Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 1778

Thread: State of the world, state sponsored terror, terror and war in general

  1. #101

    Default

    I understood the point you were attempting to make but you made it sound so bad and offensive to anyone who read it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  2. #102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    For the most part, peacekeeping forces and humanitarian missions are there with the approval of the inhabitants. Otherwise we have a situation like the Balkans where we try to bomb them back to peace (if not pieces).
    Governments, for the most part, inhabitants...most not consulted, other factions...not so much.

    Economic forces are a work sure. But having those troops and equipment stationed there is also a reminder that America is the big stick in the world these days. Generally speaking, the Americans don't do peacekeeping or humanitarian missions. If they're there, then you can bet they believe there's something in it for them.
    The economic impact they bring is what the home governments look at more than anything else.

    In both countries they are also an integral part of their defense structure by agreement.

    So the gun isn't pointed at their heads, its pointed well East of them.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  3. #103

    Default

    This is very bad news for the US, Kurd forces are losing to ISIS. The Kurds are the closest ally's the US has in IRAQ, the US has intelligence bases under construction on their land for example. The Islamic State is a brutal regime, for example, reportedly they intend to mutilate the genitals of all women in their conquered territories. They are winning one military fight after another though, it seems their forces are better trained and more dedicated than anything else in the region:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/u-s-con...iraq-1.2729911

  4. #104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    This is very bad news for the US, Kurd forces are losing to ISIS. The Kurds are the closest ally's the US has in IRAQ, the US has intelligence bases under construction on their land for example. The Islamic State is a brutal regime, for example, reportedly they intend to mutilate the genitals of all women in their conquered territories. They are winning one military fight after another though, it seems their forces are better trained and more dedicated than anything else in the region:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/u-s-con...iraq-1.2729911
    ISIS are just a bunch of power hungry thugs with a few ideologues guiding them. Can't wait till someone puts them in their place.

    By the way, the FGM thing was just a rumor proven to be false. Thankfully.

  5. #105

    Default

    ^US special forces are reported to work closely with the Kurd military, the news of the losses is surprising,

  6. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^US special forces are reported to work closely with the Kurd military, the news of the losses is surprising,
    Not really surprising after reading the related articles on the net.

    The problem is one of numbers...

    Too few Kurd military personnel to cover too long a border against numerically superior numbers.

    The Kurds have an excellent professional military and as combatants they have an exceptional reputation.

    But their numbers are too small against a force many times their size that are driven by fanaticism and obvious intelligent (tactically) leaders.

    It would be a different game if they had a choke point (canyon/valley...think of the movie "300") to reduce the numerical advantage, but they don't as it appears to be open rolling country.

    They are going to need help in ether personnel on the ground or strong air power.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  7. #107

    Default as the Cold War seems to be returning

    http://freebeacon.com/national-secur...defense-zones/

    This article reads like a history piece on the cold war...dates back to my day as a late teens.

    So...
    We have had Crimea
    The Eastern Ukraine is in combat
    Gaza, while thank fully cool at the moment, is in turmoil
    ISIS is threatening the Kurdish state and has take a number of key Iraq zones
    Syria is a mess
    Libya is in turmoil

    and now Russia is back to cold war games and a nuclear modernization program

    Dr. Strangelove must be in remake

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  8. #108
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    http://freebeacon.com/national-secur...defense-zones/

    This article reads like a history piece on the cold war...dates back to my day as a late teens.

    So...
    We have had Crimea
    The Eastern Ukraine is in combat
    Gaza, while thank fully cool at the moment, is in turmoil
    ISIS is threatening the Kurdish state and has take a number of key Iraq zones
    Syria is a mess
    Libya is in turmoil

    and now Russia is back to cold war games and a nuclear modernization program

    Dr. Strangelove must be in remake

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    dr. strangelove or maybe groundhog day?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  9. #109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    dr. strangelove or maybe groundhog day?
    Ken I'm going with Dr. Strangelove at least it had a couple of giggles in it
    (Gotta love Slim Pickens, Peter Sellers and some of the other cast)

    If I wanted to be scary I would have said: a third remake of "fail safe" must be in production.

    Both are excellent (George Cloney did a great job in the remake) and quite scary...

    Then again..."Threads" was a chiller.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 07-08-2014 at 04:32 PM.

  10. #110

    Default

    ^i liked fail safe more then strange love, but the ending was more than a bit unbelievable.

  11. #111

    Default

    You may leave here for 4 days in space but when you return it's the same old race.
    You may leave here for 45 years in space but when you return it's the same old race.....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QslV5asj_yM
    Last edited by Gemini; 07-08-2014 at 05:03 PM.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  12. #112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^US special forces are reported to work closely with the Kurd military, the news of the losses is surprising,
    Not really surprising after reading the related articles on the net.

    The problem is one of numbers...

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    This is the article I was thinking of, before the ISIS attack, would be embarrassing I expect for the US to allow this CIA base to be captured:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/07/1...cility-in.html

    An interesting thing about ISIS is they care not for boarders, Kurdistan is at risk now (oh, my bad, Kurdistan is just part of Iraq).
    Last edited by moahunter; 07-08-2014 at 05:15 PM.

  13. #113
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    according to aristotle, "we give up leisure in order that we may have leisure, just as we go to war in order that we may have peace."

    maybe after more than 2,300 years of that we should think about implementing a better philosophy on how to achieve peace.

    maybe it's time we traded in aristotle for ghandi, not in terms of simple acceptance of the status quo but in recognizing that change really can be accomplished without resorting to violence.

    we probably still need to maintain police forces, and probably even defense forces, but we need to move past going to war in order to have peace both as countries and as individuals if we are ever going to enjoy peace.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  14. #114

    Default

    Ken

    maybe after more than 2,300 years of that we should think about implementing a better philosophy on how to achieve peace.
    we probably still need to maintain police forces, and probably even defense forces, but we need to move past going to war in order to have peace both as countries and as individuals if we are ever going to enjoy peace.
    You are so right.

    But with the way things are currently racking up it reminds me (other than the geography) so much of the time before both the First and Second World Wars its scary.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  15. #115
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Ken

    maybe after more than 2,300 years of that we should think about implementing a better philosophy on how to achieve peace.
    we probably still need to maintain police forces, and probably even defense forces, but we need to move past going to war in order to have peace both as countries and as individuals if we are ever going to enjoy peace.
    You are so right.

