Printable View
There were enough threads about Bush and the things he is doing. Many members said that he was wrong others said he was right. I guess the argues are clear now.
I miss alternative solutions. What would you do if you were President of the United States? How would you fight terror and solve the Iraq problems?
Please only positive suggestions. No: I'd stop doing ...
Do nothing with Iraq. Some places just aren't ready for democracy. Does anyone really think that the Iraqis are better off now than when Saddam Hussein was in power? Which would you prefer: a quiet life with enough food, electricity, gas and hospitals but no right to vote or express yourself politically? Or the right to vote and express yourself (sometimes at the risk of one's life) but in a highly dangerous and volatile situation, where even going to the market is a risk?
I would fight terror by killing each and every individual convicted of carrying out acts of terror, I would also if possible do it in such a way that they would be denied their spiritual afterlife. The next country that I found to be funding terrorists organisations I would annihilate, and I mean the whole country. I wouldn't make any excuses about WMD or corrupt regimes, I would simply issue the warning and then act. Along with the stick you would need a carrot, this would be improved trade agreements, aid packages and/or military and political support for countries willing to ally against the terrorists.
Of course this wouldn't work in this day and age, but you did ask. :charge: ~:)
Do nothing is not an option anymore. Going out of Iraq would only increase the trouble, don't you think so?Quote:
Originally Posted by King Henry V
Why wouldn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ja'chyra
So what would you do this day?
I would speed up the creation off Iraqi Army and Police Forces.When that would be done.I would withdraw from Iraq as soon ass possible.If that would create problems inside Iraq.I would bring it up in UN.So it would be legimite to International community to send there peacekeepers.
Other thing what id do is that i would stop chasing Al Qaida and Osama Bin Laden with my own troops.Instead i would promise such high fees for their heads that any deacent mercenary could not say no to it. :bow:
Isn't Bush doing both - creating Iraqi army and police and promising head fees?Quote:
Originally Posted by kagemusha
I would just speed them up.I agree with US that you cant just runaway from Iraq and leave it like its now.But the key in my post was the peacekeepers.Because i think people of Iraqi will keep thinking Coalition forces as conguerors,not liberators. :bow:
Maybe the US and the rest of the free world have to start a new Marshall Plan for Iraq. This will increase the wealth in Iraq at once. People must feel that life is better now.
Also Bush has to insure that in the end Iraqi key industry (=oil) is not dominated by US companies.
I would also start an information / propaganda campaign. Support free press and TV stations. Built my own station. Just cannot leave this to AlJazera (right spelling).
Bush has to solve the Palestina problem. This is one key to the whole problem. He has to raise pressure at both sides. And he has to give the Palstinians some perspective for the future. This may mean more money.
To the terrorist? I do not have the real solution. I would send all my CIA etc. to identify the terrorists and their shelders. Then I would get them. Demand them from the ountries they live in. Maybe their should e an international law and court for them, just like the one they had at Nuremberg.
I like your approach. :bow:
About that Court of Law.There is one at Haque but if im right The US doesnt regognice its authority.How weird is that?
How I would combat terrorism.
First I would kill Bush - he makes more terrorists than he kills.
Then I would cut the military spending of the world by 50% - those money, in turn, I would use to send aid, food, housing etc. to poor countries / regions. That I would keep doing for 200 years
=
problem solved.
I would "combat" terrorism by trying to find the reason why terrorism occurs and try to fix it with diplomacy and negotiations. In my opinion noone blows himself up just to kill some people and thus cause fear. There is a reasonable motive behind this unreasonable action and thus it's important to actually study their motives, find out what they want and attempt to reach a compromise, that suits both sides the best.
About the Iraq issue my answer would be to eventually try to bring the Iraqi government, the US government and the Terrorist leaders to a negotiation over the future of Iraq and continue onward based on the decisions of the negotiation. This would be the start on how I would handle things in Iraq. ~;)
That's extremely easy to say, but do you seriously think that they aren't allready trying to get them up as quickly as possible? Would you prefer they sacrifice quality and get mass desertions within the first month of putting them on the streets?Quote:
Originally Posted by kagemusha
Killing Bush would definitly create more terrorist than you kill. Maybe 200 million more!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sjakihata
I know its easy to say.But well im also very happy i didnt create this mess.In what other thing you would concentrate? :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by dgb
I don't know, but I certainly know I wouldn't keep pushing resources into it once I hit serious diminishing marginal returns.Quote:
Originally Posted by kagemusha
Maybe I'm miserading it, but the idea of this thread seems to me to be about not taking cheap shots like "I didn't create the problem", and rather have a serious discussion about what to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by kagemusha
You mean created. You really are clueless. Doing all you say dosent effect Bin Laden and his type in the least. There are poor people all over the world and he sure aint one of them and they dont use terrorism.Quote:
How I would combat terrorism.
First I would kill Bush - he makes more terrorists than he kills.
Then I would cut the military spending of the world by 50% - those money, in turn, I would use to send aid, food, housing etc. to poor countries / regions. That I would keep doing for 200 years
=
problem solved.
OK all we have to do is all convert to Islam otherwise your wasting your breath.Quote:
I would "combat" terrorism by trying to find the reason why terrorism occurs and try to fix it with diplomacy and negotiations.
This is the best solution. From all my studies about arabs and the middle east it seems the only thing they respect is strength.Quote:
I would fight terror by killing each and every individual convicted of carrying out acts of terror, I would also if possible do it in such a way that they would be denied their spiritual afterlife. The next country that I found to be funding terrorists organisations I would annihilate, and I mean the whole country. I wouldn't make any excuses about WMD or corrupt regimes, I would simply issue the warning and then act. Along with the stick you would need a carrot, this would be improved trade agreements, aid packages and/or military and political support for countries willing to ally against the terrorists.
However this is problably a more likely answer.
What if said countries refuse to hand them over do we go to option number 1?Quote:
Maybe the US and the rest of the free world have to start a new Marshall Plan for Iraq. This will increase the wealth in Iraq at once. People must feel that life is better now.
Also Bush has to insure that in the end Iraqi key industry (=oil) is not dominated by US companies.
I would also start an information / propaganda campaign. Support free press and TV stations. Built my own station. Just cannot leave this to AlJazera (right spelling).
Bush has to solve the Palestina problem. This is one key to the whole problem. He has to raise pressure at both sides. And he has to give the Palstinians some perspective for the future. This may mean more money.
To the terrorist? I do not have the real solution. I would send all my CIA etc. to identify the terrorists and their shelders. Then I would get them. Demand them from the ountries they live in. Maybe their should e an international law and court for them, just like the one they had at Nuremberg.
Beeing serious.In my mind the only thing US should try to do is to get UN back to the process.Tell me if im wrong but i believe that 99% of the combatants captured in Iraq are Iraqs own people.If someone would occypy my country,i would fight back.Now you could ask me why anyone would fight for Saddam Hussein.I dont think they are fighting his cause.Did people in Soviet Union in WWII fight for Josef Stalin?
OK your wrong. This has been one of the sticking points on calling this an insurgency as many of the fighters are from the surrounding nations and AQ. Their killing Iraqis mostly . So who are they fighting the US or the people of Iraq?Quote:
Tell me if im wrong but i believe that 99% of the combatants captured in Iraq are Iraqs own people
So im wrong.Maybe its larger misunderstanding here in Europe,but i like to separate US war on terror from war on Iraq.I support war on terrorism.But i dont support occupation of an country by another country without UN resolution.I think terrorist are groups of individuals who should be dealt as criminals.If they operate locally they should be judged according the laws of the country were they are captured.If internationally.They should be judged and punished at military tribunal at Haque.
The problem with terrorists is who should have the right to judge who is an terrorist.I think we can all agree that members of Al Qaida are terrorists.But if i ask you are members of IRA,ETA or Tczezheen separatist terrorists i think there will be many answers.
Number one. We are not occupying Iraq. Number two the UN is worthless, get over it.Quote:
But i dont support occupation of an country by another country without UN resolution.
Well thats what most on the left believe. I guess we could have treated Hitler and the Nazis as a criminals also.Quote:
I think terrorist are groups of individuals who should be dealt as criminals
Im sorry, but i dont understand.About UN what is your alternative?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
[QUOTE=Well thats what most on the left believe. I guess we could have treated Hitler and the Nazis as a criminals also.[/QUOTE]
I dont know if we have a common definition of the left.Maybe its difference in our political culture.About the Nazi leadership they were treated like criminals and most of them were judged and hanged at Nurnberg.
An organization of democratic nations.Quote:
Im sorry, but i dont understand.About UN what is your alternative?
Did we send the police to arrest them?Quote:
About the Nazi leadership they were treated like criminals and most of them were judged and hanged at Nurnberg.
I'd smother the insurgence with dollar notes and free tvs.
And cable. That's the important bit. No one will blow themselves up if they have got caught in a soap and want to see how xxx ends up next week.
So who would judge what nation would be democratic?I´l throw you an example:Would Pakistan be included or Saudi-Arabia.They are US allies.And not very democratic at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
About the Nazis i would characterize them as international Terrorist on novadays terms and if we are talking about what country made biggest effort destroying them.The answer would be Soviet Union.My country fought both Nazis and Soviet Union in WWII.
The members would be decisded upon by the members ~;) I think we all know what countries are truly democratic.Quote:
So who would judge what nation would be democratic?I´l throw you an example:Would Pakistan be included or Saudi-Arabia.They are US allies.And not very democratic at all.
There was no soviet union during WW2 ~;)Quote:
About the Nazis i would characterize them as international Terrorist on novadays terms and if we are talking about what country made biggest effort destroying them.The answer would be Soviet Union
Besides Russia was as big a terrorist state if not more so than Germany.
Thats why
Did your country fight them with your police?Quote:
My country fought both Nazis and Soviet Union in WWII.
Where do you get that police thing?I havent talked about police in this whole thread.And no we didnt fight them with police. My country has little over 5 million people and we have over 5 hundred thousand men in reserves.Im Infantry 1st sergeant my self,in that reserve. ~;)
Right hereQuote:
Where do you get that police thing?I havent talked about police in this whole thread.
Quote:
I think terrorist are groups of individuals who should be dealt as criminals.
What i meant they should punished in court of law like any other people.How to catch them, would you prefer chasing terrorists inside US with Army?That could be rather messy.Wouldnt you like to use maybe FBI and SWAT teams for the job?
Its against our law to use the army for these purposes within our borders.Quote:
would you prefer chasing terrorists inside US with Army?
We doQuote:
Wouldnt you like to use maybe FBI and SWAT teams for the job?
Im speaking of International terroism here. Clinton and the left consider it still a police matter not a military one as conservatives and Bush do.
Okay.That would be one ridicilous police operation. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
About Al Qaida.I believe the bounties will work eventually and you may capture the main figures of Al Qaida.But rooting out any terrorist organisation will be very hard. :bow:
Be more aggressive abroad. Politically correct wars dont ever work..
Im speechless... :inquisitive:
You're not the only one... ~;)
I need to comment on this:
According to your statement arabs respect strength. But if this is true, then why is there clear hate among some arabs against the USA?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
If they respect strength, then I'd expect them to respect the USA too.. ~:confused:
OK your wrong. This has been one of the sticking points on calling this an insurgency as many of the fighters are from the surrounding nations and AQ.
Many Gawain ? are you sure ~;)
You are correct though , he was wrong about the 99% , he was wrong by less than 2% ~D ~D ~D
I've said this before, in the "King of America" thread somebody started. I'm not going to rehash it all, but I essentially believe in a very non-interventionist foreign policy.
At the the first sign of difficulty in any peacekeeping missions, my troops would shoot to defend themselves and immediately pull out. No sitting around without ammo moaning about how if only there was something they could do. Messes in other countries would be primarily the responsibility of said other countries to clean up.
Of course, you'd probably be posting a thread about what you could do to help the heartless bastard, President Corleone, that won't put his men on the line to stop lawlessness in other countries.
Thats a good one. ~:cheers:
One question.Do you guys really believe that anything your current government does will end up being bashed around by uss bunch off liberals?Are there any common ground? :bow:
Honestly? Yes. I really do. Let's take Bosnia....
First, the US was a bunch of evil, cowardly ingrates who wouldn't act to stop an ongoing human travesty. But then we did, and overnight, the criticism changed to what a bunch of heavy handed imperialist thugs we all are.
I get the impression that nothing short of a bunch of unarmed soldiers, taking shot after shot to the chest, forming a human shield between the Serbs and the Bosnian muslims, would have satisfied the European Left. The first guy who shot back in self defense would have been branded a war criminal. I'm exaggerating my views, but only slightly.
What i have seen in the backroom here.I havent stumbled upon any european who classifies as an conservative in American standard.I dont even consider myself very lefty at all but in this forum i seem to be.After all its pretty intresting.But what you sayed before.I dont like the war in Iraq but i appreciate the soldiers fighting there or anywhere.Its not their fault that they are there.They are just doing as ordered. :bow:
I suppose you can back that up with figures.Quote:
Many Gawain ? are you sure
You are correct though , he was wrong about the 99% , he was wrong by less than 2%
Also it seems any Sunni who tries to work with the government gets assassinated. Whats up with that ?Quote:
July 06, 2004
Foreign fighters in Iraq
[posted by swamphopper]
USATODAY ran the story, Foreign detainees are few in Iraq. These statistics are supposed to imply that the Bush administration is overstating the involvement of foreign fighters in Iraq.
Although the article acknowledges the presence of funding from outside sources (namely Syria), the implication of the article is that Americans are exaggerating. They even quote a Marine officer: "In Ramadi, where Marines have fended off coordinated attacks by hundreds of insurgents, the fighters 'are all locals,' says Lt. Col. Paul Kennedy, commander of the 2nd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment. 'There are very few foreign fighters.'"
To put the article in perspective, however, consider the following quotes from Army Specialist Joe Roche's post detailing his unit's involvement in fighting against Muqtada Al-Sadr's uprising. Read it for yourself and then decide if USATODAY is giving a balanced perspective on the involvement of foreign fighters in Iraq.
Here's Joe Roche:
The 1st Armored Division, of which the 16th Engineers are a part, led the charge against Muqtada Al-Sadr's uprising. The 16th was in the front in all this in Karbala, Najaf, Kufa and Baghdad. And contrary to the negative news coverage, the reality is that we have won some major victories that are having dramatic impact region-wide. I don't think most Americans are aware of the seriousness of the threats we confronted and defeated.
Sadr's Mahdi Army was backed by extensive foreign fighters and a huge amount support. Iran's formidable Al-Quds Army (named for the conquest of Jerusalem, Israel) directly assisted their attacks against us. They trained some 1,200 of Sadr's fighters at three camps they ran along the Iran-Iraq border at Qasr Shireen, 'Ilam, and Hamid. This was backed by what one Iranian defector to us has said was $70 million dollars a month given by Iranian agents to our enemies -- from which Sadr's forces were directly funded in just the past few months by up to $80 million more. The Iranian Embassy distributed some 400 satellite phones in Baghdad to Sadr's forces, while 2,700 apartments and rooms were rented in Karbala and Najaf as safe houses. Sadr's ability to influence the Iraqi people was further enhanced by 300 "reporters" and "technicians" working for his newspaper, radio and television networks -- persons who are actually members of the Al-Quds Army and Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards.
We also faced Chechen snipers in Sadr's forces who were being paid anywhere from $500 to $10,000, depending on differing accounts, for each American soldier they hit. One sniper hit five soldiers in less then a minute-and-a-half, killing one with a shot in the neck. These mercenaries were sending this money back to Al-Qaeda-allied guerrillas in Chechnya to fight the Russians.
We also have constantly faced Lebanese and Palestinian Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon mixed in the fighting. Their claim to fame for the killing of 241 U.S. Marines in Beirut in 1983 is something we have had to consider every day and on every mission.
Then I'd give them in the hands of Panzer ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Gawain, you know that it is not as simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
In the US they like to believe that all the enemies in Iraq come from other countries. In Europe they are willing to believe they are all Iraqis. Both is true and both is wrong.
It is worthless because the US wants them to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
I waited a long time for someone to bring Hitler in this thread. By the way, you treated them as criminal, don't you remember?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Classic Gawain , you post an article where it says that the statistics back me up , a commanding officer backs me up , but an NCO talking about an operation from a long time ago , against a group that is now part of the Iraqi government , military and police force , says you are right ~D ~D ~D oh yes , an operation who eventually produced statistics that also back me up .
