Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 95

Thread: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

  1. #71
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Don't be so cocksure about this plan because it's based on little more than wishful thinking. The sanctions regime was disintegrating before our eyes. That's the reality that you have to address. Removing the immediate WMD infrastructure but leaving the knowledge base intact, leaving the political base intact, and leaving the financing base intact doesn't look like a viable solution.

    Would President AdamT be willing to shoulder the entire burden of blocking the entire Iraqi border for as long as Saddam remained in power? How much damage to US international prestige would you be willing to shoulder in maintain this embargo in the face of world opinion which delegitimized the imposition of sanctions and especially an embargo against Iraq because they wanted their oil and wanted to sell them wares and services?

    If you had a functioning brain stem you'd recognize the deus ex machina nature of "your plan."
    There was no need for a total embargo or border fence. We were more secure with Saddam in place and serving as a buffer to Iran they we are without him, with our new Iraqi "friends" cozying up to the Iranians and providing no military counterbalance. The irony, of course, is that Saddam's real reason for not being completely forthcoming about his lack of WMD was his fear of the Iranians -- rather than any desire to play games with the U.S.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-16 @ 07:28 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,441

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    There was no need for a total embargo or border fence.
    I agree. Clinton should have just finished them off the very first time they violated the cease fire agreements and been done with it. Instead, we just dragged it out for no purpose whatsoever. Bush's mistake was in letting some idiots convince him on the idea of 'nation building', being too stupid to grasp that these people are basically still living in 600 A.D. and still just barbarian tribes, and no 'nation building' is possible with them.

    We were more secure with Saddam in place and serving as a buffer to Iran they we are without him, with our new Iraqi "friends" cozying up to the Iranians and providing no military counterbalance.
    Nonsense. Obviously people who think this aren't aware that Iran's 'army' is barely on a par with Mexico's. You seem to think they are some sort of super power. They aren't, and they would be even easier to crush within hours than Saddam's military, which at the time of Bush I's war was somewhere in the top 10.

    The irony, of course, is that Saddam's real reason for not being completely forthcoming about his lack of WMD was his fear of the Iranians -- rather than any desire to play games with the U.S.
    Who dreamed up this weirdness? If he was afraid of Iran, he would never have risked going to war over some marshes. He merely miscalculated the weaknesses in surrounding alliances and sought to exploit them. He failed.
    Last edited by Oberon; 09-12-11 at 02:32 AM.

  3. #73
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    I agree. Clinton should have just finished them off the very first time they violated the cease fire agreements and been done with it. Instead, we just dragged it out for no purpose whatsoever. Bush's mistake was in letting some idiots convince him on the idea of 'nation building', being too stupid to grasp that these people are basically still living in 600 A.D. and still just barbarian tribes, and no 'nation building' is possible with them.



    Nonsense. Obviously people who think this aren't aware that Iran's 'army' is barely on a par with Mexico's. You seem to think they are some sort of super power. They aren't, and they would be even easier to crush within hours than Saddam's military, which at the time of Bush I's war was somewhere in the top 10.



    Who dreamed up this weirdness? If he was afraid of Iran, he would never have risked going to war over some marshes. He merely miscalculated the weaknesses in surrounding alliances and sought to exploit them. He failed.
    Not sure where you get your information, but you seem to be badly misinformed. Iran's military is far more formidable than Saddam's was. General Abizaid has said that Iran has the most powerful military in the ME, outside of Israel. The Iranian Republican Guard trained the Hamas fighters who essentially fought Israel to a standstill in their last conflict. Of course Iran also sits in a key strategic location from which it could bring worldwide oil shimpments from the ME to a standstill if it was ever attacked.

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-16 @ 07:28 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,441

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Not sure where you get your information, but you seem to be badly misinformed.
    I have no doubts you're not sure. I get mine from military sources, and they aren't misinformed, unlike those who get theirs from propaganda sites and talking points trees.

    Iran's military is far more formidable than Saddam's was.
    Yes, that's why they won that huge victory over Saddam in their war with Iraq.

    General Abizaid has said that Iran has the most powerful military in the ME, outside of Israel.
    I see you know nothing about the militaries in the ME at all. That was already obvious. Here's a hint: They are tiny, and generally poorly trained.

    The Iranian Republican Guard trained the Hamas fighters who essentially fought Israel to a standstill in their last conflict.
    I see you also know nothing about Israeli tactics and capabilities, either. Here's another hint: Israel is concerned about civilian casualties. Hamas specializes in maximizing civilian casualties, and hides behind children as a standard tactic. They do this because faux 'Peace Leftists' enthusiastically encourage them to get as many civilians, especially children, killed as possible. Neo-liberal antisemites love pics of dead babies and children in their info war scams.

    Of course Iran also sits in a key strategic location from which it could bring worldwide oil shimpments from the ME to a standstill if it was ever attacked.
    Yes, for maybe a week tops, and only from a tiny Gulf. If you read your own post, you might see the absurdity of Israel, with some 4 or 5 million people, out gunning an oil rich country with a far larger population, but then you don't seem to be interested in the obvious.
    Last edited by Oberon; 09-12-11 at 01:48 PM.

