Real Life Mandarins
- Thread starter Phillip Tanaka
- Start date
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
Damn straight. You don't negotiate with terrorists, and you'll find half the time that terrorists will not negotiate when (insert law enforcement, special forces, or government here) try. I was referring more to incidents like, say, the attempted release of Anthrax in England.
I've talked about Rainbow Six a few times in other discussions. For those who don't know, Rainbow is a fictional anti terrorist group by Tom Clancy, who are made up of an International team. When I was reading about the game Rainbow Six, they pointed this out as so that Rainbow could not be criticised of being American and what not, as they are made up of shoot and looters from Canada, Brazil, Australia, Korea, Egypt, Greece, Poland, Switzerland and many others. A real life Rainbow I think is a very good idea.
I've thought of a new one: Gringoism. The right to hop and pop, shoot and loot, maim, rape (litrially), pillage, slaughter and burn anywhere, at anytime, against absolubtly anyone, in a bid to stop terrorism before it strikes.
With the Moscow bit, I was just thinking-surely they could have come up with something other than pumping a strange gas into a crowded theater.
On that last point I really hope that was sarcasm. Because, that seems like a great way to make more poeple angry enough to become terrorists.
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
Yeah, I was joking around.
But seriously, there should be a team like Rainbow who are not constrained by laws like "you have to read terrorists their rights before you do anything", or "you have to be on the news describing each and every move you'll make, one hour before you strike." Yeah, I'm probably being a bit silly, but there are rules that stop these people from doing their jobs, re: saving innocent lives.And with changing the thread name, um, how do you do it?
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
Book? What book? The Price of Freedom?
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
Oh, sorry, I think you mean Rainbow Six, and how they plan to release the Ebola Brahma virus on the world. Yeah, I know. That sort of stuff makes me twitchy as all hell.
scheherazade
Rear Admiral
for all it matters, its none of the US' goddam business to send anything.
second, there is no 'GI JOE' terrorism. there are no 'bad guys'... anywhere. there's just people with different needs. no one goes around terrorizing for sh1ts and giggles. they have their reasons.
most the time they do it cause they are oppressed and weak and wouldnt live an open battle with an army. so they have to resort to guerilla tactics, and on targets that they can manage to defeat. (i.e. hit and run civillians)
-scheherazade
second, there is no 'GI JOE' terrorism. there are no 'bad guys'... anywhere. there's just people with different needs. no one goes around terrorizing for sh1ts and giggles. they have their reasons.
most the time they do it cause they are oppressed and weak and wouldnt live an open battle with an army. so they have to resort to guerilla tactics, and on targets that they can manage to defeat. (i.e. hit and run civillians)
-scheherazade
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
So this is how losers live. Spend millions of dollars on weapons to use indiscriminatly on innocent people. All because they feel oppressed, or feel that some country is evil. I won't deny that terrorists are generally diffirent to those two DICKHEADS from Washington, but I still have no sympathy for terrorists, the possible exception being Jinroh\Wolf Brigade. I take it for granted that you are against these acts.
scheherazade
Rear Admiral
i have sympathy for anyone who's been screwed by any government. theirs or foreign. its as simple as 'leave me alone'... when governments dont leave people alone, they make their lives miserable, and in turn make enemys for themselves. normal people dont want to fight. its when someone in power has $ to be made that things go bad.
chechens were a bad example of terrorism. they are freedom fighters. they have a nation who is occupied by russia. that simple. their policy is make russia get out. and if you've ever watched the russian news (on WETA) the russian public wants out of chechnya too, its their government that is unwilling to let go (chechnya has a lot of oil).
-scheherazade
chechens were a bad example of terrorism. they are freedom fighters. they have a nation who is occupied by russia. that simple. their policy is make russia get out. and if you've ever watched the russian news (on WETA) the russian public wants out of chechnya too, its their government that is unwilling to let go (chechnya has a lot of oil).
-scheherazade
Concur.