Oh stop it , it hurts when I laugh this much ~:cheers:
Well First and Foremost, if everybody on the forum thinks that the US is occupying Iraq, then I am sure most Iraqis think we are occupying Iraq. We need to send in many many more troops... at least 100,000. Then we need to all but sever Al Jazeera from Iraqi TVs, the Iraqi government needs to broadcast it's own Iraqi propaganda station. We need hourly border patrols, via helicopters, and airplanes using highly advanced infra-red and other optical surveillance equipment. The US military is not soft, it's the American people themselves who cannot handle the war, most soldiers dislike Bush for making them go there... but out of every soldier I have met that has been in Iraq, they say that they need to be there for a long time, maybe even a decade or more, and most are willing to do that. We need to rekindle our bonds with Europe and the UN, also we need to draft a UN Right to Act Bill, allowing UN authority to be ruled under an elected Chain of Command, and giving UN peacekeepers the right to not only defend themselves, but the right to defend the country and the people they are supposed to defend. From this point, we could slowly move troops out of Iraq, whilst UN forces move in, and the Iraqi Military rebuilds itself. For every US soldier that is withdrawn from Iraq, the Iraqis must have One Fully Trained and Equipped soldier to replace him.
Also the Iraqis must make a clear and well thought out constitution that scrutinizes anyone with deep religious affiliation, military affiliations, or outside affiliations to be able to hold office. Kurdistan needs to be recognized as a dependent nation, so they have their own constitution and civil rights, outside of Baghdad, but would be economic and military dependants. Any act of aggression by the Southern Iraqis (shi'ites or Sunnis) would be treated as an act of war and would activate US military support.
Hmmm... can't think much beyond that.
And Remember! Always Tip your Waitress!
^Unfortunatly everything you said is either impossible or never going to happen.
I know... wishful thinking on my part ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by lars573
~:cheers:Quote:
First I would kill Bush - he makes more terrorists than he kills.
That would be a good step. There certainly would be some great after assasination parties out there!
But as murder is not really condoned by the majority of the civilized world, I guess we need another solution.
As much as I despise the bastard, I believe he has done the right thing, in his own screwed up sort of way.
First, regardless of whether the Iraqi's needed liberating or not he needed a complete show of stregnth after 9/11 as a warning to the rest of the world. I think Iraq was just a convenient political target. After neutralizing Afghanistan, I raq was basically the next on the list.His reasoning behind the attack was misguided. Perhaps he would have gained more support had he used an excuse he could actually back with facts, rather than making up stories to suit his own ends. I wonder whether he is now regretting his decision to enter Iraq in the capacity of freedom fighter. Maybe a quick slash and burn approach would have been more economical , not only in monetary terms, but human lives also. He's certainly stirred up the hornets nest, and America will continue to pay for it for years to come.
Pakistan also gives refuge to a huge network of terrorists, regardless of the media statements saying otherwise,but the political ramifications of attacking them would have been devastating.
On the other hand, the USA has had it's finger in so many pies over the last 50 years, it can't expect not to get burned now and again. 5000 odd lives in 9/11 is nothing in comparison to the toll it has inflicted worldwide over the years.
Rwanda lost 1 000 000 to genocide and barely made headlines for a day a year or so after the event. America loses 1/200th of that and it's all we hear for months on end. Where's the justice?
Genocide and how the world did nothing
Close America's porous borders.
Turn the entire middle east into a sheet of glass.
We must destroy our enemies before they destroy us.
But first we should all try to be friends.
You have the right to your opinion, but I think this statement represents incomplete thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Revelation
"Inflicted"?
What have Americans "Inflicted"? Aside from virtually ridding the world of many threats to freedom throughout history?
If it wasn't for America and our allies, the earth would be covered in the darkness of Nazis, Communists, or religious fundamentalists.
9/11 was an event which by America sees itself as completely changed. Prior to 9/11, the perception was that we are safe and invulnerable. Now that our lip has been bloodied, it has occurred just how vulnerable we really are. 9/11 created a national change in conciousness. A nuke could really happen.
As per the news on Rwanda and other miserbale places in the world, what are we going to do to fix it right this second? Not a damn thing. Look how screwed up Iraq is and it is costing America an unrecoverable fortune to fix.
Fixing the whole world is idealistic and impossible. A clear example Liberal thinking. Nothing wrong with being idealistic but keep your feet on the ground while your head is in the clouds.
"Let's help everyone, everywhere."
"Who will pay for it?"
"The rich!"
"So how will they afford to employ people and invest?"
"Who cares. They're rich and I'm not. Let's take away their money and give it to someone else. Like Africa or the poor urban mother with eight crack babies, or me. Oh. And kill Bush."
Its not America's fault other people are less civilized and resort to genocide.Quote:
Rwanda lost 1 000 000 to genocide and barely made headlines for a day a year or so after the event. America loses 1/200th of that and it's all we hear for months on end. Where's the justice?
The same people who condemn America for not acting in the Sudan, Rwanda, ect. condemn America for taking out a dictator in Iraq.
Why doesnt Europe take on the African problems instead of blocking action in the UN? They havent dismantled their militaries quite enough to lose to African nations - yet.
More importantly, if we did act, we'd be imperialist Nazis, taking over the world. I've come to recognize that Europe and the US are on two different paths. This is all part of a propaganda campaign by Europe to 'blame the US for EVERYTHING'. A boy in East Timor catches a cold? Must be the United States' fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Revelation, Ruanda is another topic. Not helping Ruanda is bad, but not a reason for not trying to fix the terror.
Panzer, if there is a silly comment coming from Australia why do you use this for anti-europeism? ~:cheers:
Quote:
First I would kill Bush
It's hard to tell if such statements are meant seriously or not, but I am pretty sure that they are not constructive answers to a serious questions, but are rather meant to be baits that are likely to drag discussions down into the gutter.Quote:
Turn the entire middle east into a sheet of glass.
I would appreciate if people could limit their violent fantasies to e.g., playing the TW games or Battlefield 2, instead of carrying them to discussions where they are not really helpful.
Thanks for your attention :bow:
Et tu, Don?
There are European troops under UN mandat at Sierra Leone as we speak. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Wow thats comforting.Quote:
There are European troops under UN mandat at Sierra Leone as we speak.
There were UN troops in Rwanda were there not? It also seems that UN troops commit attrocites where ever they go but dont garner near the attention of US troops in such natters,
There were also US troops at Somalia?For not wery long if i recall?Is the real problem that Europeans are willing to send troops under UN mandat but not without it?
Same with the US at this point. We would be better off with no UN.Quote:
There were also US troops at Somalia?For not wery long if i recall?Is the real problem that Europeans are willing to send troops under UN mandat but not without it?
Are you being serious? Or has a brilliant moment of satire slipped right past me yet again?Quote:
Close America's porous borders.
Turn the entire middle east into a sheet of glass.
We must destroy our enemies before they destroy us.
But first we should all try to be friends.
Don't really see the relevance to the discussion, but let's run with it. Nazis? Maybe, depends who the allies are. Communists? Probably, though whether that is a "darkness" or not is debatable. Fundamentalists? Absolutely not. America is currently reaping the results of Machiavellian policies in the Middle-East during the Cold War, where Islamic fundamentalism was promoted to combat the influence of the USSR, and only aided its growth.Quote:
If it wasn't for America and our allies, the earth would be covered in the darkness of Nazis, Communists, or religious fundamentalists.
Anyhow, right now I would say the most successful strategy for Bush would depend on how he feels about diplomatic relations with the rest of the world. Probably in the short term, a zero-tolerance approach on events in Iraq, with terrorists brutally and totally repressed even with dire consequences for the general civilian population would be a good bet, followed by a swift withdrawal after achieving the goal (whatever that may be) that he set out to do.
However, that may hold longer-term political costs, to diplomatic efforts in general and the perception of Bush in the Middle-East. Certainly, I don't particularly envy Dubya's position but he can always leave it to his successor if he can't solve it, so it isn't a tremendous problem for him.
OK...If I were Prez Bush ...the first thing I would do is to stop smerking at people during press conferences....(hey I'm serious here)...and feed/educate/enfrancise the peoples of these so called evil states.
Education is the key here...as long as the religious zealots from either side have a say in how the ordinary guy can live his life ... then there is no hope of a peace.
And follow things through, if you invade a country then before you leave, you make sure it's as stable as possible.
And another thing I'd do...I would find out who placed all that crap about the WMD *eyes my mate Tony* and I would have them sent to Gitmo, just in the name of justice.
Lets see Cherie get him out of there, even on £30,000 a speech... ~:grouphug:
Sheet of glass...
Perhaps superheated sand was not the best choice of words. Was it a joke? Kind of. More of an extreme and simplistic answer really. I thought it contrasted nicely with such comments as "kill bush", and "why is 9/11 a big deal", etc.
Here is a more realistic answer: Continue policy as it stands now, but ramp up diplomacy and foriegn education funding. When Imams preach that America is the big Satan and Israel is the little Satan, we have a real big problem. Entire generations are being bred and educated to hate us and seek our destruction.
Religious fundamentalism, facism, and communism are all essentially the same and here is why: Each seeks to force the will of a few onto the many using violence. There is no representation. There is no tolerance. And none are happy unless their slave way of life is forced upon the victim-society.
Is that more constructive?
Trying to tell an American they are not as great as their ego's lead them to believe is like trying to tell a Muslim how good pork tastes. The end result is the same, they just don't buy it!
Should we thank you all for saving the world from eternal darkness and the like?
I think we should just agree to disagree.
It's a subject that cuts really close to the bone for me.
I despise Bush! I'd like to say I also despise all America stands for but I don't. Just it's delivery.
Sigh, your missing my point altogether. As for the silly part, people in glass houses mate.Quote:
Revelation, Ruanda is another topic. Not helping Ruanda is bad, but not a reason for not trying to fix the terror.
Bloody Europeans!
Who would have thought that? You're full of surprises! :brood:Quote:
I despise Bush! I'd like to say I also despise all America stands for but I don't. Just it's delivery.
America is doing what it thinks needs to be done. This all comes from America's policy as being the "Big Brother", if America doesn't take charge on controversial issues who will? France ? Germany? Italy? Australia? I seriously doubt it. America isn't a father knows best state because it wants to be, It has grown into being one out of necessity. Although I agree America has some very underhanded politics, It isn't fair to point the finger at us, or the politicians and say "It's all your fault!" Because it isn't... the War in the Middle East and Against Terrorism is more so the Soviets fault than ours, but everyone likes a conveniant target to blame. As far as Islamic Fundamentalism is concerned, we only helped the cause, we did not give birth to it, the Soviets did when they invaded Afghanistan, and the age old quote "The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" Came into realization during the Soviet Afghan War. The fact of the matter is, we've never liked Religious Fundamentalists, but we hated communism even more. Just like in WWII, we never liked Communism (in fact it spited us greatly that we had to supply the soviets) but we knew faschists were far worse. And now everyone has the audacity to tell us how much they hate us for being the way we are, when in fact we were drug into this position by everyone else. I seriously doubt America would have been on this road had it not been for the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Hirohito, and Chamberlaine. And it bothers me even more when people say they hate the common American when we have sacrificed so much blood and money towards the greater good of the world and we get spat in the face for it. Everyone says America is full of weak willed liberalists who like to get things done quickly, like our war in Iraq and our war in Afghanistan, but truth be told I, like every other level headed person in the world couldn't give a damn about Iraq or Afghanistan and the people that live there, I just want to see my family and even my country continue to grow in a safe world. However I also realize that trying to change things takes time, this war on terrorism is not a war against time, it is a war of patience... and history shows the west is far more impatient than the middle east.
Wazikashi-
Nicely put. Concise and articulate.
Quote:
And it bothers me even more when people say they hate the common American when we have sacrificed so much blood and money towards the greater good of the world and we get spat in the face for it.
Oh please.....That really is sickening and bordering on delusional!
The American ego at work! I rest my case!
Theres only 1 delusional person here . Maybe his name will be revealed.Quote:
Oh please.....That really is sickening and bordering on delusional!
Couldn't help but point out the conflict Revelation had with his last statement with his sig. Kind of interesting if you ask me.
His last statement.
Oh please.....That really is sickening and bordering on delusional!
The American ego at work! I rest my case!
His sig.
Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.
Now I think he has rested his case.
Ahh, a couple of Seppo's throwing stones from the relative safety of their caves?
How is it that Seppo's find it so difficult to believe that the rest of the world really do not think much of them?
Anyone not agreeing or idolizing the Yanks is wrong?
Nice little jibe there Redneck also mate. Well done... :duel:
Vote 1 Osama!
