Why is it OK to bash the US?

[Kr0m]

Oh yeah, I haven't had time to check this site out, but I hear it's good... http://www.moveon.org/

 

[Sazar]

kr0m stoled my thread

/me smacks kr0m for stealin the church sign generator thinger...

 

[Maveric169]

Originally posted by Kr0m
LOL Maveric... that seems like the typical attitude as to why people dislike the US.

Maybe the US would have had more help if they had more concrete evidence than what they did, as to the reasons why they INVADED and are OCCUPYING Iraq. Maybe even more of the 'little guy' in Iraq would be more encouraged to help out against the fall of it's country.

That is a fair statement, and I agree. The US SHOULD have gathered direct, inrefutable proof of WMD's (as this was the orignal reason we were going there to begin with). But as far as help (I am guessing you are refering to other countries) the US got all the help it would ever have gotton no matter what proof or lack there of was. As France, Germany and North Korea (the 3 I know of for fact) would never have supported the US because they were selling weapons to Iraq (in which they were violating the sanctions by the UN).

 

[Maveric169]

Originally posted by Sazar
did they?

perhaps I missed the bomb shelter that was blown up amongst other things?



all those civilians who died in there were not really there?

Yea, and where was that bomb shelter, in the heart of Iraq!

 

[Brandi]

All I know is that we need to quit sending our troops to Iraq. I wish we'd quit fighting everyone else's battles.

 

[Maveric169]

Originally posted by Geffy
No innocent civilians in Iraq????
WTF

its a good thing there were no innocent civilians in the World Trade Center building when it got hit then isnt it, my god what a load of complete bollocks.


and its a good thing there were no innocent civilians in that large warehouse with the RED CROSS painted on the roof in Afghanistan

Well first of all your trying to compare a terrorist attack to a decarled war. I think you need to pull your head out of your bullocks and do some reasearch.

And as for the red cross yes it is sad that they got killed as they were there to help everyone and anyone, but they knew the risks that intailed setting up shop where they did. In fact the US military told them many times to move from that location.

 

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Maveric169
Yea, and where was that bomb shelter, in the heart of Iraq!

those evil bomb shelter makers... it was all part of a big conspiracy to make the people who dropped the bomb look bad...

damn you you evil bomb shelter makers...

 

[Maveric169]

Originally posted by o_87
Maveric169: your so full of it. I can't believe you'd say something like what you posted. Would you like a country to bomb and level the place where you live?

Well of course not, and I am sure the Iraqies don't either, but at the same time if I knew the occuping force was comming, and I was not going to fight, I would get the hell out.

 

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Maveric169
That is a fair statement, and I agree. The US SHOULD have gathered direct, inrefutable proof of WMD's (as this was the orignal reason we were going there to begin with). But as far as help (I am guessing you are refering to other countries) the US got all the help it would ever have gotton no matter what proof or lack there of was. As France, Germany and North Korea (the 3 I know of for fact) would never have supported the US because they were selling weapons to Iraq (in which they were violating the sanctions by the UN).

north korea has nothing to do with this

permanent members of the security council such as china and russia would have not gone along with the new resolutions calling for a use of force by america and britain... neither would france...

the US needed international help and legitimacy would have helped assistance in this conflict... we don't have enough troops to cover afghanistan AND iraq as well as threaten other nations... unless we start conscription...

there is a reason the US begged the UN for assistance after its fait accompli... there is a reason it was trying to bribe other nations to assist in its attack on Iraq...

Iraq was in violation of the security council resolution 1441... however wether this implied that use of force was appropriate is incorrect...

had we reached a diplomatic solution... it would appear the US would have pushed for chalabi to be installed as president or whatever... I seriously doubt hte iraqi people would have supported this move.. and they certainly have uncertain times ahead of them @ the moment...

hopefully a better strategy to deal with the Iraq situation will be formulated in the near future... something which will make our standing in the eyes of the world a little better...

 

[Erbmaster]

^^^^Very well said Sazar

 

[Maveric169]

Originally posted by Sazar
north korea has nothing to do with this

permanent members of the security council such as china and russia would have not gone along with the new resolutions calling for a use of force by america and britain... neither would france...

the US needed international help and legitimacy would have helped assistance in this conflict... we don't have enough troops to cover afghanistan AND iraq as well as threaten other nations... unless we start conscription...

there is a reason the US begged the UN for assistance after its fait accompli... there is a reason it was trying to bribe other nations to assist in its attack on Iraq...

Iraq was in violation of the security council resolution 1441... however wether this implied that use of force was appropriate is incorrect...

had we reached a diplomatic solution... it would appear the US would have pushed for chalabi to be installed as president or whatever... I seriously doubt hte iraqi people would have supported this move.. and they certainly have uncertain times ahead of them @ the moment...

hopefully a better strategy to deal with the Iraq situation will be formulated in the near future... something which will make our standing in the eyes of the world a little better...

Well first of all, the US did not beg the UN for anything, putting the request to the UN is a standard process in dealing with any international matters. And I have no idea where you got the idea that the US bribed any country for support.

 

[Sazar]

Originally posted by Maveric169
Well first of all, the US did not beg the UN for anything, putting the request to the UN is a standard process in dealing with any international matters. And I have no idea where you got the idea that the US bribed any country for support.

when first the US bashes the UN for being an inept organisation with no power... and then the US goes to the UN and asks for support in the form of troops and monetary aid... that would constitute begging...

putting forth a request to ask for help once you have already denounced an organisation is not exactly good ethics or purpotrates to high standards...

the idea that the US bribed nations for support is an easy link

nations such as turkey for exameple...were given monetary incentives to provide support to US troops... others were given monetary aid for votes in the UN when the US was initially pushing for a new resolution authorising the use of force...

 

[Kr0m]

Yeah, the US would never bribe or press sanctions or threaten to stop any flow of any kind of money or aid or trade to another country that refused to help.

 

[Jewelzz]

I sure hope a mod is watching this thread, I can't be bothered to read it ... cause I don't care

 

[Sazar]

if it gets out of hand jewelzz... we'll deal with it

there are about 3-4 mods actively posting in this thread @ the moment... seems fine for now... certainly not as out of hand as the war on iraq thread got...

 

[Kr0m]

This google search is kind of funny...

 

[Brandi]

LOL....that is funny

 

[Timuwine]

wow.... that is funny

 

[NetRyder]

Originally posted by Kr0m
This google search is kind of funny...

 

[Maveric169]

Originally posted by Sazar
when first the US bashes the UN for being an inept organisation with no power... and then the US goes to the UN and asks for support in the form of troops and monetary aid... that would constitute begging...

putting forth a request to ask for help once you have already denounced an organisation is not exactly good ethics or purpotrates to high standards...

the idea that the US bribed nations for support is an easy link

nations such as turkey for exameple...were given monetary incentives to provide support to US troops... others were given monetary aid for votes in the UN when the US was initially pushing for a new resolution authorising the use of force...

Well as usuall, the UN wanted to turn a blind eye and ignore it's responsibilites (as usual) so the US did bash the UN to put the UN in the spot light and bring attention to the fact that the UN was just sitting on there collective arses. Then after the UN had no other choice but to listen (as the whole world started asking why they are not doing anything) the US put it's request to the UN.

As far as your statement on "ethics", it is no different that you disagreeing with your employer on an issue and then still going to work the next day. Wether the US likes it or not they still did the responsible thing and put the matter to the UN.

As far as bribery, ok, I suppose you can call it that. But tell me this, name 1 country that does not do the very same thing. Just 1. I guarentee that you can't. Yet I don't see you bashing the UK, or any other countries for it.

It is funny how the US is the only country that does everything wrong and how everyone else is squeaky clean.