Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Other > Motorcycle.Com Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-08-2009, 07:48 AM   #41
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

As soon as Ken can figure out his own criteria for war, then maybe I can figure out why certain Presidents are war criminals and others aren't.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 05-08-2009, 07:52 AM   #42
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by longride View Post
"Do you HONESTLY believe that Iraq was poised to cause serious harm to us?"

If that was, and is, your criteria for war, then we should have never been in any war since WWII. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Serbia and Afghanistan had ZERO capability of doing any 'serious harm' to us. That is a FACT that can't be denied. So if you are using that as the measuring stick, then you can't even justify our action in Afghanistan. You still never answered the question about why Clinton isn't a war criminal. Was Serbia poised to cause serious harm to us? Answer that question Ken. Kennedy and LBJ were also war criminals. Was Vietnam poised to cause serious harm to us? Answer please.
Ok, I'll answer:

WWII: clear and present danger. There was this thing called "Pearl Harbor." Korea: N Korea invaded S Korea. S Korea asked us for help. We worked with the UN and removed the agressor. Vietnam: debatable; depends on if you felt the S. Vietnamese government was legit. Personally, I don't think so. Iraq: 1st war, Kuwait asked for help repelling an invader. 2ond war: we invaded, based on claims of WMDs which were false. Was Sadaam a violent freak? Absolutely. Did it justify the invasion? No way. Almost nobody supported our invasion if Iraq; certainly not even close to the support we had for the 1st Iraqi war. Serbia; doubtful. Is Clinton a war criminal for it? I don't think so; there was widespread genocide being undertaken, and we had the support of our allies and even the Soviets. Afghanistan: the government in place then knowingly and willingly supported Al Quieda (sp?) and were directly involved in 911. Will we "win" in Afghanistan? Doubt it.
.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org

Last edited by Kenneth_Moore : 05-08-2009 at 07:55 AM.
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2009, 08:07 AM   #43
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

And all that means that we should never have been in even one war since WWII. Your criteria for war was that they were a clear and present danger to the U.S., not 'supporting allies' or 'widesperead genocide', 'they asked us to jump in'. Sorry, but since you suddenly introduced more criteria for war and it just makes you justify your own predjudice against Bush and the decision to invade Iraq. If Bush is a war criminal then so is Clinton, and Kennedy, and Obama, and LBJ. Iraq had plenty of genocide, use of WMD's, human rights violations, along with thumbing their nose at the UN resolution for their disarmament, shooting at our planes in no-fly zones, and refusing to let inspectors do their work. I won't even bring up that he started 2 Middle East wars and bombed Israel who was not involved in the first war at all. I guess all that just isn't enough for a critical guy like you. There were certainly MORE reasons to invade Iraq than Korea, Vietnam, and Serbia COMBINED. Lots more. Sorry if that bugs you, but there were. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean much.
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2009, 10:48 AM   #44
schizuki
Founding Member
 
schizuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzglyd View Post
Just google some images of that attack. When you see women and children mangled from the gas attack lying dead on the ground, you tell me he never had WMD.
Sorry, Buz, but that never happened. That's why Ken and his buddies never, ever acknowledge that, I guess. I dunno, it's confusing.

We were wrong for not stopping the Rwanda genocide. We were tardy in our intervention in the Balkans to save the Muslims (I guess that's why the Muslim world never gives us credit for saving all those Muslims, huh?). But bring up mustard gas attacks on Kurds, and all you hear is "There were no WMD!!! There were no WMD!!!! Eleventy!!!!"

And I won't even get into what's supposed to happen when one side breaks the terms of a cease-fire. "There were no WMD!!!"

Kurds? They're in, like, cheese or something, right?
__________________
Reverēre meam auctōritātem

Bill Clinton and Chuck Schumer are praising the Supreme Court for overturning an anti-gay-marriage law that they both signed.
schizuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2009, 10:50 AM   #45
schizuki
Founding Member
 
schizuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
The real danger is Iran. Neither Bush nor Obama has done one effective thing to keep a nuke out of the hands of the Ayatollahs.
Bush has, however, managed to park about 130,000 US troops on their border. That might come in handy for Obama someday. If he doesn't squander it.
__________________
Reverēre meam auctōritātem

Bill Clinton and Chuck Schumer are praising the Supreme Court for overturning an anti-gay-marriage law that they both signed.
schizuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2009, 11:34 AM   #46
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth_Moore View Post
It's not "ok." I said rational people would never want to see innocent civilians die. But there is a difference George. Say two cops go through a red light with their sirens and lights on. Both hit a car with a Mom and two kids, killing all three. One cop gets suspended with pay for two weeks during an investigation. The other serves 14 years for manslaughter. What's the difference, they both did exactly the same thing? The first cop was rushing to his coke dealer to make a buy before the dealer left town; he had no business abusing his authority. The other cop was chasing a van full of gang-bangers who had just shot up a party with automatic weapons, and the cop had reason to believe they were going to kill other people.

Same actions, different results.
So, is Obama the Cokehead? Or was he in the van full of Gang Bangers? And at what Mexico/Texas Border Gunshop did they purchase the Automatic Weapons? Did they fill out all the proper paperwork to get them? What other Weapons did they have? Sarin? Anthrax? NUKULAR WEAPONS? Why didn't the Gang Bangers just shoot-out Bush's tires? Or did they, and that's why he crashed? If they didn't, is it because they ditched the Weapons in Syria? Was there Marijuana and Cocaine at the party? And why didn't Barry just go there for his fix? Or was it the reason Bush was chasing the Gang Bangers was because they got all the pot and blow, and he wanted it back?

This stuff is important. Too important to not commission a Congressional Fact-Finding Committee to Investigate this whole situation, and find out what the **** is going on, and find out why College Hazing counts as "torture", yet pulling the fingernails out of captured Marine Pilots, and breaking every knucklebone one at a time is "OK" when the "other side" does it...........
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2009, 08:39 PM   #47
Muskrat
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1
Default

I disagree with about 99% of what Ken says. But honestly, I do think that he's right about the war. Prior to WWII, we had an isolationist approach as a nation. But then came the Cold War. Both the capitalists and the communists undertook what can only be described as an imperialist race to expand. The Americans led the capitalist expansion efforts, and the USSR led the communist efforts.

And now, even though the USSR has officially abandoned communism, the US has not abandoned its plans to continue to expand. What happened to our pre-WWII isolationist mentality? Our peaceful, idealistic little nation has become a global empire - the Rome of the modern world.

So in response to what people are saying about Iraq: yes, they have a history of attacking our interests. But it seems like "US interests" now comprise a sizeable portion of the world. And yes, they have attacked our Air Force. But why do we even have spy planes flying around overseas? When did we decide that we wanted to rule the world?

Make no mistake - the things that the Democrats have done and are currently doing to our country are making the founding fathers roll over in their graves. But this war is doing the same thing. How quickly we forget that our Revolutionary War was fought by an American insurgency to stop the very sort of injustice that we are now causing...
Muskrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2009, 09:10 PM   #48
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muskrat View Post
I disagree with about 99% of what Ken says. But honestly, I do think that he's right about the war. Prior to WWII, we had an isolationist approach as a nation. But then came the Cold War. Both the capitalists and the communists undertook what can only be described as an imperialist race to expand. The Americans led the capitalist expansion efforts, and the USSR led the communist efforts.

And now, even though the USSR has officially abandoned communism, the US has not abandoned its plans to continue to expand. What happened to our pre-WWII isolationist mentality? Our peaceful, idealistic little nation has become a global empire - the Rome of the modern world.

So in response to what people are saying about Iraq: yes, they have a history of attacking our interests. But it seems like "US interests" now comprise a sizeable portion of the world. And yes, they have attacked our Air Force. But why do we even have spy planes flying around overseas? When did we decide that we wanted to rule the world?

Make no mistake - the things that the Democrats have done and are currently doing to our country are making the founding fathers roll over in their graves. But this war is doing the same thing. How quickly we forget that our Revolutionary War was fought by an American insurgency to stop the very sort of injustice that we are now causing...
Agreed with most of that. However don't be fooled into thinking that the Democrats are anti-war. They have gotten us in most of our wars and will again. Democrats are only against wars when Republicans start them.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2009, 06:40 AM   #49
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
Agreed with most of that. However don't be fooled into thinking that the Democrats are anti-war. They have gotten us in most of our wars and will again. Democrats are only against wars when Republicans start them.
You're right, the Dems have instigated and/or supported wars, "right or wrong" as much as the Republicans.

What really bugs me is when I think about what we could have done the last 20-30 years with the money we've spent on defense, especially since the Cold War ended. If we'd put a fraction of the same resources into energy, space exploration, our national infrastructure, etc. we'd be taking vacations on the Moon and our bikes would fly. (NOT LITERALLY, I'm trying to make a point). I think we've overspent on the defense many times over, and we've created a self-perpetuating defense industry that can only grow and show a good ROI by using the products it creates.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2009, 06:45 AM   #50
schizuki
Founding Member
 
schizuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,030
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muskrat View Post
Prior to WWII, we had an isolationist approach as a nation....Our peaceful, idealistic little nation has become a global empire - the Rome of the modern world.
Would that be the "peaceful", "isolationist" little pre-WWII nation that expanded across North America, acquired swaths of land in a provoked war with Mexico, poached the Spanish Empire, carved Panama out of Columbia, and stirred up anti-German sentiment and sold arms to Germany's enemies (including 4.2 million rounds of Lee-Enfield ammunition on the Lusitania) before WWI? That peaceful, isolationist nation?
__________________
Reverēre meam auctōritātem

Bill Clinton and Chuck Schumer are praising the Supreme Court for overturning an anti-gay-marriage law that they both signed.
schizuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off