McCain wants to kick Russia out of G-8

[Duskofdead]

Not exactly things we'd support.

Well I sure as hell know that I don't pay my taxes hoping and praying that the money goes to foreign aid to anyone who uses the money to shore up their military position and then start bulldozing civilian houses, or shooting kids from sentry towers. Don't really care if the person doing it is a Muslim despot or a Zionist. Let's not pretend this is a black/white good guy/back guy paradigm here, as with most things in the real world, it's a shade of gray. I'd rather we not be involved period.

[Tsukiyumi]

...I'd rather we not be involved period.

As would most of us. Unfortunately, that choice was not ours, but that of the people who murdered over 3,000 civilians on 9/11. They aren't going to quit if we choose not to fight. We should be handling things more efficiently, for sure, but bear in mind that some shades of grey are indistinguishable from black unless you squint really hard.

If they'd attacked a valid military target, I wouldn't be anywhere near as vehement that they be completely eradicated. They made their own choice.

[Duskofdead]

...I'd rather we not be involved period.

As would most of us. Unfortunately, that choice was not ours, but that of the people who murdered over 3,000 civilians on 9/11. They aren't going to quit if we choose not to fight. We should be handling things more efficiently, for sure, but bear in mind that some shades of grey are indistinguishable from black unless you squint really hard.

If they'd attacked a valid military target, I wouldn't be anywhere near as vehement that they be completely eradicated. They made their own choice.

The choice to prop up dictatorships in the Middle East as expedient to ensure our continuing supply of oil, and spending money for political interference and CIA ops to topple legitimate or democratic movements which might be inconvenient to our resource access, most definitely was a choice. The entire oil business at this point absolutely is a choice and I'm not going to sit in an armchair with a frappucino self-assured in my righteousness that my country helped create a region of the world impoverished and oppressive enough to spawn terrorists.

You act like there was no beef until 9/11. This stuff goes back for a century or more, Tsuki. You help beat the crap out of someone every week for a few decades, then don't act shocked when one day they're waiting for you with a knife in hand. Yeah it's dirty but it's not like you shouldn't have seen it coming.

[Tsukiyumi]

The choice to prop up dictatorships in the Middle East as expedient to ensure our continuing supply of oil, and spending money for political interference and CIA ops to topple legitimate or democratic movements which might be inconvenient to our resource access, most definitely was a choice. The entire oil business at this point absolutely is a choice and I'm not going to sit in an armchair with a frappucino self-assured in my righteousness that my country helped create a region of the world impoverished and oppressive enough to spawn terrorists.

You act like there was no beef until 9/11. This stuff goes back for a century or more, Tsuki. You help beat the crap out of someone every week for a few decades, then don't act shocked when one day they're waiting for you with a knife in hand. Yeah it's dirty but it's not like you shouldn't have seen it coming.

I agree that our (and european and Soviet) policies in the middle east over oil have royally screwed things up, but 9/11 was way over the top in terms of reasonable response. I wasn't of voting age until 1999, therefore had no hand in American policy until then. The kids who died on 9/11 certainly had no say-so about their government's questionable operations dacades ago. Not to mention that the root of the problem can be traced back to the Crusades and the overall contempt radical Islam has for non-believers, as I've quoted from the Q'uran on previous pages.

Our response has been measured and appropriate, if terribly misdirected. If we operated under the same rules these impoverished and oppressed people seem to, we'd have nuked Mecca on 9/18/01, and tried to target civilian populations with mass firebombings.

The beat up guy with the knife also shouldn't be surprised when his percieved oppressor pulls a Glock and guns him down.

[Duskofdead]

The choice to prop up dictatorships in the Middle East as expedient to ensure our continuing supply of oil, and spending money for political interference and CIA ops to topple legitimate or democratic movements which might be inconvenient to our resource access, most definitely was a choice. The entire oil business at this point absolutely is a choice and I'm not going to sit in an armchair with a frappucino self-assured in my righteousness that my country helped create a region of the world impoverished and oppressive enough to spawn terrorists.

You act like there was no beef until 9/11. This stuff goes back for a century or more, Tsuki. You help beat the crap out of someone every week for a few decades, then don't act shocked when one day they're waiting for you with a knife in hand. Yeah it's dirty but it's not like you shouldn't have seen it coming.

I agree that our (and european and Soviet) policies in the middle east over oil have royally screwed things up, but 9/11 was way over the top in terms of reasonable response. I wasn't of voting age until 1999, therefore had no hand in American policy until then. The kids who died on 9/11 certainly had no say-so about their government's questionable operations dacades ago. Not to mention that the root of the problem can be traced back to the Crusades and the overall contempt radical Islam has for non-believers, as I've quoted from the Q'uran on previous pages.

