Pro/Forums - View Single Post - World politics, alternative fuels, and an odd GPU comment (was Ati's 9800 is out)

Blackeagle · 03-07-2003, 05:10 PM

(Off topic rant)

Those in power will conceed nothing without a demand and struggle, they never have and never will.

This is the ringing truth of history. The claim that bombs have never freed anyone is BS, and easy to prove as BS. Naked force has freed far more peoples of the world than any other means. France, Belguim, Neatherlands & the nordic countrys as well as north africa, China, and most of the island nations of the pacific far east ALL were restored to free nations and peoples by brute force in WWII. Had america stood clear of risk then none of these peoples could have thrown off the oppressors without decades of continuing conflict, if ever. Russia at least as far east as the Urals would have fallen. Of the nations engaged in conflict with the axis powers of evil then, only Great Britain had a fair chance of staying free without the US intervention. This IS historic fact, that many now tend to forget or dissmiss.

The freedoms of the US it's self was won at the point of the sword, bayonet and gun. This is also the truth of history.

Throughout history those who compromise with evil pay a high price for doing so. Even when others step forward to also pay along side them.

Would Europe have stayed free of the USSR without the promise of war with the US?? Not a chance. Those who can't see this are truly self deluded.

Is the US always right in it's actions?? He[[ no of course not ! ! But show me just one example of any dictator in history that, in possesion of such overwhelming advantage in arms vs. his surrounding nations did not use that force of arms in conquest.

Saddam may well be gone soon. The question is will the United Nations survive as more than a token, or at all? Many in the US are growing restive where the UN is concerned. Any major error by the UN will be it's total undoing with the majority of the US population. A number of the members of the US senate and house have already on several occasions called for the US to withdraw and even order the UN off america's soil. Bush's referance to the UN becoming irrelivant are not idle propaganda, although that would be without question a extreme result.

But if by chance Soddam is not removed, I ask all to consider this. If the UN members, led by France, Germany, Russia and China do prevail on the US not to act, and later a weapon of mass destruction is used by Saddam aginst anyone else, what will these nations do???????? They will do nothing in their own right. China and Russia have the means, but not the inclination, and Germany and France lack both the means and the will. But I have no doubt they would be quick to demand that the US clean up the mess THEY created. The excuses of Germany and France for their obstructionist stand now are hard to imagine.

I agree with Airspirit. I live in Mi. in the midwest far from Airspirit but the mood of the majority here are also in favor of war. Not by 90% but 60% will do. I also agree with what else he said. Best for the US to withdraw our forces from around the globe. Also withdraw ALL foreign aid to all nations that do not support us and never will. At which point we may as well "invite" the UN to move elsewhere, as they seem to find so much they dislike about the US. France perhaps? Then as a low key non leading member who also holds veto power, we can just block anything we don't like. But otherwise offer no aid or funding. Asia will be a differant place in short order, as will the middle east. At that point let France take the lead in restoring freedom and democracy.

Yeah, right.:shrug:

AS for N. Korea. Gmat, doesn't it seems hypocritical to suggest we take on the N. Koreans while decrying our going after Saddam. Ever think we most likly will do just that, after Saddam is gone?

As for "thousands of American and Iraqi's" being killed, you're half right. Remember the outcome the first time, "the mother of all battles"?? Why would anyone think the Iraqi forces can do better now?

I really do feel sorry for the Iraqi's forced into serving such a dictator.

They don't have a chance. Yet they also have no freedom, which is why they are in that situation.

03-07-2003, 05:10 PM	#40
Blackeagle Thermophile Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: U.S.A = Michigan Posts: 1,243	(Off topic rant) Those in power will conceed nothing without a demand and struggle, they never have and never will. This is the ringing truth of history. The claim that bombs have never freed anyone is BS, and easy to prove as BS. Naked force has freed far more peoples of the world than any other means. France, Belguim, Neatherlands & the nordic countrys as well as north africa, China, and most of the island nations of the pacific far east ALL were restored to free nations and peoples by brute force in WWII. Had america stood clear of risk then none of these peoples could have thrown off the oppressors without decades of continuing conflict, if ever. Russia at least as far east as the Urals would have fallen. Of the nations engaged in conflict with the axis powers of evil then, only Great Britain had a fair chance of staying free without the US intervention. This IS historic fact, that many now tend to forget or dissmiss. The freedoms of the US it's self was won at the point of the sword, bayonet and gun. This is also the truth of history. Throughout history those who compromise with evil pay a high price for doing so. Even when others step forward to also pay along side them. Would Europe have stayed free of the USSR without the promise of war with the US?? Not a chance. Those who can't see this are truly self deluded. Is the US always right in it's actions?? He[[ no of course not ! ! But show me just one example of any dictator in history that, in possesion of such overwhelming advantage in arms vs. his surrounding nations did not use that force of arms in conquest. Saddam may well be gone soon. The question is will the United Nations survive as more than a token, or at all? Many in the US are growing restive where the UN is concerned. Any major error by the UN will be it's total undoing with the majority of the US population. A number of the members of the US senate and house have already on several occasions called for the US to withdraw and even order the UN off america's soil. Bush's referance to the UN becoming irrelivant are not idle propaganda, although that would be without question a extreme result. But if by chance Soddam is not removed, I ask all to consider this. If the UN members, led by France, Germany, Russia and China do prevail on the US not to act, and later a weapon of mass destruction is used by Saddam aginst anyone else, what will these nations do???????? They will do nothing in their own right. China and Russia have the means, but not the inclination, and Germany and France lack both the means and the will. But I have no doubt they would be quick to demand that the US clean up the mess THEY created. The excuses of Germany and France for their obstructionist stand now are hard to imagine. I agree with Airspirit. I live in Mi. in the midwest far from Airspirit but the mood of the majority here are also in favor of war. Not by 90% but 60% will do. I also agree with what else he said. Best for the US to withdraw our forces from around the globe. Also withdraw ALL foreign aid to all nations that do not support us and never will. At which point we may as well "invite" the UN to move elsewhere, as they seem to find so much they dislike about the US. France perhaps? Then as a low key non leading member who also holds veto power, we can just block anything we don't like. But otherwise offer no aid or funding. Asia will be a differant place in short order, as will the middle east. At that point let France take the lead in restoring freedom and democracy. Yeah, right.:shrug: AS for N. Korea. Gmat, doesn't it seems hypocritical to suggest we take on the N. Koreans while decrying our going after Saddam. Ever think we most likly will do just that, after Saddam is gone? As for "thousands of American and Iraqi's" being killed, you're half right. Remember the outcome the first time, "the mother of all battles"?? Why would anyone think the Iraqi forces can do better now? I really do feel sorry for the Iraqi's forced into serving such a dictator. They don't have a chance. Yet they also have no freedom, which is why they are in that situation.