And speaking of civilian casualties, in thier second forray into the break away republic, Russia realized that street to street fighting in the capital of Grozny would be a very costly proposition. So they rolled up a bunch of artillary and levelled the place. This from the country that won at Stalingrad? Common, guys, you know from you're own history that reducing cities to rubble will only make them fight harder.
Also, the impetus for the second militry foray into Chechnya was a series of bombings that was never conclusively linked to the Chechan rebels. It's not as if a former KGB officer would have the means to pull that off, or have the necessary lack of moral fiber to do it though... just a thought.
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
Yes, but...isn't that what the UN and the International Court is for? To right the wrong a country may do without resorting to terrorism?
Phillip Tanaka
Swabbie
Banned
The thing that most people don't realise is that it is the aggressors who control the situation. That's a hard and fast rule for law enforcement. It's the same here. With Iraq, the weapons inspectors could have been allowed in, which they ultimatly were. Yes, I know the arguement over the weapons of mass destruction. But it's the same as allowing law enforcement guns and not allowing convicted murderers the same privilage. Police would not harm innocent people. Murderers would. You follow?
scheherazade
Rear Admiral
iraq has as much right to weapons of mass destruction as the US.
saddam and bin laden are ENEMYS. why would al qaeda want to have anything to do with saddam.
iraq has not done any terrorism.
US causes to invade?
iraq could use weapons of mass destruction cauue it used gas on its own people and iran
-own people? kurds are not iraqis, they are kurds. not their own people. the US told the kurds it would back them if they attacked iraq. they attacked, and iraq retaliated. i dont think they went out of proper response by using gas. A) gas is faster than shooting, and it shortens conflict, saving your own soldiers. B) kurds were armed civillians attacking, so who else but civillians to target... (duh)
- used it on iran? the US funded that war. Sadam was a CIA employee at the time. it was on our hands, not iraq's.
for all it matters, saddam wants to be left alone.
now what of this double standard?
{
albanians came into serbia and settled into an area.
kurds came into iraq and settled into an area.
albanians tried to take that area and make it their own.
US didnt like that and told them 'you dont do that sh1t to people who took you in'
kurds tried to take that area and make it their own.
US liked that idea
}
and what about the reasons we are there in the first place?
oil.
bush owns massive amounts of oil corp. stock.
his friends too.
his family too.
he stands to make massive $ for himself, friends, family, and children.
PLUS imagine if IRAQ (the second largest source of oil on the planet) has a PRO US government and was not part of AOPEC?
oil prices plummet + sold for the same price here (or more) = MASSIVE PROFIT MARGINS.
when the US went to aide kuwait, it was only to get into the iraqi politics. to get an excuse. Britains only reason to get into it was that Kuwait was their pet project since after it was broken from Iraq by the UN in 48'. They were saving their investment.
and what about this democracy and freedom propaganda BS.
i mean really.
US has good ties with known terrorist nations AND terrorists themselves...
Other places than iraq have greater human rights abuses and more death...
This war we're starting stands to kill more iraqis than saddam would in a couple times the rest of his forseeable lifetime, IF he were even killing them.
dead iraqis are not the reason. The us national guard SHOOTS YOU ON SIGHT if you loot during a weather emergency evacuation. its in the papers in florida time to time,... but no one seems to report it much farther. once it was on TV a while back (80 something), but that mistake was corrected (no more showing it on TV). i'm sure the US would react even harsher if some central-us-militia tried to take over. so i wouldnt classify iraq stopping rebellious kurds as out of bounds either.
what guns are not illegal? the ones that wouldnt stand a chance if used VS the army.
what about gun control? what guns are illegal? the ones that could fight the army.
what guns kill nearly all people here? handguns (you can hide them on you, so you can actually get to someone without them seeing you're armed)
what guns kill nearly no people? shotguns and rifles. which is weaker? the handgun.
funny that 50 calibre rifles are gonna be illegal. who's been killed by one? nobody so far... who's been killed by handguns? LOTS!