  5. #75
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    I have no doubts you're not sure. I get mine from military sources, and they aren't misinformed, unlike those who get theirs from propaganda sites and talking points trees.



    Yes, that's why they won that huge victory over Saddam in their war with Iraq, and



    I see you know nothing about the militaries in the ME at all. That was already obvious. Here's a hint: They are tiny, and generally poorly trained.



    I see you also know nothing about Israeli tactics and capabilities, either. Here's another hint: Israel is concerned about civilian casualties. Hamas specializes in maximizing civilian casualties, and hides behind children as a standard tactic. They do this because faux 'Peace Leftists' enthusiastically encourage them to get as many civilians, especially children, killed as possible. Neo-liberal antisemites love pics of dead babies and children in their info war scams.



    Yes, for maybe a week tops, and only from a tiny Gulf. If you read your own post, you might see the absurdity of Israel, with some 4 or 5 million people, out gunning an oil rich country with a far larger population, but then you don't seem to be interested in the obvious.
    Iraq's army in 2003 was a pale shadow its army during the Iran/Iraq war. Even then Iran got the better of Iraq in the end, notwithstanding the fact that Iraq started the war with a surprise invasion. Iran today has a far stronger military than they did in the 80s and 90s. They could shut down the Suez Canal for quite a long time. They have a large number of long and medium range missiles. They have a much better air defense system than Iraq ever had.

    There is a reason that Israel hasn't gone there.

  6. #76
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,312

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by atrasicarius View Post
    Oh boy, here we go. Kick out the dictator, replace him with something worse. Well, hopefully it'll get better after things have settled down for a year or so.
    Oh boy, keep singing that song every time the West is involved in war. Blame everything on the West.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    But, but, I thought the rebels were the freedom-loving good guys! How could anyone have possibly foreseen that the conflict might not have been as morally clear-cut as Western governments tried to portray it? Clearly NATO did the right thing by poking its nose in this conflict in which it had no stake and no moral authority.
    Dude, most of the country was rebelling against him and calling for democracy. He was bombing his own people with the airforce and slaughtering opposition with hired mercs. At some point, even the Euros say 'enough is enough'. You, apparently, have no problem with leaving him in power after what he did (for six days, before the UN stopped him).


    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    You mean that you are abandoning the Bush Doctrine?
    I, for one, am still doctrining.

    The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of former United States president George W. Bush. The phrase was first used by Charles Krauthammer in June 2001[1] to describe the Bush Administration's unilateral withdrawals from the ABM treaty and the Kyoto Protocol. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to secure itself against countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups, which was used to justify the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.[2]

    Different pundits would attribute different meanings to "the Bush Doctrine", as it came to describe other elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate; a policy of spreading democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating terrorism; and a willingness to unilaterally pursue U.S. military interests.[3][4][5] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.[6]

    The phrase "Bush Doctrine" was rarely used by members of the Bush administration. The expression was used at least once, though by Vice President Dick Cheney, in a June 2003 speech in which he said, "If there is anyone in the world today who doubts the seriousness of the Bush Doctrine, I would urge that person to consider the fate of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq."[7]
    Bush Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    (GASP! I just suggested that Reagan and Obama agreed about something. The horror!)

    Here's what I find immensely funny. Part of Bush's rationale for invading Iraq was that it would result in democracies taking hold across the region -- you'd think the Right wing would be shoving this in people's faces saying "See, we told you this would happen."
    Funny, and I saw Iraqi freedom causing a regional push. Told ya so.

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    My political party didn't deem anything necessary. I don't like the involvement, never did. Though if we're asking such questions, why after all the "rah rah, invade Baghdad" and "Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" (remember McCain -- to the tune of "Barbara Ann.") is it now bad?

    Here's "dixiesolutions" (whom I'm now convinced is not real), saying that it's horrible that all these Muslims are involved. What kind of democracy in the Middle East wasn't going to involve Muslims??? You wanted democracy in the Middle East, and now it's arriving. Bush was right (to an extent), but now you guys are all unhappy because....???
    I'm bomb bomb Iran, bigtime. And I'm happy, except we haven't bombed Iran. If we don't do it soon, they're gonna be locked down like nK and no one will be able to do crap then.


    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Here's the problem with doing something "because it should be done". When we assume the role of global policeman without the capability, militarily and financially, to intervene anywhere and everywhere, we then start picking and choosing for purely arbitrary and capricious reasons. Why intervene in Libya and not in Syria, or Yemen? Why not Myanmar? Why not Sudan, Somalia, Uganda, Rwanda, etc?
    Ludicrous argument. Life requires priorities. Doing everything at once is not an option. As Iraq was in the heart of darkness and capable of developing like an asian tiger, it is a natural choice. Hopefully, Iran is next and soon.