Our response has been measured and appropriate, if terribly misdirected. If we operated under the same rules these impoverished and oppressed people seem to, we'd have nuked Mecca on 9/18.

The beat up guy with the knife also shouldn't be surprised when his percieved oppressor pulls a Glock and guns him down.

Why is it that when we read off a laundry list of atrocities committed by Saddam, or by the regime in Iran, or by the Saudis, or whoever else, it always pales in comparison to 3,000 people on 9/11? How many people in Iraq have died since the occupation? Was that not a monstrously greater instance of "way over the top in terms of reasonable response"?

Saddam was there, with our help.

Iran went backwards 200 years, because we helped topple a more progressive government.

Saudi Arabia is enormously rich and poor side by side with oppression of women, with our help and assistance to remain secure.

This "yeah yeah, that's the past, that's history, WHAT ABOUT 9/11?" thing is an example of American amnesia about history that conveniently always helps America to convince herself she's the victim. No one likes to hear it but we are very much sleeping in the bed we made, 9/11 included.

These people pushing the war, the people who engineered it and wanted it like a virgin wants his first prom date, will continue to support Saudi Arabia. They don't give a crap about Islam, extremism, some misquoted sections of the Q'uran, or the rights of women, free speech or global social justice. If those things are the reasons you support what we've been doing, you are simply being used like a tool by those in power.

[sunnyside]

Why America?

Why are they going after you guys and no one else?

Most of Europe, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and others have most of the same **** you do. Some more some less. You dont see our sky scrapers falling down.

As I mentioned one of Al Quadas major goals is to establish a new Islamic Caliphate from Pakistan to Morroco at least. Even beyond Israel they oppose us because we support governments they want to overthrow and control, Kuwaitis, Saudis, etc.

Many of them generally want to spread and force their religion on others. The serioiusly do.

And again there is also the Israel problem. Which is stickier.

And occasionally we apply political pressure to get them to stop hanging gays or stoning rape victims and other things.

So why the US. Or rather why the US first.

It is because we get involved. New Zealand could care less about atrocities as far as I can tell. Rape murder, oppress, they'll give you a sweet trade deal. Carve out through blood and terror a new Bloc the size of the Soviet Union under Sharia law? No problem. Just hope they don't raise gas prices.


And to a degree we're also seeing the classic economic free rider problem carried out with countries. Countries like New Zealand know that by the time a new power threatens them they'd have already threatened bigger countries. So they can step in late and not worry so much.

The US however is in an annoying spot where if they don't do something they know nobody else will.

Seriously. You can commit pretty much any attrocity you want. If the US doesn't come for you than you've gotten away with it. I really wish the UN had some spine to step in on other situations instead of just throwing some assistance after the US. Like maybe Darfour or Rwanda. And you have to wonder if they'd have managed any of the conflicts they were in if the US decided to sit them out.

[sunnyside]

Saddam was there, with our help.

Iran went backwards 200 years, because we helped topple a more progressive government.

Saudi Arabia is enormously rich and poor side by side with oppression of women, with our help and assistance to remain secure.

This "yeah yeah, that's the past, that's history, WHAT ABOUT 9/11?" thing is an example of American amnesia about history that conveniently always helps America to convince herself she's the victim. No one likes to hear it but we are very much sleeping in the bed we made, 9/11 included.

I guess maybe you'd rather if the USSR was the only superpower? True they largely imploded due to the failure of communism. But in large part that was due to having to spend to keep up with the US, some disasterous wars they had as a result of our actions, and the fact they weren't able to to spread and gain new resources to keep going.

And we don't like a lot of what the Saudi's do. But despite what you may think we aren't quite strong enough to declare war on the entire freaking world at the same time.

So we have to watch while a lot of horrible crap goes down. And we have to support a lot of the lesser of two evils.

[Duskofdead]

I guess maybe you'd rather if the USSR was the only superpower? True they largely imploded due to the failure of communism. But in large part that was due to having to spend to keep up with the US, some disasterous wars they had as a result of our actions, and the fact they weren't able to to spread and gain new resources to keep going.

At least when there were TWO superpowers, both had to at least make the strong pretense of benevolence for PR purposes, if nothing else. When you're the only superpower you could give a crap, as demonstrated by our current administration. As to whether I wish the USSR had "prevailed" in the Cold War let's not be silly, please. Comparing Al Qaida with the USSR is ridiculous anyway.

And we don't like a lot of what the Saudi's do. But despite what you may think we aren't quite strong enough to declare war on the entire freaking world at the same time.