can a handgun threaten an APC? nope
can a 50 cal rifle threaten an APC? yes
seems like the government is more interested in protecting itself than 'the american people'.
and the US? what democracy. you elect who they give to you on a platter. thats not really a choice if its the only choice.
side note, its ILLEGAL to be a communist... doesnt seem very free-like to me.
illegal to go to cuba... wtf do they think they are? my parents? feck off. if i want to go to cuba i'll go to friggin cuba, get out of my business.
plus you cant get in otherwise. in parlamentary systems if you get 10% of the votes, you get 10% representation. here its nothing. its just who wins.
who wins?
whoever has $. or a party behind them to give them $.
it used to be 25% votes (i think 25) to get your own party.
now its 50%.
know when that changed?
after ross perot got 25%.
how long did it take to change? PRONTO. the guys in government wasted no time getting the law changed from 25 to 50.
without a party, you have no representation in the US system.
how much $ did ross spend? BILLIONS. cause thats what you need today to have your voice heard. and the government is gonna shadow dance around the subject, and will never actually create an equal hear system. its about staying where the money is. $/3 is a lot less appealing than $/2.
on another note, i think its funny how Bush Sr. gave Bush jr. business after business (already running businesses, just told him to take over runnig them), and each one crashed after Bush Jr. took over. where are the managerial skills of this man? he can run a nation of he cant even run a business? how do these people even get up there to choose from? oh wait,... we didnt put them on the ballot, the partys did...
On another note, i've talked to a good few iraqi's, and they tell me a story other than what's on TV here. firstly, they say that its about middle class all around over there, up untill the sanctions there was nothing to be wooried about. as for saddam, as long as you didnt go around spreading ideas of overthrowing him, he didnt bother you. (dont think the US wouldnt react if you were organizing something to overthrow the US government). As for all the veiled women, the girls i talked to told me that only old women and girls with old fashioned parents wear them, most that wear them here tell me that they started when they came here because the US culture judges them by their looks too much. wearing a veil frees them from being treated better or worse by how pretty they are. they say that over there they were treated all the same. and boys had to respect them by looking to their feet when talking to them. it wasnt proper to look at their faces because it was understood that they would treat them differently depending on if they liked what they saw.
what about these recent changes?
- Genetic database of everyone suspected or arrested, from which you are NOT REMOVED after being cleared of a crime or involvement.
- Database of all your financial transactions. (SHOW ME THE $!, now you cant cheat on your takes, they know exactly what you got, and what share THEY GET)
- law enforcement agencies dont need court permission to spy on you. (pretty ez to follow someone you dont like illegally (oops, ex. illegally)). good tool for keeping an eye on anyone who may know more than you like people to know. nip that problem in the bud the moment they say anything.
seems like the government is doing a great job protecting itself, i mean, us... from us, i mean, terrorists.
frankly, the US government has had a greater negative affect on me since 9/11 than any terrorists.
i for one am sure they knew about 9/11 (to be clear i think they get info on 10000's of terrorist threats, and so few materialize that i dont blame them for not reactingto the 9/11 possibility), and were HOPING it would happen, just because it gives them leeway to act, and makes people complacent to their actions.
sigh. oh well. i'm just glad i'm leaving this country before it finsihes degrading into totalitarianism. but i guess it wont ever be bad here, as long as people have $. believe me, if the people here werent as wealthy as they are, the problems with this system would be a lot more front page than they are now. right now nobody cares or notices whent he government is abusive cause they have the crap they want and are happy. its when you dont have $ and crap you want, that you start wanting more freedom.
(if you're wondering, moving to spain. good weather, nice people (unlike the land of the dead we live in here), cheap living, and the government + law enforcement tends to leave you alone (ex. you can smoke weed out in the open even though its illegal, and noone will say shit to you))
-scheherazade
saddam and bin laden are ENEMYS. why would al qaeda want to have anything to do with saddam.
iraq has not done any terrorism.
US causes to invade?
iraq could use weapons of mass destruction cauue it used gas on its own people and iran
-own people? kurds are not iraqis, they are kurds. not their own people. the US told the kurds it would back them if they attacked iraq. they attacked, and iraq retaliated. i dont think they went out of proper response by using gas. A) gas is faster than shooting, and it shortens conflict, saving your own soldiers. B) kurds were armed civillians attacking, so who else but civillians to target... (duh)
- used it on iran? the US funded that war. Sadam was a CIA employee at the time. it was on our hands, not iraq's.
for all it matters, saddam wants to be left alone.
now what of this double standard?
{
albanians came into serbia and settled into an area.
kurds came into iraq and settled into an area.
albanians tried to take that area and make it their own.
US didnt like that and told them 'you dont do that sh1t to people who took you in'
kurds tried to take that area and make it their own.
US liked that idea
}
and what about the reasons we are there in the first place?
oil.
bush owns massive amounts of oil corp. stock.
his friends too.
his family too.
he stands to make massive $ for himself, friends, family, and children.
PLUS imagine if IRAQ (the second largest source of oil on the planet) has a PRO US government and was not part of AOPEC?
oil prices plummet + sold for the same price here (or more) = MASSIVE PROFIT MARGINS.
when the US went to aide kuwait, it was only to get into the iraqi politics. to get an excuse. Britains only reason to get into it was that Kuwait was their pet project since after it was broken from Iraq by the UN in 48'. They were saving their investment.
and what about this democracy and freedom propaganda BS.
i mean really.
US has good ties with known terrorist nations AND terrorists themselves...
Other places than iraq have greater human rights abuses and more death...
This war we're starting stands to kill more iraqis than saddam would in a couple times the rest of his forseeable lifetime, IF he were even killing them.
dead iraqis are not the reason. The us national guard SHOOTS YOU ON SIGHT if you loot during a weather emergency evacuation. its in the papers in florida time to time,... but no one seems to report it much farther. once it was on TV a while back (80 something), but that mistake was corrected (no more showing it on TV). i'm sure the US would react even harsher if some central-us-militia tried to take over. so i wouldnt classify iraq stopping rebellious kurds as out of bounds either.
what guns are not illegal? the ones that wouldnt stand a chance if used VS the army.
what about gun control? what guns are illegal? the ones that could fight the army.
what guns kill nearly all people here? handguns (you can hide them on you, so you can actually get to someone without them seeing you're armed)
what guns kill nearly no people? shotguns and rifles. which is weaker? the handgun.
funny that 50 calibre rifles are gonna be illegal. who's been killed by one? nobody so far... who's been killed by handguns? LOTS!
can a handgun threaten an APC? nope
can a 50 cal rifle threaten an APC? yes
seems like the government is more interested in protecting itself than 'the american people'.
and the US? what democracy. you elect who they give to you on a platter. thats not really a choice if its the only choice.
side note, its ILLEGAL to be a communist... doesnt seem very free-like to me.
illegal to go to cuba... wtf do they think they are? my parents? feck off. if i want to go to cuba i'll go to friggin cuba, get out of my business.
plus you cant get in otherwise. in parlamentary systems if you get 10% of the votes, you get 10% representation. here its nothing. its just who wins.
who wins?
whoever has $. or a party behind them to give them $.
it used to be 25% votes (i think 25) to get your own party.
now its 50%.
know when that changed?
after ross perot got 25%.
how long did it take to change? PRONTO. the guys in government wasted no time getting the law changed from 25 to 50.
without a party, you have no representation in the US system.
how much $ did ross spend? BILLIONS. cause thats what you need today to have your voice heard. and the government is gonna shadow dance around the subject, and will never actually create an equal hear system. its about staying where the money is. $/3 is a lot less appealing than $/2.
on another note, i think its funny how Bush Sr. gave Bush jr. business after business (already running businesses, just told him to take over runnig them), and each one crashed after Bush Jr. took over. where are the managerial skills of this man? he can run a nation of he cant even run a business? how do these people even get up there to choose from? oh wait,... we didnt put them on the ballot, the partys did...
On another note, i've talked to a good few iraqi's, and they tell me a story other than what's on TV here. firstly, they say that its about middle class all around over there, up untill the sanctions there was nothing to be wooried about. as for saddam, as long as you didnt go around spreading ideas of overthrowing him, he didnt bother you. (dont think the US wouldnt react if you were organizing something to overthrow the US government). As for all the veiled women, the girls i talked to told me that only old women and girls with old fashioned parents wear them, most that wear them here tell me that they started when they came here because the US culture judges them by their looks too much. wearing a veil frees them from being treated better or worse by how pretty they are. they say that over there they were treated all the same. and boys had to respect them by looking to their feet when talking to them. it wasnt proper to look at their faces because it was understood that they would treat them differently depending on if they liked what they saw.
what about these recent changes?
- Genetic database of everyone suspected or arrested, from which you are NOT REMOVED after being cleared of a crime or involvement.
- Database of all your financial transactions. (SHOW ME THE $!, now you cant cheat on your takes, they know exactly what you got, and what share THEY GET)
- law enforcement agencies dont need court permission to spy on you. (pretty ez to follow someone you dont like illegally (oops, ex. illegally)). good tool for keeping an eye on anyone who may know more than you like people to know. nip that problem in the bud the moment they say anything.
seems like the government is doing a great job protecting itself, i mean, us... from us, i mean, terrorists.
frankly, the US government has had a greater negative affect on me since 9/11 than any terrorists.
i for one am sure they knew about 9/11 (to be clear i think they get info on 10000's of terrorist threats, and so few materialize that i dont blame them for not reactingto the 9/11 possibility), and were HOPING it would happen, just because it gives them leeway to act, and makes people complacent to their actions.
sigh. oh well. i'm just glad i'm leaving this country before it finsihes degrading into totalitarianism. but i guess it wont ever be bad here, as long as people have $. believe me, if the people here werent as wealthy as they are, the problems with this system would be a lot more front page than they are now. right now nobody cares or notices whent he government is abusive cause they have the crap they want and are happy. its when you dont have $ and crap you want, that you start wanting more freedom.
(if you're wondering, moving to spain. good weather, nice people (unlike the land of the dead we live in here), cheap living, and the government + law enforcement tends to leave you alone (ex. you can smoke weed out in the open even though its illegal, and noone will say shit to you))
-scheherazade
How 'bout them new Homeland Security uniforms-your choice of colors.
Brown or Black
http://homepage.mac.com/leperous/.Pictures/troopers.jpg
Brown or Black
http://homepage.mac.com/leperous/.Pictures/troopers.jpg
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
That's a rather creative re-interpretation of facts. Hussein gassed whole villages, not just the people who fought against him. And this was done on several occasions, not just when the US encouraged the Kurds in 1991 (and indeed, I believe that's one occasion when gas wasn't used). Of course, Sir Winston Churchill was the first one to gas the Kurds in the 1930s, but that's another story.
Another very creative interpretation. The Kurds had been there for thousands of years. Salah al-Din, one of the greatest Muslim military leaders during the Crusades was a Kurd. On the other hand, Kosovo is traditionally a Serb area - although there is now an Albanian majority there, this is only because so many of the Serbs had fled.
Besides, the US did like the Albanians taking over Kosovo. That's why they bombed the hell out of Serbia, remember? So, there is a double standard, but it's the reverse of what you claim.
Kuwait has been a British protectorate since the 19th century. It was officially a part of the Ottoman Empire, but hey, so was Egypt. The idea of Kuwait being historically a part of Iraq is a myth.
Now, I do think we probably have quite similar outlooks on the situation as a whole, but it bothers me a lot that you would spread misinformation to support this argument - doing so only weakens your argument.