize our actions considering you enjoy the f-ing luxury of being able to visit the nearest mall without the fear of being blown up to 17 pieces or take a bus and read a book instead of being worried about that guy that sits next to you and looks a bit weird. How can you say we are misusing our power when in fact everything you've done in the past 5 days is evidently illegal and has been condemned by the UN and millions of people worldwide? You are much more hypocrite than us - anything we do here you do ten times more powerful in Iraq and who knows where else, and has much worse consequences. I thought you wanted to "liberate" Iraq (now that's a good one), not turn it into a parking lot.

I guess, though, getting back to the first part of my post, Israeli aggression would not be possible were the US not supplying the Israelis with money and arms to continue the fight. Perhaps we should heed your advise and just stop warmongering everywhere?

Perhaps you should. Perhaps you should redirect those hundreds of billions of dollars you are wasting right now in Iraq towards more human efforts, such as trying to work things out in the Middle East. It's quite obvious we cannot do this alone, but instead you are providing us weapons - and when they are used, you show your true face. You're like the big brother who's watching over his two little brothers on a Saturday night, and when they start fighting you give them tools to hit each other with. And then when they start bleeding you decide it's gone too far so intervene and stop their little fight - but the damage has been done already.

[Chen]

Because, hey. Your comfort and cynicism is far more important to preserve than the freedom of the 20 million people we are now liberating.

That's so not fair, how come I am not being liberated by 2-tons bombs?

But sarcasm aside, I don't blame you for doing this. This is a war, and people die in a war. All I want is you to stop being so hypocrite and put us down because we kill someone by accident while killing 3 more terrorists, but use every possible excuse in the world to justify your actions in Iraq. The only difference is that you are, what, a thousand times bigger than us, and no matter what you do or say it bother anyone as long as they're on your payroll. It's time you understand that were are in a war and it's been like that for more than 55 years.

[Chen]

Happiness and dread rose together yesterday from this desolate border village, where some of the first Iraqis liberated by American and British troops found the joy of their deliverance muted by the fear that it was too good to last.


"They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head." (from an ex-human shield)

"God help you become victorious."

I can show you much more images of happy Palestinians that are glad with our actions and "occupation", do you think Arafat treats them any better? You know what those reports are worth and you don't need me to spell it for you.

[bigmattyh]

But sarcasm aside, I don't blame you for doing this. This is a war, and people die in a war. All I want is you to stop being so hypocrite and put us down because we kill someone by accident while killing 3 more terrorists, but use every possible excuse in the world to justify your actions in Iraq.

I'm right there with you, Chen. I don't know if it happens every time, but I do know that the IDF offers apologies when it strikes civilians. And I know that on more than one occasion, they've launched investigations of their own officers when this has happened. And then on the other side, you have them bragging about how many civilians they took out. Teenagers. Kids. Grandmothers. Pregnant ladies. It happens on both sides. The difference is that Israel apologizes; Palestine has street parties.

I personally think we ought to get out of the whole Israel-Palestine mess. I'm sure you don't appreciate us trying to tell you what to do. The whole political fence-riding is what led to distaster in Vietnam (among other places) and it's panning out about the same for you guys. If this kind of thing were happening in, say, Arizona, it'd be over in about 3 months.

I can show you much more images of happy Palestinians that are glad with our actions and "occupation", do you think Arafat treats them any better? You know what those reports are worth and you don't need me to spell it for you.

I understand what you're saying -- my ex-roommate worked in Tel Aviv for the last 2-3 years, and he got a lot of first-hand experience with the political situation. I posted those pictures to prove a point: that the anti-liberation movement disregards the very wishes of the Iraqi people it claims to speak for. We have been enormously concerned about Iraqi civilian casualties, and we have thankfully been well-received in the cities we've rolled into. These guys are praising Bush and America. And if you ask me, their word is a lot more relevant to the situation than some guy seated at a computer in Honolulu. Or Switzerland. Or Finland. Or Scotland. Or .... you get the idea.

[Chen]

Isn't it funny that Blair says Iraq is violating the Geneva Convention even though he's failed to provide any proof that this war is justified and started it without the consent of the UN? If he's so concerned he should've stayed at home. [img]images/smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/index.cfm?id=353742003

[Vile]

Isn't it funny that Blair says Iraq is violating the Geneva Convention even though he's failed to provide any proof that this war is justified and started it without the consent of the UN? If he's so concerned he should've stayed at home.

http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/index.cfm?id=353742003

No, it's not funny at all. Who sad Blair or Bush needed the UN in the first place? You think they were required to seek UN approval first?

[jmd]

Is it not true that the US help create this monster called Saddam??