    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Read the 911 report.
    Have you read anything since?


    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    these people are basically still living in 600 A.D. and still just barbarian tribes, and no 'nation building' is possible with them.
    Hogwash. Watch, they will mad develop as soon as they get their feet stable (1-2 generations).

    Who dreamed up this weirdness? If he was afraid of Iran, he would never have risked going to war over some marshes.
    No, that's true. We have some pretty good info that says a big reason he was giving the inspectors the run-around (99% of their time there) was that he was scared of Iran. As long as the US wondered if he had WMD, so did Iran. We also have info that says even his own scientists lied to him about what he had and was capable of producing, out of fear of him. If they told him "look dude, we can't really do that... we don't have the capability or materials", it could be the end of that scientist. Most of his dudes were missing fingers, he systematically raped women in special rooms/homes, he tortured-to-death on a routine basis and he genocided. Saddam was full-on delusional and expecting his forces to rally a miracle counter-attack (in the form of materials and capabilities that did not exist). There was a centrifuge buried in a village... there was old deposits of mustard gas... what's that about? I bet Saddam's dudes counted that as "we are capable of enriching uranium at a moment's notice". Seriously, how does a naked centrifuge (basically a metal tube) get buried in a village?
    Last edited by ecofarm; 09-12-11 at 02:58 PM.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-16 @ 07:28 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,441

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Iraq's army in 2003 was a pale shadow its army during the Iran/Iraq war.
    Shift the dates and times around all you want. You have nothing even with that.

    Even then Iran got the better of Iraq in the end, notwithstanding the fact that Iraq started the war with a surprise invasion.
    Iran got shut down, by a country a fifth of it's size or less. They're laughable as a conventional force.

    Iran today has a far stronger military than they did in the 80s and 90s.
    Only on paper, and only because of Europeans selling them whatever they want, including equipment for making nukes. So much for Europeans and their contributions to 'Peace', while sniveling about the U.S. out of the other sides of their mouths.

    They could shut down the Suez Canal for quite a long time. They have a large number of long and medium range missiles. They have a much better air defense system than Iraq ever had.
    All not worth spit. A single carrier division can, and sooner or later will, shut them down within hours. Quit watching Al Jareeza and Daily Kos, and find a valid info source.


    There is a reason that Israel hasn't gone there.
    Yes, and it's called the U.S. They would have been toast long ago if it weren't for U.S. indecision and interference.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-16 @ 07:28 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,441

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Have you read anything since?
    They're a lot like right wing fundies; once something is declared Holy Writ, it stands forever.

    Hogwash. Watch, they will mad develop as soon as they get their feet stable (1-2 generations).
    That would be nice, but it isn't going to happen. They're wrapped up in clan and tribe mentalities; that is their political reality and they aren't spending any time debating Locke and Thomas Paine over there. Mein Kampf is more to their liking and comfort zone. I can find the same hopes about them written in 1922, when the Ottomans collapsed and 'Pan-Arab Nationalism' became all the rage among ME 'intellectuals'. The only consensus that came from it was that Jews must die. Whoopity do.

    No, that's true. We have some pretty good info that says a big reason he was giving the inspectors the run-around (99% of their time there) was that he was scared of Iran. As long as the US wondered if he had WMD, so did Iran. We also have info that says even his own scientists lied to him about what he had and was capable of producing, out of fear of him. If they told him "look dude, we can't really do that... we don't have the capability or materials", it could be the end of that scientist. Most of his dudes were missing fingers, he systematically raped women in special rooms/homes, he tortured-to-death on a routine basis and he genocided. Saddam was full-on delusional and expecting his forces to rally a miracle counter-attack (in the form of materials and capabilities that did not exist). There was a centrifuge buried in a village... there was old deposits of mustard gas... what's that about? I bet Saddam's dudes counted that as "we are capable of enriching uranium at a moment's notice". Seriously, how does a naked centrifuge (basically a metal tube) get buried in a village?
    I never gave a crap whether he actually had them or not. He had to go, and now he's gone. A happy ending, at least for the time being. As long as the Iraqis are busy with killing each other the better off the ME is. 'Nation building' in Islamo-Nazi cultures is a fantasy for stoners; might as well just quote passages from Lord of the Rings or bad poetry from Greenwich Village. Group hugs and posters of Ghandi will do nothing.
    Last edited by Oberon; 09-12-11 at 03:46 PM.

  9. #79
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    They could shut down the Suez Canal for quite a long time.
    Thanks for putting your well-thought out, super-genius, leftist, military strategy insights on display. Why would Iran want to shut down the Suez Canal?

  10. #80
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Libyan rebels round up black Africans

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Thanks for putting your well-thought out, super-genius, leftist, military strategy insights on display. Why would Iran want to shut down the Suez Canal?
    Can your uber-arian, genetically enhanced, rightist, militaro-science-genius brain not think of a reason? Here's a hint: it rhymes with foil.

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •