Is 3rd world war close?

[AvarAllahNoor]

U.S is a bully! - Putin hit the nail on the head with his remarks. U.S are trying to drive fear into other countries, hence why so many want to arm themselves. - It took one hit on 9/11 and US was brought down to it's knees. Like I say, China and India are global powers now, and dubya has done nothing but bully. he's a t**t and should be dealt with swiftly. He's ruined the U.S.A

 

[Jibril]

I think the most ignored aspect of all this is that Israel has had nuclear weapons for years without so much as a peep from Washington DC. So essentially what we have is 1 country (America) unilaterally deciding who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't. If the US were more fair in this aspect, meaning more vigilant across the board not just with our enemies, I would be less hesistant to support all this drum beating against Iran.

 

[Woodrow]

I think the most ignored aspect of all this is that Israel has had nuclear weapons for years without so much as a peep from Washington DC. So essentially what we have is 1 country (America) unilaterally deciding who gets to have nuclear weapons and who doesn't. If the US were more fair in this aspect, meaning more vigilant across the board not just with our enemies, I would be less hesistant to support all this drum beating against Iran.

Agreed we should have put up just as much of a fuss over Israel having them as we are putting up over Iran wanting them. If we call one a danger, the other is just as much of a danger.

 

[Cognescenti]

U.S is a bully! - Putin hit the nail on the head with his remarks. U.S are trying to drive fear into other countries, hence why so many want to arm themselves. - It took one hit on 9/11 and US was brought down to it's knees. Like I say, China and India are global powers now, and dubya has done nothing but bully. he's a t**t and should be dealt with swiftly. He's ruined the U.S.A

Yes, by George, I think he's got it!

Let's look to Putin, former head of the KGB, for spiritual and moral guidance!

BTW...has anyone seen my Polonium 210?

Avar, as a friend, I'm, telling you...it may be time to go back to see the doctor.

 

[Muezzin]

Don't attack the source of the argument, attack the argument itself.

 

[Keltoi]

U.S is a bully! - Putin hit the nail on the head with his remarks. U.S are trying to drive fear into other countries, hence why so many want to arm themselves. - It took one hit on 9/11 and US was brought down to it's knees. Like I say, China and India are global powers now, and dubya has done nothing but bully. he's a t**t and should be dealt with swiftly. He's ruined the U.S.A

The U.S. wasn't brought to its knees by any stretch of the imagination. In a cold detached way, which means not considering the 3,000 dead, all the attack did was disrupt Wall Street activity for a few days. Of course it also put the U.S. in a bad mood, which is the reason we are all dealing with these events.

China and India are growing economic powers, but they are far from "super powers". Although I'm not sure what your point was with that in the first place. I would also point out that countries are using this opportunity to confront the U.S. politically because the U.S. is focused on other issues at the moment.

 

[Cognescenti]

Agreed we should have put up just as much of a fuss over Israel having them as we are putting up over Iran wanting them. If we call one a danger, the other is just as much of a danger.

Perhaps in a cosmic balance sort of way...but it the issue of Iranian nukes is not a moral issue (unless they were to use one on someone)...it is a national security issue. It has implications for all the Sunni Arab states in the region..it obviously has implications for Israel..and even for the global economy.


Let's have a show of hands. Who here thinks that Israel would use a nuclear weapon on the US???? Does anyone here really think that Israel would use a nuke in any situation other than an existential threat? Israeli nukes are a stabilizing force in the ME. look at GWI...Hussein had enough confidence that Israel wouldn't respond with nukes that he bombarded Israel with Scuds..even causing quite a chemical weapon scare. It was a crazy thing to do on Hussein's part...but even so..the Israelis did not retaliate.

The Iranians have been trying to kill Americans..and in many cases succeeding, for 25 years. I have a big problem with Iranian nukes.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

My point is keitol, you seem to think the US are the best thing since sliced bread. - Why is that? all your posts are in favour of everything they do. Do you think the US is the 'chosen' country? dubya is not Christian he's mis-guided

 

[Cognescenti]

Don't attack the source of the argument, attack the argument itself.

Very well, when the cold war ended, there was talk in the US about a "Peace Dividend". Politicians were falling all over each other trying to decide where to spend money other than defence. The Philippinos wanted US bases out...we left. The Okinawans complained...we drew down forces there. US forces were markedly reduced in Germany.


Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut (on a mission to stop an Israeli attack on the city).....we pick up our dead and go home

GWI...we save the Kuwaitis and Saudis rear ends and then leave...no empire...no vassal state

First WTC attack

Black Hawk Down (originally a mission to feed starving Somalians)...we bring back the bodies of mutilated soldiers and go home

We save the Kosovar muslims......crickets chirping

Taliban blows up Buddhist statues, oppress women..yada, yada yada.....where is the remote?

Africa embassy bombings.....we send a couple of FBI agents

Khobar Towers......yawn

USS Cole.....nothing


Sept 11, 2001...Ok..now you have our attention. Defence against acts of terorr is now, no longer, confined to prosecution of the perps after the event.

 

[Jibril]

Perhaps in a cosmic balance sort of way...but it the issue of Iranian nukes is not a moral issue (unless they were to use one on someone)...it is a national security issue. It has implications for all the Sunni Arab states in the region..it obviously has implications for Israel..and even for the global economy.


Let's have a show of hands. Who here thinks that Israel would use a nuclear weapon on the US???? Does anyone here really think that Israel would use a nuke in any situation other than an existential threat? Israeli nukes are a stabilizing force in the ME. look at GWI...Hussein had enough confidence that Israel wouldn't respond with nukes that he bombarded Israel with Scuds..even causing quite a chemical weapon scare. It was a crazy thing to do on Hussein's part...but even so..the Israelis did not retaliate.

The Iranians have been trying to kill Americans..and in many cases succeeding, for 25 years. I have a big problem with Iranian nukes.

I honestly believe Iran is no more likely to use a nuclear weapon than Israel. Infact I would say it is more likely that Israel would use a nuke because whatever happens, the existence of Iran can never be threatened by conventional means. It is a country of 80 million with a huge landmass and a long history. Israel is a small strip with 5 million people and a 50 year history. Which of the countries is in a more precarious situation?

Many refer to Ahmadinejads outrageous comments as some sort of proof of Iran's intent to use nukes. The fact is that Ahmadinejad is not, as Bush says, ,...the "decider". Isn't it disingenous of America that when Mohammed Khatami was President and expressed all kinds of willingness to cooperate with the west and improve relations,.....he was written off because it was claimed that the real power doesn't lie with the President. However when Ahmadinejad makes his doomsday statements all of a sudden it is ignored that the real power DOES NOT lie with him. Even if Iran DID have nukes,...Ahmadinejad wouldn't be the one with his finger on the button. The supreme leader, meanwhile, is obviously much more pragmatic that Ahmadinejad.

As for Iranians trying to kill Americans for 25 years,...thats not a fair statement. Iranians were reacting to American hostility in their own way. But they were'nt the ones that picked this fight. It takes 2 to tango and I would say America instigated the hostilities with the overthrow of Mossadeq.

 

[Jibril]

Black Hawk Down (originally a mission to feed starving Somalians)...we bring back the bodies of mutilated soldiers and go home
.

Firstly, its Somalis not Somalians. Secondly, the TFR mission was independent of the mission to "feed" Somalis. The hunger problem was already solved and the Marines had done their jobs. The troops that died in Somalia were not there on a humanitarian mission (infact they deployed after the famine abated), they were there on a military mission to hunt down a military target. This is a huge distinction.

Americans try to paint the Somalis as ingrates for what happened there. The fact is when you target 1 clan of Somalis, arrest their elders, kill thousands of them in airstrikes,..what do you expect them to do? All due respect the Americans brought it upon themselves, and I say this as an American.

Besides,...what the hell does Black Hawk Down have to do with terrorism? It was Somali militias v the US.

 

[Ninth_Scribe]

Although I'm not sure what your point was with that in the first place.

I think the world leaders believe Bush is a psycho who wants to use 911 as an excuse to rule the World. Rather than trying to use diplomacy, which is a time honored tradition that's worked wonders in the past, he's using military strategy and has already ordered multiple deployments in Poland, Africa and Japan. The man has no concept of reality, even while the entire world order is aligning themselves against him. The message I get is this:

If we don't get him out of office, someone else will.

Ninth Scribe

 

[Ninth_Scribe]

The US saw Israel as being the helpless new kid at school. There were bigger kids at the school and a few of them called Israel names, so Israel cried to Big Daddy who told the little Isrel to stand up for itself. Israel came back and said now the kids were being bullies and hitting him. So the US gave little Israel a stick to hit the bullies with if the kids tried to hit him any more. Little Isrel took the stick and shped it into a spear now Isrel came running and said the big kids have swords, so the US gave little Israel a rifle which Isreal refashioned into a machine gun and is now chasing the bigs kids. The problem we are faced with is how to get the machine away from Israel.

Well, any mother would tell you kids have to earn respect at school and the best way for a parent to help their child accomplish that is to teach the child to find ways to foster relationships with the kids at school. Sending the kid off to school with a loaded gun is not very helpful. Might have been better to host a cook-out so the kid could invite the others over for some fun.

That tears it. I'm voting for the female this time!

Ninth Scribe

 

[Jibril]

The US-Israel relationship is a case of the tail wagging the dog.

As an American, I am furious that the US government spends more money on the average Israeli than they do on the average American. Kids can barely get a decent education in some of our neighberhoods yet we keep pumping billions per year to sustain Israel.

 

[snakelegs]

well, i for one, miss the USSR. i think the world was a lot safer when there were 2 Big Baddies. now there is really only one, and it does whatever it pleases, wherever it pleases.
who would ever think a person would miss the USSR!

 

[Ninth_Scribe]

As an American, I am furious that the US government spends more money on the average Israeli than they do on the average American. Kids can barely get a decent education in some of our neighberhoods yet we keep pumping billions per year to sustain Israel.

I can't believe my country has wasted so many resources on foreign affairs. I get the whole tribute thing, but for the love of God, I can't understand why the funds were used to promote violence in the Middle East.

Grabs steering wheel from monkey, shifts vehicle into first gear...

Ninth Scribe

 

[Cognescenti]

Firstly, its Somalis not Somalians. Secondly, the TFR mission was independent of the mission to "feed" Somalis. The hunger problem was already solved and the Marines had done their jobs. The troops that died in Somalia were not there on a humanitarian mission (infact they deployed after the famine abated), they were there on a military mission to hunt down a military target. This is a huge distinction.

Americans try to paint the Somalis as ingrates for what happened there. The fact is when you target 1 clan of Somalis, arrest their elders, kill thousands of them in airstrikes,..what do you expect them to do? All due respect the Americans brought it upon themselves, and I say this as an American.

Besides,...what the hell does Black Hawk Down have to do with terrorism? It was Somali militias v the US.

Very well...point by point:

1) Somalis...yes, of course. A typo. This is where the agreement ends :smile:

2) "the TFR mission was independent of the mission to "feed" Somalis".
Strictly speaking, that is true, but they were part of the official UN mission to restore order, titled UNOSOM II, which was the direct follow on to the intial relief mission. UNOSOM II was designed to reduce violence to permit UN relief workers to safely go about their work. Hunger had not been ended. Aidid was felt by the UN to have been responsible for the murder of 24 Pakistani peacekeeprs some of whose bodies had been skinned like animals. (BTW...we are talking about the Clinton admin here..I hope you know that)

3) "Americans try to paint the Somalis as ingrates for what happened there. The fact is when you target 1 clan of Somalis, arrest their elders, kill thousands of them in airstrikes,..what do you expect them to do? All due respect the Americans brought it upon themselves, and I say this as an American."

Oh...they were ingrates, all right. Aidid and his clan were not thankful that the UN messed up their racket. There is money to be made in stealing and "taxing" UN relief supplies. Despite this, the best thing for the UN and the US to do at that point was get out and leave the Lord of the Flies nightmare to the locals. The American's mistake was "mission creap" ...and working with the UN in the first place. BTW..your use of the plural form of "thousand" to describe casualties is likely too high:smile:

4) "Besides,...what the hell does Black Hawk Down have to do with terrorism? It was Somali militias v the US."

My point was to refute the claim the US are "bullies". I was listing examples of US forebearance when attacked....but...since you asked..OBL himself has claimed a link.

"Links with al-Qaeda

There have been allegations that Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda movement was involved in training and funding of Aidid's men. In his 2001 book, Holy War, Inc., CNN reporter Peter Bergen interviewed Bin Laden who affirmed these allegations. According to Bergen, Bin Laden asserted that fighters affiliated with his group were involved in killing American troops in Somalia in 1993, a claim he had earlier made to the Arabic newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi. According to CNN, al-Qaeda claimed to have supplied a large number of Soviet-designed rocket-propelled grenade launchers (RPGs) to Aidid's fighters, and instructed them in ways to modify the RPGs to make them more effective against helicopters."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mogadishu#Links__with_al-Qaeda

 

[Cognescenti]

The US-Israel relationship is a case of the tail wagging the dog.

As an American, I am furious that the US government spends more money on the average Israeli than they do on the average American. Kids can barely get a decent education in some of our neighberhoods yet we keep pumping billions per year to sustain Israel.

Jibril;


That is simply not true. Counting loan guarantees and grants (which were phased out in the late '50's) the US has subsidized Israel to the tune of about 100 B $ since 1949 (about $11,000 per current Israeli). That is 58 yrs..so the per capita annual spending is about $190!!!

The current US Federal Budget is about 2.6 TRILLION $ If you throw out interest on the debt and the DOD budget ...I think its somewhere North of 1.5 T$ on entitlements. There are about 300 Million Americans

So we have 1.5 x 10**12 / 3 x 10**8 =5 x 10**3 = 5,000 $ per capita per year.

And that is only the Federal spending.


It's not even close. you are off by a factor of 25 (not including defence, interest on the debt or state and local spending).

 

[Jibril]

My point was to refute the claim the US are "bullies". I was listing examples of US forebearance when attacked....but...since you asked..OBL himself has claimed a link.

"Links with al-Qaeda

OBL can claim he is the next Saladin, it doesn't make it so. The link between Al Qaeda and Black Hawk Down is weak to non-existant. Everybody acknowledges that the battle was not pre-planned it was spontaneous. The most authoritative work on the incident, which is Mark Bowden's Black Hawk Down also descredits this account. Its simply a case of Al Qaeda taking credit for something they didn't do. Similiar to their claims of having brought down the USSR.

 

[Jibril]

2) "the TFR mission was independent of the mission to "feed" Somalis".
Strictly speaking, that is true, but they were part of the official UN mission to restore order, titled UNOSOM II, which was the direct follow on to the intial relief mission. UNOSOM II was designed to reduce violence to permit UN relief workers to safely go about their work. Hunger had not been ended. Aidid was felt by the UN to have been responsible for the murder of 24 Pakistani peacekeeprs some of whose bodies had been skinned like animals. (BTW...we are talking about the Clinton admin here..I hope you know that)

The UN/US had accomplished its mission of securing the food destribution network. On this account Aidid never resisted. So in essence the conflict with Aidid had nothing whatsoever to do with the humanitarian aspect of Operation Restore Hope. It was only within the realm of nation-building and political reconciliation that Aidid started fighting with the UN. So TFR had absolutely nothing to do with the humanitarian aspect of the Somalia mission.

Oh...they were ingrates, all right. Aidid and his clan were not thankful that the UN messed up their racket. There is money to be made in stealing and "taxing" UN relief supplies. Despite this, the best thing for the UN and the US to do at that point was get out and leave the Lord of the Flies nightmare to the locals. The American's mistake was "mission creap" ...and working with the UN in the first place. BTW..your use of the plural form of "thousand" to describe casualties is likely too high:smile:

Look up the Abdi house massacre. In July 93' a large group of Habr Gidr elders met to discuss how to convince Aidid to stop resisting the Americans and the UN. The result of that meeting was that half way through, American helicopters pumped a dozen TOW missiles into the house, first destroyed stairways to prevent escape,..killing upto 100 individuals. Helicopter attacks throughout that summer resulted in the deaths of thousands of predominantly Habr Gidr clans men.

Aidid obviously spun all of this masterfully and the Habr Gidr had no choice but to rally against the US forces and fight them tooth and nail. Their animosity toward the Americans forces became evident in how they mutiliated their corpses.

They were not ingrates,..it was UN/US political and military blunders that forced the Habr Gidr Somalis to defend themselves.