Were they not buddies at one time and supplied him with the technologies and know how to build these so called weapons of mass destruction??

Now they have the nerve to send in the son's and daughters of the US to clean up this major f-up and cloak it under a just war to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam. They don’t give a rat’s ass about the Iraqi people but they do care deeply about what runs under the sands of Iraq

There is something wrong with this picture.

[Chen]

No, it's not funny at all. Who sad Blair or Bush needed the UN in the first place? You think they were required to seek UN approval first?

There's this thing called a cause which allows one country to start a war (for example, shutting marine access to a country) and the Iraqis did nothing to instigate a strike. In case you haven't noticed that's what Bush was trying to prove for the past 4 months or so before he realized no one is going to buy his excuses so he decided to go to war on his own.

Who sad Blair or Bush needed the UN in the first place?

It's this kind of statements that make the world so anti-US, don't you see? "Who needs you, we have the power to do anything we want. You should be thanking us for even asking you in the first place. Don't you appreciate the attention you received?"

[Brian Briscoe]

Well, who do you think funds the U.N.? The USA, and a combination of other powerful countries such as Britian.

Where is the U.N. HQ? New York, New York, USA

I could go on and on about the U.S. involvement with the U.N., but it would be a waste of my time. During the start of WW2 the same thing happened, at the time there was the League of Nations. The League of Nations was jsut like the U.N., they sat back and watched while Hitler invaded countries such as Poland. Before Hitler even started attacking they knew he was stockpiling troops and mass armies that Germany was not even supposed to have. But yet, the League of Nations did nothing about it. So Hitler invaded Poland, marched through Belgium, and came right around behind the powerful French forts. The French were so suprised that they could not even defend themselves becuase their guns could only face one way, and that was towards Germany. So, that ended France's only stand against the Nazi's. Yet again, the British had to come to the rescue of the French at Dunkirk, where Hitler had pushed the French army into the Englisg channel. Luckily British ships came to save some of the French soldiers. I know my History, dont get me started on how everyone is so Anit-US.

[Chen]

Well, who do you think funds the U.N.? The USA, and a combination of other powerful countries such as Britian.

Where is the U.N. HQ? New York, New York, USA

So? Where would they put it, in outer space? If it were in Paris people would say France controls it.

News flash - you don't, for crying the f*** out loud, own the United Nations! You're just one more member of it, albeit permanent. Just like France, the UK or China.

[Brian Briscoe]

So? Where would they put it, in outer space? If it were in Paris people would say France controls it.

News flash - you don't, for crying the f*** out loud, own the United Nations! You're just one more member of it, albeit permanent. Just like France, the UK or China.

Read the rest of my reply I edited it.

[Chen]

Well, who do you think funds the U.N.? The USA, and a combination of other powerful countries such as Britian.

Where is the U.N. HQ? New York, New York, USA

I could go on and on about the U.S. involvement with the U.N., but it would be a waste of my time. During the start of WW2 the same thing happened, at the time there was the League of Nations. The League of Nations was jsut like the U.N., they sat back and watched while Hitler invaded countries such as Poland. Before Hitler even started attacking they knew he was stockpiling troops and mass armies that Germany was not even supposed to have. But yet, the League of Nations did nothing about it. So Hitler invaded Poland, marched through Belgium, and came right around behind the powerful French forts. The French were so suprised that they could not even defend themselves becuase their guns could only face one way, and that was towards Germany. So, that ended France's only stand against the Nazi's. Yet again, the British had to come to the rescue of the French at Dunkirk, where Hitler had pushed the French army into the Englisg channel. Luckily British ships came to save some of the French soldiers. I know my History, dont get me started on how everyone is so Anit-US.

First of all I would to say that the current situation is nothing like World War II.

But anyway, let's do talk about that. You're trying to twist history by placing all the blame of WWII on the League of Nations or France alone, when in fact England had a substantial role in its happening. I'm not going to repeat history now but let's just consider one incident - the Munich Agreement, September 1938, Chamberlain and Daladier meet Hitler in Berlin together with Mussolini. Bottom line is - go ahead Adolf, you have our permission to take over the Sudetenland, just don't couple with Stalin. And since you know your history so well, you probably know what happened after this. Hitler did transfer the Sudetenland to Germany and 6 months later invades Czechoslovakia, with zero reaction from Chamberlain or the League of Nations. And don't forget we're talking about '38 here, you've been much more nicer to Hitler in the years before.

"Peace in our time" he said:


So next time you try to make it look like France caused WWII and the UK with all its glory saved the world from doom, think again.

(And just for the record, it wasn't just the "French army" in Dunkirk. Both English and French forces were there.
http://www.theotherside.co.uk/tm-her...unkirk1940.htm)