We're NEVER going to declare war on the Saudis while we need oil. Ever. And it has nothing to do with our military strength or their regime. As long as they will play ball with us we could care less if they stone people to death.

So we have to watch while a lot of horrible crap goes down. And we have to support a lot of the lesser of two evils.

Taking a bunch of brutal dictatorships, almost all of whom we HELPED INTO POWER, and arbitrarily saying the ones currently on our birthday party invitation list are "less evil" than the ones we're presently annoyed with (For reasons having nothing to do with their human rights record) is so incredibly self-serving it's beyond belief.

[Tsukiyumi]

Why is it that when we read off a laundry list of atrocities committed by Saddam, or by the regime in Iran, or by the Saudis, or whoever else, it always pales in comparison to 3,000 people on 9/11? How many people in Iraq have died since the occupation? Was that not a monstrously greater instance of "way over the top in terms of reasonable response"?

Because it was over the top. They could have carried out such an attack on their own oppressive governments much more easily than organizing an attack on us. Our attacks in Iraq didn't start with carpet bombing residential neighborhoods. Besides, Iraq was a total red herring; our efforts should've been focused on crushing Al-qaeda, Hamas, and any other fundamentalist zealots worldwide, including inside our own country.

...Saddam was there, with our help.

Iran went backwards 200 years, because we helped topple a more progressive government...

As I said earlier, and addressed on this page as well, our previous meddling in Arab affairs was bullsh*t politics furthered by rich people trying to become richer, or hold onto their power.

Saudi Arabia is enormously rich and poor side by side with oppression of women, with our help and assistance to remain secure.

I think Saudi Arabia was a more deserving target than Iraq, personally.

This "yeah yeah, that's the past, that's history, WHAT ABOUT 9/11?" thing is an example of American amnesia about history that conveniently always helps America to convince herself she's the victim. No one likes to hear it but we are very much sleeping in the bed we made, 9/11 included.

You still haven't mentioned any atrocities we committed that could justify 9/11, and trivializing the blatant disregard for civilian casualties the enemy showed that day is disturbing at best.

[Duskofdead]

Because it was over the top. They could have carried out such an attack on their own oppressive governments much more easily than organizing an attack on us. Our attacks in Iraq didn't start with carpet bombing residential neighborhoods. Besides, Iraq was a total red herring; our efforts should've been focused on crushing Al-qaeda, Hamas, and any other fundamentalist zealots worldwide, including inside our own country.

150,000+ dead are dead regardless of the method you used to kill them. The idea that it's okay they're dead because we didn't carpet bomb them all at once is a neurosis of American militaristic thinking that completely eludes a moral person. I agree we should have focused on Al Qaida, but that's the whole point Tsuki. This war is not and never really was about terrorism, that's just the hook used to sell it to the public and to put Congress in the position of having to keep supporting it. After all, if they yanked the funds on "fighting terrorism" that doesn't look very good does it. There's a reason we don't have Osama Bin Laden and it's not because he's really good at hiding.

As I said earlier, and addressed on this page as well, our previous meddling in Arab affairs was bullsh*t politics furthered by rich people trying to become richer, or hold onto their power.

And that continues to be the case. Making the case after the fact that "well these regimes are bad and deserve to be taken out anyway" is a cheap cop-out considering we helped them stay in power or even placed them in power to begin with.

I think Saudi Arabia was a more deserving target than Iraq, personally.

Considering that a good majority of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, yes, it would have made a lot more sense to take out their regime than Saddam, who didn't tolerate any Muslim extremist groups.

You still haven't mentioned any atrocities we committed that could justify 9/11, and trivializing the blatant disregard for civilian casualties the enemy showed that day is disturbing at best.

Only an idiot would justify an attack on civilians. I would not justify 9/11 but neither would I justify killing any number of civilians, however much it dwarfs 9/11, because we're "doing a greater good" getting rid of a few governments over oil.

[Tsukiyumi]

We're NEVER going to declare war on the Saudis while we need oil. Ever. And it has nothing to do with our military strength or their regime. As long as they will play ball with us we could care less if they stone people to death.

Because the rich in this country would rather not expend the effort to do anything but protect their investments and foreign assets. Besides, it's not like any of thier kids will be doing the fighting anyways...

Taking a bunch of brutal dictatorships, almost all of whom we HELPED INTO POWER, and arbitrarily saying the ones currently on our birthday party invitation list are "less evil" than the ones we're presently annoyed with (For reasons having nothing to do with their human rights record) is so incredibly self-serving it's beyond belief.