You have every right to disagree with us, despise us, hate us for whatever reason that you will. I frankly do not care. But your callous insults and seemingly unwitty quips and retorts to do not help your cause. I don't claim to be a lover of all things american, as a matter of fact I disagree about our approach to this war on terrorism, but the fact of the matter is something had to be done.
And I whilst you sit on your computer and blast me or my comments, and tell me that I sit in the relative safety of my cave, where in the hell are you? I don't think you are off in some foreign land fighting your enemies (and trust me YOU do have enemies) you have the audacity to say that we shout behind the safety of our soldier's guns, Hypocrisy does not impress me in the least. So before you decide to post any retort or reply to mine, stop and think for a moment before you say something childish. Remember your quote.
P.S. Learn to call American's "American." Its not that hard, you should try it sometime.
Ive never seen an America-basher so thoroughly beat down.. its truly a sight to behold. ~:cheers:
You know what?
I had a huge post just written up, replying to all the points you raised in your previous post(directed at Waz), detailing my immense dislike for Americans, replying with nasty little jibes at all you said. Taunting with threats of another 9/11 and how that would be a good thing, basically exercising my right to hate.
Then I stepped back and thought about it..........
I don't hate Americans, I don't hate Bush, goddamn, I don't really hate anyone.
What I do hate is a war on terror that is really not justified. Thousands of Iraqi's suffering and military personell being killed needlesly.
Bush is just a man. Nothing more. A man with huge responsibility trying to do the best he can for his country, in his own screwed up sort of way.
Over here (in Australia) , our view on America is biased, influenced greatly I believe by the rubbish we recieve on Television. The perception of Loud mouth Arrogant Yank is one widely held by the broader community due to the above mentioned fact. I guess it's a shame that we(I) don't see the other side to American life. The same as anywhere else I suppose. Mum and Dad , 3 kids, mortgage struggling to give the children what they need, pay the bills etc etc....
It's a pity I let myself become blinded to the fact that when it comes down to it, we're all the same. Doing it hard, trying to get on top.
Please accept my apologies. It was bloody childish of me. Authority irks me and I guess Bush/America is the extreme Authoritarian, or thats the way I viewed it. My anger was misguided and I let my mouth run away without the brain in tow.
I could go on and on trying to explain my actions, and look for excuses as to why I behaved like a complete fanatical anti American dickhead, but I won't.
I was wrong.
Again , Apologies.
Peace out :bow:
All you bashers, get out of here. There are enough bashing threats here. If you do not agree, create a new one. I don't mind. But this one is not made for bashing! :furious3:
If I were the President of the USA, I would use the UN against terror.
I would setup several councils there:
1. A council to adjust principle rule against international terror
2. A juristical council to judge the terrorists according
Of course I would offer a proposal for the principle and make sure htat the right persons are in that judging council. Some moslem states have to be in it as well.
It has to be similar to the Nuremberg trials.
You'll of course need a council to judge the fairness of the other councils.. :laugh4:
Rev-
Good of you to step up and apologize. It is taken from this American and with no offense. You are correct. We are all the same.
I HIGHLY recommend that you browse this document:
www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
It may give you insight into the how and why of American foreign policy.
Is Bush a liar? Everyone in the world thought Saddam had WMD. And if he did, he would have gladly given them to terrorists to use against America. He hated fundamentalists, but he hated America far far more. It was just that no one was willing to do anything about it. Our intelligence and the intelligence of the world was wrong. We called Saddam's bluff and a bluff it was. The weak may attempt to appear strong and the strong may attempt to appear weak.
So now we are in Iraq for different reasons. Stabilize, promote democracy and free economy, then get the hell out.
As for the civilians and death toll, this is one of the least bloody wars of all time. It could have been way way way worse. We do everything we can to minimize and avoid civilian casualties.
I just find it a real shame that people think we are over there to conquer or something. If that were the case, the American people would not stand for it. I served in Afghanistan (I have a picture of me with an Aussie soldier) and the people I had contact with were delighted that we had set them free from the Taliban. As one local put it, the Taliban operated under the "banner of Islam", but were nothing more than thugs who wanted to be in control. Same with Nazis, same with facism, same with communists.
We want peace my friend. And only freedom throughout the world can ensure a decades-long or centuries-long peace, which is something the earth has never seen.
And a council to judge the fairness of THAT council.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager