New Europe Steps Up - Page 5

Traianvs · September 7, 2003, 06:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
you're stupid

and your point is?

anyway i'm not the president of the US so i got my right be stupid, the president and his administration on the other hand..

Quote:

Hey you little Civ kid. we went to the UN. Get over it. WE spent several months on it. Deal with it. We did it.

Uh yeah, but what does it matter, UN or not, you're going to bomb Iraq anyway, so what's the point. If the UN thinks you shouldn't go to war, then hell you shouldn't go to war!
I've seen Powell's presentation about all the nuclear programmes Saddam was running, and with all the evidence.... It was a joke, that people were even taking him seriously was kinda surprising to me already! He had no evidence whatsoever.. nothing really

Zylka · September 7, 2003, 06:52

"AmerIndian" is a retard word - comparable to my own inventions of "Floridanish", "ZionaBumhumper" and "MilkMan(ic)Episode"

Zylka · September 7, 2003, 06:55

Oh, and let's not forget the fan favorite: "Babylon Jive"

First person to say "AmerIndian" in my real life travels gets 5 demerits and a fist to the back.

The Mad Monk · September 7, 2003, 06:57

I prefer, "Ed".

The Mad Monk · September 7, 2003, 06:58

In all seriousness, use the name of the tribe if you know it.

Zylka · September 7, 2003, 06:59

Prairie Ni

The Mad Monk · September 7, 2003, 07:01

I'm not familiar with that tribe -- are they in Canada?

Zylka · September 7, 2003, 07:05

No but I'm pretty sure no tribe names were ever AMERINDIAN

Creating and publicizing that new word makes about as much sense as renaming Chocolate Donuts "ChocolaMuffinRound" because you're an idiot who thinks it rolls nicely

The Mad Monk · September 7, 2003, 07:12

I see you've studied German, then.

Heresson · September 7, 2003, 08:32

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Why are the backwards, feudalistic countries "new" Europe, while the modern capitalist countries "old" Europe?

Backward? Feudalist? Haven't 500/70 years of communist changed anything? Oh my.

TCO · September 7, 2003, 09:03

Comrade and Trajan,

Yes, we "failed" to get the UN to agree to what we wanted.* But the point was related to the wrong impression that we went to war because of "missiles on the launcher". The danger from Saddaam was not of that imminent sort. Else we would not have waited the several months. That does not mean that the danger was not significant. We've already seen how well ignoring a problem worked in Europe in the 1930's.

*They have shown a serious lack of interest in enforcing their own sanctions and restrictions on Iraq...it was only in the dimension of "preventing a war" that they even reintroduced inspectors who had been kicked out since 1998. And hassled from doing their job, the entire time.) But of course this is a seperate issue.

TCO · September 7, 2003, 09:33

I like Amerind. I think I've seen it even pre-PC. Just that its descriptive. Do you mean the brown ones or the red ones.

TCO · September 7, 2003, 09:34

American Indian works fine too.

Alexander's Horse · September 7, 2003, 09:47

10,000 troops, gee, that will change things.

HershOstropoler · September 7, 2003, 09:50

Alexander's Horse · September 7, 2003, 09:56

this is like Vietnam, where the US got a bunch of minor allies in

Boris Godunov · September 7, 2003, 10:32

I used "Amerindian" because 1) It's an accepted terminology for referring to the peoples native to the Americas that distinguishes them from any other peoples (i.e. Indians from India), and 2) it's shorter and easier to type than Native Americans. I prefer to take the lazy way when possible.

VetLegion · September 7, 2003, 10:38

Quote:

Originally posted by TCO
Comrade and Trajan,

Yes, we "failed" to get the UN to agree to what we wanted.

quotation marks noted

Anyway, this thread went totaly off topic.

What I am interested in is are all the people going to Iraq from 'new europe' volunteers? It would seem wrong to send people there aginst their will.

notyoueither · September 7, 2003, 15:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
So glad you can chortle so contentedly over the future of the Iraqi people being so bleak, Tass. I knew you had it in you.

Stop this.

And in response to the personal attack: I'm happy over the US political failure. I'm certainly not happy that the Iraqis are caught in the middle.

When the Yanks screw up politically in foreign adventures, someone is likely to be stuck in the middle. Yearning for American failures is the same, to me, as hoping that the Iraqis continue to live in a **** hole. It is a likely consequence of the failure.

Personal attack? Perhaps. I guess it could be uncomfortable if it hits close to the mark.

Nubclear · September 7, 2003, 15:42

Quote:

That does not mean that the danger was not significant. We've already seen how well ignoring a problem worked in Europe in the 1930's.

Oh yeah, because (as we all know) Saddam is worse than HITLER!

Quote:

Yearning for American failures is the same, to me, as hoping that the Iraqis continue to live in a **** hole.

To you maybe, however logically one can root for American failure and still care about those stuck in the middle.
I'll compare it to a glass of water. Most older people know that a tall-and-thin glass can hold just as much water as a short-and-wide glass. However, some cannot because they base their reasoning on how wide the glass is without looking at it logically.

Quote:

Personal attack? Perhaps.

Is this an acknowledgement *from NYE* about a personal attack he made?!

notyoueither · September 7, 2003, 15:50

To you maybe, however logically one can root for American failure and still care about those stuck in the middle.

Split that hair, Tass.

Oh, and btw. Logic dictates that for a dictator to be bad enough to be removed, that dictator must be as bad or worse than Hitler? Nice standard you're setting there.

Saras · September 7, 2003, 15:50

Quote:

Originally posted by TCO

In the late 90's, I did a joint exercise in Germany. It was as if we were going to go to Lithuania and save them after the Ignalanias power plant blew up. We had some Liths there. Was pretty shocked at how unprofessional they were. I mean these were senior field grade officers. And they did stink. sorry. this exercise was a big deal. Wesley Clarke came by and everyithing. I was aide to a 2-star for it.

Lame troll

Ted Striker · September 7, 2003, 16:14

Nubclear · September 7, 2003, 16:20

Quote:

Oh, and btw. Logic dictates that for a dictator to be bad enough to be removed, that dictator must be as bad or worse than Hitler? Nice standard you're setting there.

We both know that was a troll, NYE. Well, at least I do

Though it does bring up an interesting question. Do YOU believe Saddam is equal to or worse than Hitler? A yes or no answer please. Any other answers will constitute an attempt to evade the question.

On your second point....We should at least try to gain the support of the rest of the world before we begin removing dictators. And we should try to remove the biggest threats first.

Ted Striker · September 7, 2003, 16:22

First of all we need to get rid of that haircut.

notyoueither · September 7, 2003, 16:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

We both know that was a troll, NYE. Well, at least I do

Though it does bring up an interesting question. Do YOU believe Saddam is equal to or worse than Hitler? A yes or no answer please. Any other answers will constitute an attempt to evade the question.

On your second point....We should at least try to gain the support of the rest of the world before we begin removing dictators. And we should try to remove the biggest threats first.

Feel free to consider me to evade whatever you wish. The fact is the US sent the troops in.

The real point now is the future of the people of Iraq. Those countries opposed to the US going in can sit on the side lines and tut-tut, or they/we can get involved to help ensure that Iraq comes out of this better.

re biggest threats first... That is a red herring. There is no way in hell that South Korea would ever agree to an invasion of North Korea to get Kim.

Willing allies in the region are required before action can be taken. In the case of Saddam, action was possible and it is not undesirable that he be out of power.

btw, if the US could get SK to go along, and could get Kim for similar costs to the action in Iraq, that would be great and I would support it whole-heartedly. Unfortunately, that is very, very unlikely since some spot in Japan would likely take on a distinct glow and large parts of Seoul would be leveled within hours.

Ted Striker · September 7, 2003, 16:34

We're pretty much out of troops to do anything else anyway.

Unless a real emergency arises.

Ecthy · September 7, 2003, 16:34

Ted Striker, it seems someone should get his "hair mussed", right?

Ted Striker · September 7, 2003, 16:46

Correct!

Ecthy · September 7, 2003, 16:48

I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed.... but I do say, no more than 10-20 million civilians killed, tops...

...errr, depending on the breaks...