|
|
#145210 - 06/29/05 02:23 PM
Re: Iran Elects a War Leader
[Re: Aint]
|
Administrator
Registered: 08/01/99
Loc: New York, NY (New York)
|
Quote:
In Vietnam we contained most of our activities to below the 38th parallel. There is no such dividing line in Iraq or Afghanistan.
So what? You might as well argue that Iraq and Vietnam are not equivalent because Iraqis speak Arabic and Vietnamese speak Vietnamese. It's not a comparison.
Quote:
In Vietnam we used drafted troops. The war against terror is all voluntary enlistment.
But that is only because the draft of Americans to fight in Vietnam ended with the lowest, poorest, least empowered Americans as cannon fodder. And the average person, for or against the war, saw his children dying.
It is because of this that there is no current draft. Another reason there is no draft today is that it might affect the sons and daughters of people like Dick Cheney or George W. Bush, or rich non-politicians to whom the government is beholden. Nobody wants their son or daughter killed in Bush's war. Fewer than Vietnam, anyway. Of course, even during a draft, it is very unlikely that a rich man's son, or an influential man's son, would see combat in Iraq. They'd more likely be running the New York USO, handing out theater tickets to GIs on leave.
Quote:
In Vietnam we never captured Nguyen Thi Binh, Pham Van Dong or Ho Chi Minh (not his real name, by the way). Saddam Hussein is in jail right now and we've caught or killed many others in our most wanted deck.
But this again has nothing to do with equivalence. The capture of Saddam is meaningless in this context, since he, like Vietnam, was not a direct threat to the United States. We just butted in there for our own falsely perceived interest, we were into an escalation of the war by Lyndon Johnson, the same way we were lied to by George W. Bush. This is a parallel, not a difference.
Interestingly enough, Ho Chi Minh's real name was George Lewis Saugus Jr. 
Quote:
We've done alot more rebuilding and public works in Iraq then we did in Vietnam.
Because nobody wanted us in Vietnam, and when we got out, we got out fast. What would we rebuild? The hooches we burned down? We didn't need anything from Vietnam so rebuilding was the very last thought in anyone's mind.
Quote:
Yes we have learned from Vietnam. We have learned well.
Indeed, some of us have learned from Vietnam. But not what you think we've learned.
|
|
Top
|
 Reply
 Quote
 Quick Reply
 Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
|
#145212 - 06/29/05 03:10 PM
Re: Iran Elects a War Leader
[Re: Dax]
|
Master Debater
Registered: 12/04/01
Loc: southern mn
|
Dax- I wish this had happened before Bush's second term...
Wax- You wish what had happened?
That Iran became a threat?
That happened in the seventies, there were some hostages involved, I'm sure you remember.
Obviously you and I see the Iraq situation in much different terms... but...
I am not sure that you even view the situation realistically.
"Iraq" is going fine.
BTW: Almost every war in history "began with a lie".
That hasn't effected the outcome in any way.
"Remember the Maine?" Evidence has shown that it likely wasn't attacked.
What of it?
We have a reason to be in Iraq, does the majority of America understand what that reason is?
No... but that is not all that shocking.
Bush was pretty clear last night on it, we have brought the war there rather than here.
You would prefer the battle in the streets of New York?
The fact is that the plan has worked so far.
We know this because New York has not been attacked in four years... in fact no city in America has been... yet(the feint won't work forever).
_________________________
Courage is not an emotion, it is an act of will.
Pain which does not kill you, makes you stronger, and, very, very, mean!
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
|
#145214 - 06/29/05 05:18 PM
Re: Iran Elects a War Leader
[Re: wax]
|
Administrator
Registered: 08/01/99
Loc: New York, NY (New York)
|
Wax, I just don't buy the "fight them there or fight them here" line. I heard a rabbi say this on television last night and I wondered if God had made him clairvoyant and given him the ability to accurately predict the future. "Fight them there or fight them here?" Maybe. But maybe not. In fact, more likely not.
I remember when I was protesting the vietnam war and someone asked me "When would you fight, when they're storming the coast of California?" which was laughable in itself, but my response was "Yes, that would be a very good time to fight."
When Not Iraq attacked the WTC, I and everyone else supported the invasion of Afghanistan, sponsor of terror and protector of Osama. Then the President started talking about Iraq. And Iraq has occuppied our attention over Afghanistan since Bush first spoke of the Axis of evil. Indeed, we brought about the situation now prevalent in Iraq. Only Karl Rove revisionists will say "Bush's plan was to draw the terrorists into one country so we'd have a good shot at them." It's ridiculous on its face.
No Wax, "fight them there or fight them here" is just an advertising catch phrase to keep selling the war. It has no validity, and will have some or none only after the fact.
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
|
#145218 - 06/30/05 12:20 AM
Re: Iran Elects a War Leader
[Re: aus22]
|
member
Registered: 07/03/03
Loc: varies from day to day
|
Where do you guys get this stuff...? For instance, Aus wrote: Quote:
Iran or Persia elected a hardline Anit American leader because of the American action in Iraq,
You assume for a moment that the Iranians elected Ahmadinejad because of some sort of support for his hardline stance...You ignore that the ayatollahs rejected more than a thousand other candidates for office, ruling them ineligible because they were not sufficiently hardline...if you think the Iranian elections were free and fair in any sense at all, you are smoking something you really ought to share with Aint and Stone...
Quote:
They are ready for this attack. As you said other pro western governments in Saudi Arabia and Eqypt will also fall. Then the Arbs will be united in a Moslem brotherhood against the west.
Well, the Iranians are not Arab, they are Persians...The Arab world likes them just the slightest bit more than it likes America and Israel...I hardly see them making common cause with the Iranians in some Muslim spirit of fraternity, seeing as how they hardly even consider the overwhelmingly Shia Iranians to be Muslims at all.
Quote:
They might not win but they will make the price of oil so high that the American economy and way of life will change for ever.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...You are perhaps familiar with the Oil Embargo in the 1970s? It altered the American way of life forever, too....right? You forget that America is hardly dependent on Middle Eastern oil. As of 2002, the US produced 37.4 per cent of its energy requirements from domestic energy sources. It got a mere 1.5% of its energy sources from Iraq and only 12.5% from other Arab OPEC sources. The rest, 48.7% came from other sources, such as Venezuala...So, if you think that the Arabs, who represent at best 14% of US oil sources are going to completely disrupt the US economy and "alter the american way of life forever" you are toking on your pipe a bit to quickly...
_________________________
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." ~ Claire Wolfe
|
|
Top
|
Reply
Quote
Quick Reply
Quick Quote
|
|
|
|
|
8528 Members
35 Forums
11615 Topics
242470 Posts
Max Online: 2631 @ 03/18/08 12:30 AM
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index