Saddam captured

[FileNotFound]

I agree with everything that Radar has said.

The capture of Saddam means nothing more than that the US troops might get to go home sooner.

The US should never have been involved in the first place.

Oh and Kitsune: None.

Not a SINGLE ONE.

Not even WWII. Japan attacked because they felt that war was innevitable because the US was showing itself as an ally against the Axis.

Can you honestly tell me that not a single American being killed in a war in the past 100 years would have been a BAD thing?

[Radar]

World War II (American soil was attacked although we provoked the Japanese by cutting off their oil supply and other trade embargos), and Afghanistan (American soil was attacked). Although without America's military interventionism in World War I, Hitler never would have come to power and there never would have been a World War II, but that's another story. And Afghanistan would most likely have been avoided if our military had been in America instead of being spread over the globe like the Roman or English Empires pissing off everyone else with our bullying and muscle flexing.

The Constitution defines our military to be used for the DEFENSE of American soil and ships. DEFENSE never includes starting unprovoked wars, using our military to defend other countries, humanitarian aid missions, training other militaries, peace keeping missions, etc.

[FileNotFound]

Radar:

WWII - Do you mean the Japanese or the UBoat attack?
You see the UBoat attacked a ship carrying ammo and supplies...and people. US was already involved in a war by helping UK.

Afghanistan? Tell me...how did Afghanistan, the place where their idea of advanced technology is an AM radio attack US soil? 911? Thats hardly "Afghanistan". But of course we all know that 911 certainly wouldn't have happened if US hadn't gotten itself set up as the big bully of the middle east.

[Beestie]

Honestly, Radar, if you ran America there wouldn't be an America. We would have been destroyed decades ago by the very people that you so desperately want to ignore.

[FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Beestie
Honestly, Radar, if you ran America there wouldn't be an America. We would have been destroyed decades ago by the very people that you so desperately want to ignore.

Like who?

Give me a break.

Look at Australia. Who has initated terrorist action against them latley?

NOBODY.

Do you know why?

[Radar]

WWII - Do you mean the Japanese or the UBoat attack?

The Japanese. The U-Boat attack was our BS excuse to get involved in WWI. America violated our neutrality agreement and was sending arms to England in the Lucitania (A cruise ship that had been converted from a war ship) and was sunk. Edward Mandal House pushed us into WWI.

The Japanese attacked us because we cut off their oil supply and put other trade embargos on them. They attacked in retaliation and we knew they were coming (we moved all of our expensive aircraft carriers out to sea on "exercises" on December 6th, 1941 so only the old and less expensive ships were attacked...see rainbow 5)

Afghanistan?

Al Queda was responsible for attacking us, and Afghanistan (which was ruled by the Taliban) harbored and protected them. They stood in our way rather than turning over the criminals who blew up the WTC on 9/11. So yes, the attack in Afghanistan was justified, but was a failure because we didn't get Bin Laden. This was a major reason in why Bush violated the Constitution and international law by attacking Iraq. He wanted to take attention away from his MANY failures as a president including his failure to get Bin Laden.

[Radar]

Honestly, Radar, if you ran America there wouldn't be an America. We would have been destroyed decades ago by the very people that you so desperately want to ignore.

Please. If I ran America, we'd be more free, pay no income taxes, have a DEFENSIVE military, be liked throughout the world with hardly any enemies if any, we'd be more prosperous, better educated, etc. The elderly, poor, and sick would have more assistance from than they do now, we'd have affordable healthcare, lower unemployment, less people in jail, etc.

America would be secure, strong, happy, successful, and FREE.

[FileNotFound]

Radar. Wouldn't you say that the fact that Japan attacked us during WWII was because of the trade embargo which can be considered as an act of war.

I do not think that the US was right to attack Afghanistan. There is still no 100% proof that it was Al Quada who was responsible for the attack nor is there any proof that the Taliban fully supported the attack. I hate Afghanistan with a passion, I think it's a shithole and inhabited by cruel, savage and brutal people. Still I don't think the US had a right to attack them based on suspicion.

Finally, I think it's fair to say that there wouldn't have been a 911 if not for all the previous US interventions in the middle east.

[Beestie]

Please. If I ran America, we'd be more free, pay no income taxes, have a DEFENSIVE military, be liked throughout the world with hardly any enemies if any, we'd be more prosperous, better educated, etc. The elderly, poor, and sick would have more assistance from than they do now, we'd have affordable healthcare, lower unemployment, less people in jail, etc.

Lose 30 pounds in three days!

Work from home and make $150,000/year stuffing envelopes!

I bought 700 houses with NO MONEY DOWN!