I agree. We should systematically eliminate every true dictatorship on earth, and make sure the people have the right and the ability to choose their own fate. Otherwise, we should turn a blind eye, and let everyone else sort out their own problems, be they genocide (which we should stop), or economic issues (not much we can do about those), or environmental issues (which we should be a lot more aggressive about).

[Tsukiyumi]

150,000+ dead are dead regardless of the method you used to kill them. The idea that it's okay they're dead because we didn't carpet bomb them all at once is a neurosis of American militaristic thinking that completely eludes a moral person. I agree we should have focused on Al Qaida, but that's the whole point Tsuki. This war is not and never really was about terrorism, that's just the hook used to sell it to the public and to put Congress in the position of having to keep supporting it. After all, if they yanked the funds on "fighting terrorism" that doesn't look very good does it. There's a reason we don't have Osama Bin Laden and it's not because he's really good at hiding...

The 150,000 number is the extreme low-end estimate from what I understand, and I'm certainly not implying that it is okay. One of my best friends said that the Marines he commanded were always cautious about hurting civilians, and genuinely tried to help the people. And the people genuinely appreciated it. I wasn't on the ground over there with him, but the man is not the sort to lie about something like that.

I agree completely about the backroom setup to go to war over resources; I know they used the terrorist attacks to further their own goals, but as I said, I didn't set up dictatorships around the world, our leaders did decades ago. They should've hit their own governments, or at least military targets. The fact that they didn't says something about the zealotry involved here: they'd rather attack a third-party country because we're not Muslim than attack the people who actually committed the crimes against them.

...And that continues to be the case. Making the case after the fact that "well these regimes are bad and deserve to be taken out anyway" is a cheap cop-out considering we helped them stay in power or even placed them in power to begin with...

It's not after the fact for me. I really think they should all be removed from power, one way or another, regardless of whether US leaders put them in power years ago.

...Considering that a good majority of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, yes, it would have made a lot more sense to take out their regime than Saddam, who didn't tolerate any Muslim extremist groups...

Yep.

Only an idiot would justify an attack on civilians. I would not justify 9/11 but neither would I justify killing any number of civilians, however much it dwarfs 9/11, because we're "doing a greater good" getting rid of a few governments over oil.

Those people shouldn't tolerate extremists any more than we do. When MS-13 gang members started operating out of a neighboring apartment to mine, I reported them. If the problem was so great I thought aircraft were going to bomb my apartment complex, rest assured that I would've brought their bodies to the authorities myself.

[Duskofdead]

Because the rich in this country would rather not expend the effort to do anything but protect their investments and foreign assets. Besides, it's not like any of thier kids will be doing the fighting anyways...

Perfectly correct on every point.

I agree. We should systematically eliminate every true dictatorship on earth, and make sure the people have the right and the ability to choose their own fate. Otherwise, we should turn a blind eye, and let everyone else sort out their own problems, be they genocide (which we should stop), or economic issues (not much we can do about those), or environmental issues (which we should be a lot more aggressive about).

If this is what we were doing I would view it in a much better light. As long as it's just, as you pointed out, rich people making the call based on their financial interests, and all the moral justifications are beside the point, then those rich people must be considered the greater threat to peace and our freedom than any one particular regime halfway across the planet. Those same rich people who "liberate" Afghanistan today may prop up some other dictator in Kuwait or elsewhere if financially convenient, who will be the person we're having to spend trillions and thousands of lives toppling thirty years down the line when he annoys us. In other words as long as people keep biting this crap bait sink and hook this is going to go on, and on, and on. Forever.

[Tsukiyumi]

I agree. We should systematically eliminate every true dictatorship on earth, and make sure the people have the right and the ability to choose their own fate. Otherwise, we should turn a blind eye, and let everyone else sort out their own problems, be they genocide (which we should stop), or economic issues (not much we can do about those), or environmental issues (which we should be a lot more aggressive about).

If this is what we were doing I would view it in a much better light. As long as it's just, as you pointed out, rich people making the call based on their financial interests, and all the moral justifications are beside the point, then those rich people must be considered the greater threat to peace and our freedom than any one particular regime halfway across the planet. Those same rich people who "liberate" Afghanistan today may prop up some other dictator in Kuwait or elsewhere if financially convenient, who will be the person we're having to spend trillions and thousands of lives toppling thirty years down the line when he annoys us. In other words as long as people keep biting this crap bait sink and hook this is going to go on, and on, and on. Forever.

I'll echo your post and say, I agree completely. Our efforts should be focused inwards for the near future at least.

[Duskofdead]

I'll echo your post and say, I agree completely. Our efforts should be focused inwards for the near future at least.

First we have to focus on the traitors WITHIN. THEN, we can focus on the TRUE enemy.

Five bonus fun points if anyone can name that movie, haha.