FREE sex with bikini babes!!

All this and much, much more if only you elect ME!!

[Undertoad]

Originally posted by FileNotFound
Look at Australia. Who has initated terrorist action against them latley?

NOBODY.

Do you know why?

The massive and horrible nightclub bombing attack in Bali, engineered by al Qaeda, was actually an attack on the hundreds of Australian tourists dancing and drinking there. It may have been a response to the Aussie's handling of East Timor. They struck in Bali and not in Australia directly because Indonesia had a poor security infrastructure.



:p

[Radar]

Radar. Wouldn't you say that the fact that Japan attacked us during WWII was because of the trade embargo which can be considered as an act of war.

I've already said they attacked us in retaliation for our actions, but the trade embargos were a result of Japan murdering millions and millions of Chinese people (far more than the number of Russian and Jewish deaths from WWII combined) but America was wrong to make those embargos. We should have refused to trade with them ourselves, but we cut off their oil from Dutch suppliers so there was some justification for their attack.

Finally, I think it's fair to say that there wouldn't have been a 911 if not for all the previous US interventions in the middle east.

I totally agree with that statement, but disagree on the this one...

There is still no 100% proof that it was Al Quada who was responsible for the attack nor is there any proof that the Taliban fully supported the attack.

Actually there is 100% proof that those who blew up the WTC were members of Al Queda. Some of it was in their own suicide notes left behind, and their ID's. Although 17 of the 19 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, and we sure didn't attack them.

The Taliban may or may not have agreed with the attack on the WTC, but that is irrelevant. We asked them to turn over Al Queda and they refused, so they were harboring criminals which makes them criminals.

If the American military was doing their ONLY job of defending AMERICA instead of being a huge show of force around the world pissing everyone else off with our military interventionism we never would have had a September 11th attack. In a way all of them died as a result of the foreign policy choices of the Republicans and Democrats.

And the worst part is we have a cowardly, ignorant, traitor in the oval office trying to whip the American public into a frenzy to get support for his own terrorist actions. He's made government larger, costlier, and more intrusive than ever before. He created the unconstitutional "Homeland Security" department which is nothing but a department to spy on Americans.

If the "Homeland Security" department is supposed to defend our homeland (which sounds very close to the fatherland), what's our military for? Defending the Empire?

[Radar]

Lose 30 pounds in three days!

Work from home and make $150,000/year stuffing envelopes!

I bought 700 houses with NO MONEY DOWN!

FREE sex with bikini babes!!

All this and much, much more if only you elect ME!!

Those seem like unrealistic promises, while all of mine are solid, easily obtained, genuinely possible plans. We had everything I've said in the past, but lost it thanks to Republicans and Democrats. All of what I've said can be backed up by simply educating yourself. Start with the Libertarian Platform, and then read The Great Libertarian Offer by Harry Browne, Restoring The American Dream by Robert J. Ringer, and others.

And I think Australia was a poor example. Switzerland would be a better one. They've been surrounded by war for more than 100 years but haven't been attacked? Why? Because they've got a powerful military, a well-armed general population, they always remain neutral, and never practice military interventionism. That and they've got most of the secret wealth of world leaders stored there, and rigged to blow up and be buried in mountains of rubble if someone attacks.

Here's a nice article for you to read...


They Didn't Attack Switzerland

[FileNotFound]

Originally posted by Undertoad



:p

To use your very own idiotic picture on you:

From the BBC:
Bali was chosen "because it was frequented by Americans and their associates", Ali Imron has said. He quoted Imam Samudra as saying it was part of a jihad to "defend the people of Afghanistan from America".

In fact, more Australians and Indonesians would die than Americans, prompting speculation that the plotters were poorly informed, or orchestrated by other people still at large.

BBC Link

Owned you say?

[FileNotFound]

Radar, I think you might find it interesting that "Homeland Security" translates to "KGB" in Russian.

KGB!=CIA.

Main goal of the KGB was to preserve the regime. NOT to protect the people.

Just always found it funny.

[Undertoad]

It is helpfully instructional to see the Libertarians, self-proclaimed "friends of liberty":

- So completely horrified by the liberation of millions upon millions of people
- Rejecting the hope of liberation of an entire region of the world
- Advancing the notion that a nation's sovereignty can be established and maintained by torture, mass killing, and bogus elections
- Blithely and conveniently ignorant that free trade really requires complicated involvement with the rest of the world, who may not agree with our ideas

One might guess that guys like Radar really prefer to be contrarian in all cases, and that it's really a personality problem more than a coherent political philosophy.

Yah, bingo.