    But with the way things are currently racking up it reminds me (other than the geography) so much of the time before both the First and Second World Wars its scary.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    i think there are a number of differences between both those periods and now that will hopefully overcome the apparent similarities.

    firstly, i believe our communications are incrementally faster and broader and less controlled (albeit with a corresponding loss of reliability and ability to manipulate).

    secondly, i believe most of the world is better educated and most of the world is more tolerant. that might be hard to believe when looking at much of the world and what's going on in much of the world but i'm not sure those things are worse than they were previously even though they are just as terrible as always.

    thirdly, i believe that real power is not as concentrated as it used to be and it is not able to function behind closed doors the way it used to.

    fourthly, i am still overall an optimist and believe that most people given the opportunity would still choose do the right thing.

    and lastly, i am not yet prepared to be wrong.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  16. #116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    according to aristotle, "we give up leisure in order that we may have leisure, just as we go to war in order that we may have peace."

    maybe after more than 2,300 years of that we should think about implementing a better philosophy on how to achieve peace.

    maybe it's time we traded in aristotle for ghandi, not in terms of simple acceptance of the status quo but in recognizing that change really can be accomplished without resorting to violence.

    we probably still need to maintain police forces, and probably even defense forces, but we need to move past going to war in order to have peace both as countries and as individuals if we are ever going to enjoy peace.
    War is much too financially lucrative, as President Eisenhower warned us. Look at the amount each country spends on it's military and then add in all their military exports. See who's profiting from it all, not just the countries, the companies.

    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

    Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

  17. #117
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    according to aristotle, "we give up leisure in order that we may have leisure, just as we go to war in order that we may have peace."

    maybe after more than 2,300 years of that we should think about implementing a better philosophy on how to achieve peace.

    maybe it's time we traded in aristotle for ghandi, not in terms of simple acceptance of the status quo but in recognizing that change really can be accomplished without resorting to violence.

    we probably still need to maintain police forces, and probably even defense forces, but we need to move past going to war in order to have peace both as countries and as individuals if we are ever going to enjoy peace.
    War is much too financially lucrative, as President Eisenhower warned us. Look at the amount each country spends on it's military and then add in all their military exports. See who's profiting from it all, not just the countries, the companies.

    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

    Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
    maybe...

    but maybe - hopefully - not everyone is as dogmatic and narrowly focused as your posts appear to be.

    as for eisenhower, this quote would seem to align him more closely with ghandi and with my hopes than with your conclusions.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  18. #118

    Default

    The point is that we've ignored what Eisenhower said and war is now a very lucrative business.

    Keep building up the military and then, you want to show that the citizens are getting good value for their tax dollars so you start looking for places where you can use it. We're not talking about a defensive military. It's about where you can send your forces, project your power, enforce your will.

    Come the six o clock news, the media will put up screens with flag backgrounds and give the operation names like "Operation Preserving Freedom". The media benefits because the ratings go up so they can advertising for higher rates. Works best if you can schedule your war during sweeps week.

    Of course, for each weapon lost or destroyed, you need a replacement. A bigger, better, shinier replacement. And who's got that for sale?

    Nah, that's too crazy to be realistic. It never happens like that.

  19. #119
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    The point is that we've ignored what Eisenhower said and war is now a very lucrative business.

    Keep building up the military and then, you want to show that the citizens are getting good value for their tax dollars so you start looking for places where you can use it. We're not talking about a defensive military. It's about where you can send your forces, project your power, enforce your will.

    Come the six o clock news, the media will put up screens with flag backgrounds and give the operation names like "Operation Preserving Freedom". The media benefits because the ratings go up so they can advertising for higher rates. Works best if you can schedule your war during sweeps week.

    Of course, for each weapon lost or destroyed, you need a replacement. A bigger, better, shinier replacement. And who's got that for sale?

    Nah, that's too crazy to be realistic. It never happens like that.
    i didn't say it never happens like that.

    but i don't believe it always happens like that.

    and i certainly don't believe it has to happen like that.

    and i'm also not foolish enough to believe that terrorists and insurgents never operate exactly like that either.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  20. #120

    Default

    Just a couple of weeks ago, the US gave Israel an addition couple of hundred million dollars for more Iron Dome missiles. Who's profiting from encouraging Hamas to keep firing rockets that Iron Dome is shooting down? In comparison. the Hamas rockets are relatively cheap and single. They have to be to be assembled in Gaza. Not much money to be made there.

    You can bet that when this is a over (at least for now(, there's going to be a nice, lucrative arms sale to Israel. Got to restock the larder, don't ya know.

    1,800 to 3. Who's getting the bigger bang foe their bucks?

  21. #121
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Just a couple of weeks ago, the US gave Israel an addition couple of hundred million dollars for more Iron Dome missiles. Who's profiting from encouraging Hamas to keep firing rockets that Iron Dome is shooting down? In comparison. the Hamas rockets are relatively cheap and single. They have to be to be assembled in Gaza. Not much money to be made there.

    You can bet that when this is a over (at least for now(, there's going to be a nice, lucrative arms sale to Israel. Got to restock the larder, don't ya know.

    1,800 to 3. Who's getting the bigger bang foe their bucks?
    well isn't that an interesting scenario...

    you would have us believe that the u.s. military/industrial complex and the u.s. government and the idf and the israeli government are encouraging hamas to fire cheap rockets from gaza over israel so that israel can fire expensive defensive missiles at them that have to be reordered? really?

    all hamas would have to do to spoil that plan would be not to fire rockets at israel.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  22. #122

    Default

    Not encouraging but certainly taking full advantage of the fact that they are. Nary a peep when 1.8 million people are living in what's been called the world's largest open air prison but they totally lose their minds and shout in outrage when a single Israeli is killed by a low tech rocket.

    Israel blocks pretty much all imports into gaza, including such security threats as nutmeg (!)

    According to Amnesty International, the Economist, Haaretz and UN reports, prior to June 2010, the following was banned or restricted:

    Food. According to a UN report, importation of lentils, pasta, tomato paste and juice has been restricted.[15] Pasta has since been allowed. Sugar has always been allowed.[14] Soda, juice, jam, spices, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies and candy are now permitted.[16] Fruit, milk products in small packages and frozen food products are also allowed.[14] Dry food,[17] ginger and chocolate were at one point barred.[18]

    Household items. A4 paper,[18] crayons, stationary, soccer balls, and musical instruments have been, at times, banned for import.[17] According to AFP other banned goods include toilet paper,[4] though the BBC lists it as permitted.[3] According to the Haaretz the following items were banned in 2009: books, candles, crayons, clothing, cups, cutlery, crockery, electric appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines, glasses, light bulbs, matches, musical instruments, needles, sheets, blankets, shoes, mattresses, spare machine and car parts, and threads.[14]

    Reconstruction materials. Amnesty International and other organisations report that cement, glass, steel, bitumen, wood, paint, doors, plastic pipes, metal pipes, metal reinforcement rods, aggregate, generators, high voltage cables and wooden telegraph poles are high priority reconstruction materials currently with no or highly limited entry into Gaza through official crossings.[19] A UN report by Kevin M. Cahill said reconstruction was halted because of lack of steel, cement or glass, among other building materials.[15]

    Fuel. Fuel had not been imported from Israel since 2008. While fuel is available from Egypt, in contrast to Israeli fuel, it damages the newer cars in Gaza and causes malfunctions. Israel allowed only limited amounts of industrial fuel into Gaza prior to June 2010.[14]

    Agriculture and fishing. According to Gisha, fishing ropes and rods, ginger and chocolate, hatcheries and spare parts for hatcheries, were at one point barred.[18]

    Medical material. Batteries for hearing aids have been restricted.[15] Wheelchairs, at various times, have been banned.[17]

    According to the Haaretz, the number of items allowed into Gaza, as of May 2010, is about 100. Before the blockade, some 4,000 items were allowed. Gisha states that a large Israeli supermarket holds 10,000-15,000 items.[16]
    But this is totally acceptable. But when people that are being held try to fight back, they're labelled terrorists. Much like how the Jews were pre-Israel. Funny how one manages to get a country and yet the others are restricted more and more.

    Keep an enemy handy so you can keep the military aid flowing. And when they attempt to form a united front that will actually agree to recognize Israel, you immediately reject it, cut the political legs out from the faction that actually is working with you and claim that it's unacceptable because it includes people who have committed terrorist acts.

    Just like Menachim Begin. Terrorist who became Prime Minister. But that's TOTALLY different. :roll eyes:

    If you're going to negotiate for peace, you have to actually deal with the people you're fighting. If you refuse to do that, the question is "What do you have to gain by keeping the status quo?"

  23. #123
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Please keep the Gaza/ Hamas/ Israel debate in the appropriate thread. Remember that it was specifically requested to keep other conflicts separated from Gaza... BTW, 1800 to 3???? What is that? In dollars? please answer in the gaza thread though...

  24. #124

    Default

    Well this is interesting...

    War is much too financially lucrative, as President Eisenhower warned us. Look at the amount each country spends on it's military and then add in all their military exports. See who's profiting from it all, not just the countries, the companies.
    Let me fix that for ya...
    War is much too financially lucrative, as President Eisenhower warned us. Look at the amount each country spends on it's military except Canada and then add in all their military exports except Canada where its minimal cuz we have to buy all our stuff. See who's profiting from it all, not Canada we buy our stuff elsewhere.

    Sorry tad pizzy tonight as I just confirmed that 2012-2013 Canadian Military pilots were having to be trained in the USA for a period because our training jets were down due to age and use problems.

    Then there's this...
    Of course, for each weapon lost or destroyed, you need a replacement. A bigger, better, shinier replacement. And who's got that for sale?
    So how do you explain the CNN reports in 2003 when they were showing left over WW2 bombs being retrofitted with bolt on "smart bomb" guidance technology then loaded on aircraft? Seems the US (and most other western countries) hadn't had to buy bombs since WW2.

    Sure when it comes to new tech systems, Iron Dome is a not bad example, that are geared to new tech and "shield" type tech the West has been on it like a stain since Reagan and "Star Wars".

    Seems today the only ones modernizing the actual "delivery system" technology is Russia...http://freebeacon.com/national-secur...defense-zones/...who has developed (2) new cruise missile systems and is defying several treaties from the 80s.

    Mind you they are also supply military arms to fuel the death toll in Syria (well covered in the media) and Eastern Ukraine.

    Where is the hew and cry there? Why is only the US getting called out?

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  25. #125
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Where is the hew and cry there? Why is only the US getting called out?
    going to react (and agree with the apparent sentiment) to this line...


    Seems that the world now consists of all the progressive voices who are against the US and who read free or independent media (meaning not the US), and the diabolical web of the US reach. Common theme is greed and lobby. It is as if other countries do not have strategic or economic stake. Russia? China? France? Germany? the UK? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Turkey? Egypt (although weakened lately)? But only the US it seems meddles in the Middle East specifically it seems. Never mind the long history of the French in the area and Russian interests and the new history of Chinese going in. Oh, and then it at times seems that some of these local dictators would have been really swell guys if only evil US foreign policy didn't corrupt them with fancy weapons that kill many...

    International politics has never been clean.

  26. #126

    Default

    Not saying that it's only the US but they are by far and away the largest arms merchant country.

    1 - USA
    2 - Russia
    3 - Germany
    4 - France
    5 - UK

    http://www.upi.com/News_Photos/Featu...rters/fp/3105/

    ~75% of arms exports are done by the Western countries. So, yeah, Talk about Russia but don't think that they're anywhere near what the west exports.

    I'm sure the government is doing their best to bring up Canada's ranking.

    Canadian arms manufacturers may now export automatic weapons and other military equipment to Chile and Peru, following amendments that came into place this week to Canada’s Automatic Firearms Country Control List (AFCCL).

    The AFCCL is a list of 34 countries, including all NATO member countries, eligible for importation of certain military-grade weapons from Canada.

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1292261/ca...to-chile-peru/
    There's money to be made.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 07-08-2014 at 09:19 PM.

  27. #127
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Absolute numbers don't tell the whole story. Who are the customers is more telling.

  28. #128

    Default

    How much money is being made is the main point.

  29. #129
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    if purchasing countries are not really at war, then the main point of war profitability is not applicable.

  30. #130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    How much money is being made is the main point.
    No the point is the innocents being killed.

    Take the following for what its worth...

    Read a book (believe it was called Kalashnikov) on the AK-47 last winter (recommended to me by a UofA Prof), according to the author's opinion, the most produced fire arm in the world and according to the book not only the weapon of choice by insurgents, rebels, terrorists but also the weapon that has killed more human beings than any other weapon of the 20th century. Shocked me.

    It's made where? Distributed by who?

    Some years ago a report in Jane's defense outlined (in the author's opinion) how China had fueled its modern military build up by building and selling obsolete designs (anti missile systems, armored vehicles, tanks and others), selling them to 2nd-3rd world countries as well as others and using the dollars to upgrade their military.

    Arms brokers and others that sell to the highest bidder...

    Yet to read this thread you would think it is solely the West (particularly the US) and solely for profit.

    Yet in another post on this thread is a link to a region being overrun and they are calling to the West (US) for help in defense. As have many other countries in the last 70 years.

    When there is a disaster who is among the first on site and provides more humanitarian aid than almost any other country if not every other country?

    The US, who also the last I looked sends the most private charitable aid overseas.

    Doesn't matter if it is a man made or natural disaster and that is not including the many other services (investigative, medical or even paying the bills for many operations) the US is typically at the front.

    Now I do not want to be an American, I also find myself disagreeing with their political and social positions on many things but...

    I find it incredibly hypocritical that they are the great bogey man, the cause of multitudes of problems and generally there is a way to make them a scapegoat in almost any discussion.

    But are rarely recognized for the vast amount of great work done, humanitarian work done, disaster relief, medical aid, financial aid etc.

    By the US government and much done by private individuals on their own.

    But don't bring the many other countries into the conversation, like Russian, China and others, for the arms sales and political meddling they have done.

    If you are going to beat the US for its bad decisions, policies and occasional stupidity then you better credit the US for its good work to.

    Along with a ton of other western countries that do the same.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  31. #131

    Default

    Canada, usually well respected all over the world, and yet..........................

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle15817569/

    has billions in arms sales.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  32. #132
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    ^ good thing this is real life and not some fairytale where countries act only out of the goodness of their hearts.
    be offended! figure out why later...

  33. #133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    How much money is being made is the main point.
    No the point is the innocents being killed.

    Take the following for what its worth...

    Read a book (believe it was called Kalashnikov) on the AK-47 last winter (recommended to me by a UofA Prof), according to the author's opinion, the most produced fire arm in the world and according to the book not only the weapon of choice by insurgents, rebels, terrorists but also the weapon that has killed more human beings than any other weapon of the 20th century. Shocked me.

    It's made where? Distributed by who?

    Some years ago a report in Jane's defense outlined (in the author's opinion) how China had fueled its modern military build up by building and selling obsolete designs (anti missile systems, armored vehicles, tanks and others), selling them to 2nd-3rd world countries as well as others and using the dollars to upgrade their military.

    Arms brokers and others that sell to the highest bidder...

    Yet to read this thread you would think it is solely the West (particularly the US) and solely for profit.

    Yet in another post on this thread is a link to a region being overrun and they are calling to the West (US) for help in defense. As have many other countries in the last 70 years.

    When there is a disaster who is among the first on site and provides more humanitarian aid than almost any other country if not every other country?

    The US, who also the last I looked sends the most private charitable aid overseas.

    Doesn't matter if it is a man made or natural disaster and that is not including the many other services (investigative, medical or even paying the bills for many operations) the US is typically at the front.

    Now I do not want to be an American, I also find myself disagreeing with their political and social positions on many things but...

    I find it incredibly hypocritical that they are the great bogey man, the cause of multitudes of problems and generally there is a way to make them a scapegoat in almost any discussion.

    But are rarely recognized for the vast amount of great work done, humanitarian work done, disaster relief, medical aid, financial aid etc.

    By the US government and much done by private individuals on their own.

    But don't bring the many other countries into the conversation, like Russian, China and others, for the arms sales and political meddling they have done.

    If you are going to beat the US for its bad decisions, policies and occasional stupidity then you better credit the US for its good work to.

    Along with a ton of other western countries that do the same.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    I've lived in the states. My wife is American. I have many friends there. However, that does not mean that I'm going to look at the damage their doing and simply balance it off of the good that they do. It's not a question of them being the boogeyman. It's that they are the 800 pound gorilla who's the driving force across the glove. They're the last, remaining superpower and that means, in the woe's of Spider-Man;s Uncle Ben "With great power comes great responsibility".

    Yes, other countries are also dealing arms but, in general, the majority are from the west and the United States in particular. They're also the country most likely to intervene militarily.

    How many overseas bases does America have? Does China? Russia? The US spends more on it's military than the next 15 countries COMBINED! You can't just look at that and say "Yeah, but they sent a ship to help out after a typhoon, so it's all good."

    When it comes to meddling in the affairs of other countries, America is the gold standard. No one else comes close. No one else can. And no one else can do it with such a large stick to back them up.

  34. #134
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Speak of the "devil":
    US gets in on the action in Iraq against ISIS:
    http://www.thestar.com/news/world/20...artillery.html

  35. #135

    Default

    However, that does not mean that I'm going to look at the damage their doing and simply balance it off of the good that they do.
    Bullshiezen

    It's not about balance its about fact.

    I'd be hard pressed on this entire forum to find a positive word about the US (there might be a few but it'd be a challenge).

    Negative, blame...not an issue.

    Maybe they should go back to their pre WW2 isolationist policy and we could see how the world looks...yep we wouldn't have all their stupid mistakes.

    But how many would suffer?

    Like I said, I've got my issues with the US and have turned down a number of lucrative offers to move there because they required I become a US citizen and I won't.

    But if you're going to hang them for the bad stuff, you have to credit them with the good.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 08-08-2014 at 10:00 AM.

  36. #136

    Default

    So, if a country is known for doing good work, being peaceful towards it's neighbours, taking care of it's own citizens, then we should treat them better than another should they decide to launch an unwarranted invasion of a neighbouring country?

    There's nothing that would prevent the US from continuing their humanitarian missions they they also scaled back their military adventures and weapons trafficking. Just because they're doing one doesn't mean they are required to continue the other.

    As I mentioned before, my wife is American. Came from a solidly Republican family. Grew up in the shadow of the San Diego Naval Base. Father worked for defence contractors. And she tells me how he would be appalled by the current state of American military actions. How they totally disrupted the Middle East with the Iraq war. How they decided to pull a large percentage of troops out of Afghanistan, where they had a legitimate reason to be, in order to settle an old debt against Saddam and totally lying about the evidence in order to do so.

    How the military says that they don't need a particular weapon system yet it's funded in order to funnel money to defence contractors.

    "Too many contractors have been allowed to get away with delay after delay in developing unproven weapon systems," Obama said, attributing $295 billion in cost overruns to "influence peddling" and "a lack of oversight" that produces weapons meant "to make a defense contractor rich" instead of securing the nation.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...030702216.html
    As you can see from the story linked above, this is not about one party or the other. They both do it. Funding more and bigger projects, funnelling money to their districts that keeps the defence contractors fat and happy building a bigger hammer for Uncle Sam and his friends. And when you've got a great, big hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail.

    Compare what America spends on it's military, keeping it busily poking it's nose in everywhere, with what it spends on humanitarian aid. The humanitarian aid would be a footnote in the military budget, hardly worth mentioning.

    I'm not advocating for the US to be isolationist but, rather, for it to be held in check. It's the only superpower and it's acting more like the biggest bully on the block.

    Maybe we should take a different approach and take a lesson from how they managed to end the Soviet Union. Encourage them to spend more, get involved in more, keep them spending money they don't have until they collapse onto themselves. Yeah, that would be a good result, won't it?

    American intervention should be the last resort, not the first. But right now, there's nothing to dissuade them from intervening wherever and whenever they want to. There's no counterbalance.

  37. #137

    Default

    So, if a country is known for doing good work, being peaceful towards it's neighbours, taking care of it's own citizens, then we should treat them better than another should they decide to launch an unwarranted invasion of a neighbouring country?

    There's nothing that would prevent the US from continuing their humanitarian missions they they also scaled back their military adventures and weapons trafficking. Just because they're doing one doesn't mean they are required to continue the other.
    And you're missing the point.

    I'm all for criticizing when the US is wrong or I disagree with their policies...

    But explain to me why at the same time those that throw the first stone appear to never recognize the good work the US does, expound their virtues or congratulate the US when they lead in humanitarian, disaster relief relief and many other humanitarian fields.

    Ignoring what the US does well and right is not just hypocritical its wrong and ineffective.

    Even a flippin dog trainer will tell you that negative reinforcement never achieves the desired effect.

    There's no counterbalance.
    In the context of my points above...I agree

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 08-08-2014 at 11:09 AM.

  38. #138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    There's no counterbalance.
    Looks like the Russian bear under Putin is trying to provide the counter balance but I believe their days are long done. China has to play the role but they are not generally interested in overt confrontations with the US....yet.

  39. #139

    Default

    faraz

    Looks like the Russian bear under Putin is trying to provide the counter balance but I believe their days are long done.
    I think that is a dangerous assumption as much is published on Russian modernization and military build ups.

    I'd also wouldn't call it counter balance...more like another danger to be faced.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  40. #140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    So, if a country is known for doing good work, being peaceful towards it's neighbours, taking care of it's own citizens, then we should treat them better than another should they decide to launch an unwarranted invasion of a neighbouring country?

    There's nothing that would prevent the US from continuing their humanitarian missions they they also scaled back their military adventures and weapons trafficking. Just because they're doing one doesn't mean they are required to continue the other.
    And you're missing the point.

    I'm all for criticizing when the US is wrong or I disagree with their policies...

    But explain to me why at the same time those that throw the first stone appear to never recognize the good work the US does, expound their virtues or congratulate the US when they lead in humanitarian, disaster relief relief and many other humanitarian fields.

    Ignoring what the US does well and right is not just hypocritical its wrong and ineffective.

    Even a flippin dog trainer will tell you that negative reinforcement never achieves the desired effect.

    There's no counterbalance.
    In the context of my points above...I agree

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    OK, let's all agree that the US does some good work. Anyone disagree? Anyone?

    However, you must also look at how much they undo that good will by their often reckless military moves. It's all well and good for them to be dropping food and medicine in Iraq now but a large part of why they have to can be traced back to their invasion.

    Similar with the situation in Gaza. They claim to be a honest broker for the peace process but it's clear that they have a substantial bias towards Israel.

    Quite often they're their own worst enemy.

  41. #141

    Default

    Lets start with where we agree
    However, you must also look at how much they undo that good will by their often reckless military moves.
    Quite often they're their own worst enemy.
    I agree with both statements and hold them to account on both.

    But then
    OK, let's all agree that the US does some good work. Anyone disagree? Anyone?
    Gee seems somewhat begrudging and back handed to me.

    As far as the comments re: Iraq and Gaza how about we balance that with lets say the medical aid going into Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria the Congo...and those aid workers, you know the ones that were some of the first in place, now in experimental treatment for Ebola...the ones from the US.

    Back to that balance thing again

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  42. #142

    Default

    Or their support for various dictators around the world and attempting a coup in Gaza. On balance.

    Yes, they do a lot of good. Sorry it sounded begrudging and back handed. Just stating the obvious. And America hardly needs anyone to toot their horn for them.

  43. #143
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    You know, there is a whole other big world out there beyond Israel and Gaza... But only Israel and Gaza has its own, dedicated thread... Seems disproportionate and yet you insist in taking this thread that encompasses far greater number of people, deaths, and conflicts to discussing Gaza... Is your concern for Palestinians greater than for all other people or your mistrust of US/ Israel greater than all other concerns?

  44. #144

    Default

    It was in reference to the larger context. Seeing as Gaza is the big conflict in the world right now it's understandable that it might get referenced here now and again. Or should we ignore that in the context of "State of the world, state sponsored terror, terror and war in general"

    Or, there's an ignore function you can use.

  45. #145

    Default

    More and more I am thinking the far greater threat that goes essentially uncovered is the increasing Russian threat and proliferation of arms.

    I tend to agree with faraz
    China has to play the role but they are not generally interested in overt confrontations with the US....yet.
    Except for the "yet"...China thinks and acts (to this point) in much longer terms (sometimes generational) and doesn't seem to see the need to waste energy, resources and money in rushing or confrontation unless it's "Internal control" or they are pushed.

    An example would be their build up of amphibious and naval forces...15 -20 years ago "Janes" was documenting the slow build up and now they have multiple carriers, amphibious troop ships and a high capability to be able to invade or occupy a water accessible location. Again "Janes" of the day suggested it would be the small islands and archipelago in the South China sea that is disputed by China, Japan and others...would not be surprised to wake up one day and find out they have occupied without a shot and with the naval forces they have in the region no one would risk dispute.

    But it will be down the road when the time is right and it will not be rushed into.

    Russia on the other hand, under it's current leadership, is flexing it's muscle on a number of fronts, rapidly modernizing everything from it's nuclear delivery capability to naval, ground and air forces while pushing borders with everything from airborne penetrations to (what appears to be) sponsored conflicts in East Ukraine, Syria and hinted at in other areas.

    We could very well be moving to another, not very, Cold War as long as the West continues to not push back effectively.

    Times are changing once again.

    In my highly biased personal opinion
    Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 08-08-2014 at 03:25 PM.

  46. #146
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It was in reference to the larger context. Seeing as Gaza is the big conflict in the world right now it's understandable that it might get referenced here now and again. Or should we ignore that in the context of "State of the world, state sponsored terror, terror and war in general"

    Or, there's an ignore function you can use.
    What about Iraq and Syria? How do you compare the size of this conflict with those ones? Fighting is actually taking place, active combat... and dead number in thousands while war itself spanning many months... There was a specific request to start a thread on other conflicts in the world so that the thread on Israel/ Palestine does not get sidetracked. So it is only fair that we keep that separation. If you want to give context–you actually do have plenty to reference with many other current conflicts. Hence my suggestion to see the world that is far bigger than one relatively speaking small scale war.

  47. #147
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Albert
    Posts
    1,933

    Default

    Grish, the reason Iraq and Syria are ignored is that in those conflicts there are no Jews for the haters to blame.

  48. #148

    Default

    Not much in the news about Syria these days. Sad to say but the media has the attention span of a gnat with ADHD. Same with Iraq and ISIS until the US started bombing.

    However, we always know that the Kardashians are up to.

    "Look over here! Shiny new thing!"

  49. #149
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Not much in the news about Syria these days. Sad to say but the media has the attention span of a gnat with ADHD. Same with Iraq and ISIS until the US started bombing.

    However, we always know that the Kardashians are up to.

    "Look over here! Shiny new thing!"
    but isn't grish's point that you are guilty of exactly the same thing you are accusing the media of except that your "shiny new thing" is always gaza/palestine?

    you are ignoring based on fixation rather than a gnat's adhd but the results and the consequences are exactly the same.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  50. #150

    Default

    Yes, you're right. I'll hop the next flight to Damascus and do some on the spot note taking.

  51. #151
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    You probably should. I flew to Baghdad to find out about the US bombing the ISIS... Where is that "roll eyes" when you need it???

  52. #152

    Default

    Yeah, there's been NOTHING on the news about that today. Oh wait…

  53. #153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    You probably should. I flew to Baghdad to find out about the US bombing the ISIS... Where is that "roll eyes" when you need it???
    Please post photos of your trip and I will send you mine.

    I am doing some field surveys at the Yasser Arafat International Airport this week on behalf of the The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as part of the investigation of the IDF's deliberate destruction of the civilian airport, which violates the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal Convention, 1971).


    You know, this would be an excellent place to set up a nice little rocket launching site. Good sight lines of Israeli military positions, no UN schools nearby that tends to draw tank fire, no rocks or trees to hide behind, just sand and rubble. Whoops, gotta run, the air force has a couple of F-15I's coming in low...
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 08-08-2014 at 09:39 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  54. #154

    Default

    Where is that massive Solar Flare when the internet really needs one.

  55. #155

    Default

    Obama is between a rock and a hard place. He doesn't want to be in Iraq but he has to protect the US assets being built by the CIA near Iribil. When the IRAQ government turned on the US (turning to Shia Iran) the US basically aligned itself with the Kurds, being the only group there that doesn't seem to be religiously motivated (rather, an ethnic group). Problem is, a few ad hoc air strikes may not be enough to stop Sunni IS (if they don't change direction, something they have done very strategically). Per this analysis, they are a fully fledged army, likely more capable than any other army in the region:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ists/13783143/

    Obama has to be careful. For example, in Vietnam, the policy was to provide defense to strategic sites, the US never actually had any goals of defeating the North, hence the US forces were always on the back foot. Obama is saying similar stuff about IS, re it's not his job to defeat them. I'm not sure that's wise. You either go to war with them all out and use the air power in full, or you back out, IMO, middle grounds don't work against full army's, but I guess we will see. If Iribil falls it will be a disaster for Obama's policies, if it holds up, maybe he is right.

    But whose army will defeat that IS army ultimately? They have a nasty habit of assimilating their opponents when Sunni, to join the cause (no doubt with promises of captured wives and spoils), each battle just makes them stronger. I suspect only the US is capable of it, what a horrible mess:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...hia-syria-iraq
    Last edited by moahunter; 09-08-2014 at 09:37 AM.

  56. #156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Obama is between a rock and a hard place. He doesn't want to be in Iraq but he has to protect the US assets being built by the CIA near Iribil. When the IRAQ government turned on the US (turning to Shia Iran) the US basically aligned itself with the Kurds, being the only group there that doesn't seem to be religiously motivated (rather, an ethnic group). Problem is, a few ad hoc air strikes may not be enough to stop Sunni IS (if they don't change direction, something they have done very strategically). Per this analysis, they are a fully fledged army, likely more capable than any other army in the region:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ists/13783143/

    Obama has to be careful. For example, in Vietnam, the policy was to provide defense to strategic sites, the US never actually had any goals of defeating the North, hence the US forces were always on the back foot. Obama is saying similar stuff about IS, re it's not his job to defeat them. I'm not sure that's wise. You either go to war with them all out and use the air power in full, or you back out, IMO, middle grounds don't work against full army's, but I guess we will see. If Iribil falls it will be a disaster for Obama's policies, if it holds up, maybe he is right.

    But whose army will defeat that IS army ultimately? They have a nasty habit of assimilating their opponents when Sunni, to join the cause (no doubt with promises of captured wives and spoils), each battle just makes them stronger. I suspect only the US is capable of it, what a horrible mess:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...hia-syria-iraq
    I'm quite surprised IS is going after the Kurd region. I always assumed their thrust would be towards Baghdad. Perhaps it's the oil deposits they are after or perhaps they are trying their best to get US involved in the conflict to create an us versus them mentality.

  57. #157
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by faraz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Obama is between a rock and a hard place. He doesn't want to be in Iraq but he has to protect the US assets being built by the CIA near Iribil. When the IRAQ government turned on the US (turning to Shia Iran) the US basically aligned itself with the Kurds, being the only group there that doesn't seem to be religiously motivated (rather, an ethnic group). Problem is, a few ad hoc air strikes may not be enough to stop Sunni IS (if they don't change direction, something they have done very strategically). Per this analysis, they are a fully fledged army, likely more capable than any other army in the region:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ists/13783143/

    Obama has to be careful. For example, in Vietnam, the policy was to provide defense to strategic sites, the US never actually had any goals of defeating the North, hence the US forces were always on the back foot. Obama is saying similar stuff about IS, re it's not his job to defeat them. I'm not sure that's wise. You either go to war with them all out and use the air power in full, or you back out, IMO, middle grounds don't work against full army's, but I guess we will see. If Iribil falls it will be a disaster for Obama's policies, if it holds up, maybe he is right.

    But whose army will defeat that IS army ultimately? They have a nasty habit of assimilating their opponents when Sunni, to join the cause (no doubt with promises of captured wives and spoils), each battle just makes them stronger. I suspect only the US is capable of it, what a horrible mess:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...hia-syria-iraq
    I'm quite surprised IS is going after the Kurd region. I always assumed their thrust would be towards Baghdad. Perhaps it's the oil deposits they are after or perhaps they are trying their best to get US involved in the conflict to create an us versus them mentality.
    wouldn't be the first time - it's a tried and true formula, sometimes stretching out for decades.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  58. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by faraz View Post
    I'm quite surprised IS is going after the Kurd region. I always assumed their thrust would be towards Baghdad. Perhaps it's the oil deposits they are after or perhaps they are trying their best to get US involved in the conflict to create an us versus them mentality.
    They seem to be very good at surprises, they have basically come out of know-where to unexpectedly cross the boarder and capture a huge chunk of Iraq. It wouldn't surprise me if they surprised me again. Hopefully the Kurds are starting to get their act together with the air support. There are some intetesting reports that the US is basically flying alongside Russian pilots in Su24s flying for Iran backed Iraq, also that Turkey has been flying their F16's, just it's kept quiet (Turkey having its own issues with Kurdish region). "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" I guess, for now.
    Last edited by moahunter; 10-08-2014 at 07:22 PM.

  59. #159

    Default

    Got to be careful which side you're supporting. These are the guys McCain was berating Obama for not supporting.

    Remember when Senator John McCain went to Syria and met with factions of rebels fighting the Assad regime?

    As it turns out, the group that he was meeting with was a particular subset of rebels in Syria, who we now know as ISIS.

    http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/0...h-john-mccain/

  60. #160
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28785725

    Iraq: UN sounds alarm on humanitarian crisis

  61. #161
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    VICE has created a few videos that show very well what the life is like inside the ISIS regime.

    i would recommend a watch for anyone (some disturbing parts though like be-headings)

    google it as i dont wanna post the link and have someone inadvertently see some pretty disgusting stuff
    be offended! figure out why later...

  62. #162

    Default

    thought to post on the "state of the world" in US:

    After exporting democracy to mid-east, US continues to lead by example: Ferguson, Missori

    Title:Pix from Weds. afternoon & night's protests, intense night, things escalated in a troubling way

    source:https://twitter.com/PDPJ/status/4998...537665/photo/1


    Title: Police fire tear gas near Al Jazeera crew, then disassemble the gear after they flee

    source:https://twitter.com/CassFM/status/49...063104/photo/1


    Title: The gentleman on the left has more personal body armor and weaponry than I did while invading Iraq

    source:https://twitter.com/BFriedmanDC/stat...676480/photo/1


    Title: Top: Baghdad, Iraq - Bottom: Ferguson, Missouri

    source:https://twitter.com/theblogpirate/st...159745/photo/1


    Last edited by DefinatelyMaybe; 14-08-2014 at 02:46 PM.

  63. #163

    Default

    There's a great map here showing the arms sales race worldwide between USA and Russia:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/arms-...-russia-2014-8

    Russia $29.7 Billion sold
    USA $26.9 Billion sold

  64. #164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Not saying that it's only the US but they are by far and away the largest arms merchant country.

    1 - USA
    2 - Russia
    3 - Germany
    4 - France
    5 - UK

    http://www.upi.com/News_Photos/Featu...rters/fp/3105/

    ~75% of arms exports are done by the Western countries. So, yeah, Talk about Russia but don't think that they're anywhere near what the west exports.
    Well I'd say this link of Mr. Oilers...
    http://www.businessinsider.com/arms-...-russia-2014-8

    Seems to paint a very different picture than the quote above.

    In my highly biased personal opinion

  65. #165
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Meanwhile in Iraq/ Syria: an american journalist hostage is beheaded... This is shocking and brutal... Although there have been reports of numerous other beheadings by same group, so, while shocking and brutal, not surprising. Feels like the world is about to go into another world war, but this time with epicenter in the Mid East and spreading in every direction from there...
    Last edited by grish; 20-08-2014 at 09:48 PM.

  66. #166
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    ^ did you see the vid for it? kind of a wtf am i watching moment...

    the only good that will come out of all this **** is that the world may finally come to the realization that religion literally is responsible for unending amounts of horror in the world, past and present and should be banned.

    it was cool a couple of centuries ago if you needed to control uneducated illiterate masses, but these days it is a bit archaic...
    be offended! figure out why later...

  67. #167
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,205

    Default

    ^ The world has already come to that realisation. Thing is, the world, or an awful lot of it, turns to religion to end horrors. Good luck with that.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  68. #168

    Default

    Those terrorist that behead people are nothing short of animals. Primitive minds with lethal weapons is not a good match.
    As for the riots in Monroe, Missouri and the police in paramilitary riot gear. When the US Army are issued new guns and equipment they pass their old weapons and equipment down to police agencies. The better weapons the Army has the better and bigger weapons the police agencies will eventually get. Hence U S police agencies becoming more like a paramilitary group. The States is becoming more and more like a police state.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  69. #169

    Default

    They said on the news that the terrorist that beheaded the journalist had an English accent. The British PM said he was probably a British Citizen and it's shocking.
    It is very unnerving that these terrorists are being recruited (or volunteer) to join these militants. They could live anywhere in the world and go to these rogue countries at the drop of a hat.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  70. #170
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    ^ there has been in the news about Canada and the number of such "soldiers" we contribute. Apparently Calgary is one active producers of Jihadists alongside places in SW Ontario in particular.

    ps ...and, no, I did not watch it and do not intend to watch it.

  71. #171

    Default

    Obama sounds pretty angry about ISIS. I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of US military redeployed in Iraq soon.

  72. #172

    Default

    I wish the Americans would get as angry as when their the ones doing the unspeakable acts. (Blackwater massacreing civilians, Abu Ghraib). Somehow, it's less offensive when we (the good guys do it) as opposed to when they (the bad guys) do.

    When we react with the same degree of outrage whenever injustices are perpetrated, we will have moved beyond the need for religion. Until then, religion provides cover for doing evil under the guise of fitting evil.

  73. #173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    I wish the Americans would get as angry as when their the ones doing the unspeakable acts.
    I guess you haven't been following what's been happening in Ferguson.

  74. #174

    Default

    That's within their own country and the population is pretty much even;y divided between "The cops went took far" and "He's a criminal and he got what he deserved". They're much more forgiving when they're committing atrocities to people in other countries.

  75. #175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Those terrorist that behead people are nothing short of animals. Primitive minds with lethal weapons is not a good match.
    As for the riots in Monroe, Missouri and the police in paramilitary riot gear. When the US Army are issued new guns and equipment they pass their old weapons and equipment down to police agencies. The better weapons the Army has the better and bigger weapons the police agencies will eventually get. Hence U S police agencies becoming more like a paramilitary group. The States is becoming more and more like a police state.
    The amount of money that became available to local police departments after 9/11 from Homeland Security was astounding. Even small rural police departments acquired bomb detectors, SWAT equipment, armored vehicle, (many donated from the military) and 50 cal machine guns.

    http://www.unique-design.net/library/violence.html

    A very good read
    A Decade After 9/11, Police Departments Are Increasingly Militarized
    09/12/11
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...comm_ref=false


    Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America
    By Radley Balko
    July 17, 2006
    http://www.cato.org/publications/whi...-raids-america

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    The States is becoming more and more like a police state.
    Take a look at Canada too.

    Remember the G7/G20 Toronto
    http://toronto-pictures.tumblr.com/p...o#.U_ZoAPldV8E

    http://www.salon.com/2013/02/22/u_s_...ion_to_canada/

    Montreal
    http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/montrea...doff-1.1197636
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 21-08-2014 at 03:46 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  76. #176
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,205

    Default

    Not too surprising the police got new toys in the wake of 9/11 what with the rise of homegrown terror. In wars thus far, north America has benefitted from geography. Slightly different ballgame now.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  77. #177
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    That's within their own country and the population is pretty much even;y divided between "The cops went took far" and "He's a criminal and he got what he deserved". They're much more forgiving when they're committing atrocities to people in other countries.
    you can argue how successful they may have been either in regard to specific conflicts or overall but you certainly can't say that americans don't have a long history of publicly not supporting war in general (they were the last to enter either world war) or protesting - often violently - against it at home even when it was taking place elsewhere.

    these are both ap photos hosted/linked by wodumedia.com and boston.com



    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  78. #178

    Default

    There were a lot of large protests in the USA against going into Iraq as well.

  79. #179

    Default

    And yet they keep on supporting dictators (there's talk about supporting Assad now against ISIS), torturing, killing, launching wars, preventing their people from facing war crimes, etc.

    The war in Vietnam didn't end until the cost in American lives became too much, The number of Vietnamese and Cambodians and others didn't really enter into the equation. In the My Lai Massacre, 500 unarmed civilians were murdered and some of the women were gang raped. The death toll also included children and infants. Twenty-six soldiers were charged with criminal offenses, but only Lieutenant William Calley Jr., a platoon leader in C Company, was convicted. Found guilty of killing 22 villagers, he was originally given a life sentence, but served only three and a half years under house arrest.

    So, 500 dead Vetnamese civilians were on;y worth 2 1/2 years of house arrest. Yeah, they really took it seriously. Tes, there were protests against the Massacre but there were also people who denied it took place, that it was committed by Americans or that they were legitimate targets in warfare.Mendel Rivers, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, denounced the three servicemen who tried to halt the massacre:

    He criticized Army helicopter pilot and My Lai Massacre CWO Hugh Thompson, Jr. for giving the order to his men to fire upon American soldiers at My Lai if they continued to shoot unarmed Vietnamese civilians, calling him a traitor and saying he should be prosecuted.[12] Rivers was unable to believe that American soldiers would do such a thing and publicly expressed doubt that any massacre ever happened. He attempted to protect the perpetrator of My Lai, Army 2nd Lt. William Calley, by quickly holding hearings of his subcommittee on My Lai, calling every major witness to the event (including Thompson) before the subcommittee, and then refusing to release the transcripts of the testimony, so that military prosecutors would be prohibited from calling those persons as witnesses at Calley's court martial.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_...sacre_cover-up
    What had the bigger effect. protesters carrying signs or the United States government?

    The US army also used chemical weapons, including Agent Orange, which resulted in 400,000 Vietnamese killed or maimed and 500,000 children born with birth defects. However, it was still the sight of flag draped coffins that finally brought the war to an end. The cost in American lives became too great. The deaths of others were inconsequential.

    In Iraq, the Iraq Body count estimates

    figure of 110,937 – 121,227 civilian deaths from violence up to December 2012 includes reported civilian deaths due to Coalition and insurgent military action, sectarian violence and increased criminal violence.[18] The IBC site states: "it should be noted that many deaths will probably go unreported or unrecorded by officials and media."[19] The IBC website currently states that, "Further analysis of the WikiLeaks' Iraq War Logs may add 12,000 civilian deaths."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_wa...ates_by_source
    The US military, much like Israel in the current conflicts has a "we don't do body counts" policy, making confirmed deaths to purview of Non Governmental Organizations. In comparison,

    As of May 29, 2012, according to the U.S. Department of Defense casualty website, there were 4,487 total deaths (including both killed in action and non-hostile) and 32,223 wounded in action (WIA) as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
    Even those much lower numbers of American dead were considered excessive. Of course, the Iraqi dead were hardly ever mentioned.

    So no, the protests are because of American dead, not people in other countries. If the American deaths were much lower, they'd probably still be there. That's one reason that drone warfare is so dangerous . It allows you to kill large numbers of people, halfway across the planet and your solders get to sleep in their own beds each night, safe and secure in the fact that most people aren't aware of what's happening since their own people aren't being killed.

  80. #180
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    More from ISIS:

    http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/08...uicide-bomber/

    display heads... using child suicide bomber...

  81. #181

    Default

    US army did the same thing, displaying the bodies of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, They may not have decapitated them but, after being water boarded, electroshocked and kicked to death, they were still dead and displayed as trophies of war.

  82. #182
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    it's official now... ISIS can do no wrong since the US has done this... Well, not exactly this, but something bad anyways...









    sarcasm off...

  83. #183

    Default

    Nice way to twist my words. Shouldn't be surprised since you've had so much experience with it.

  84. #184
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    no need to twist. every time something happens in the world, you manage to sneak mention of US. Not Russia, Iran, the UK, France, Canada, China, India, Pakistan, Brazil... or any other large or small country. Whenever something bad happens, you are quick to reference the US. Just once it would be nice if you allowed yourself to see something that was done that was bad and simply thought about it for one brief moment recognizing the sheer evil. This particular action, that included sending a 14 year old boy as part of a suicide bombing, at the very least deserves condemnation in strong and simple terms. There is no need to link this to your hate of the US. This event was brutally evil. Just acknowledge it without any hedges or qualifications. If you feel like making additional statements, please use a second post to make them. Just so that you at least appear a little more human.

  85. #185

    Default

    If Russia or China or Iran were poking their noses into other countries as often as the US, perhaps I would.

    How many overseas military bases does Russia have? Or China? Or Iran?

    And I really have to laugh that you think I "hate" the US. That would be news to my wife who is from San Diego. I suppose you count her like you do the Holocaust survivors who oppose Israel's overreaction in Gaza, hateful stupid or deluded. That seems to be the only motivations you believe exist.

  86. #186

    Default

    grish, get off your hatred soapbox, it is really sickening. The only one on this forum with hatred is YOU.

    Let me remind you

    Quote Originally Posted by Admin View Post
    One can criticize without "hating" the person, or group they are criticizing.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  87. #187
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And yet they keep on supporting dictators (there's talk about supporting Assad now against ISIS), torturing, killing, launching wars, preventing their people from facing war crimes, etc.

    ...
    maybe you can help me out here. as near as i can determine, the following is a reasonably comprehensive list of those countries currently considered to be dictatorships (noting that they all don't have identical forms of government but that they still fit the most accepted definition of dictatorship):

    afghanistan, albania, algeria, angola, azerbaijan, belarus, bhutan, bolivia, burkina faso, burma (myanmar), cambodia, cameroon, central african republic, chad, chechnya, china, cote d'ivoire, cuba, djibouti, equatorial guinea, eritrea, ethiopia, gabon, gambia, guinea, iran, kashmir, kazakhstan, kosovo, kyrgyzstan, libya, laos, madagascar, mauritania, north korea, republic of congo(brazzaville and kinshasa), russia, rwanda, saudi arabia, somalia, sudan, swaziland, syria, tajikistan, tunisia, turkmenistan, uganda, uzbekistan, vietnam, venezuala, Zimbabwe

    which of these would you consider as being supported by the united states of america (as opposed to being supported by russia or china or oil or narcotics or...)?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  88. #188
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    grish, get off your hatred soapbox, it is really sickening. The only one on this forum with hatred is YOU.

    Let me remind you

    Quote Originally Posted by Admin View Post
    One can criticize without "hating" the person, or group they are criticizing.
    interesting how you can whip up fake outrage like whipping up fake jewish friends. reminds me of that episode of Seinfeld when George desperately needed a black friend...

    What's sickening is the use of the 14 year old suicide bomber or suicide bombing victim alongside a person who was genetically his father.

    What's also sickening is a constant attempt to change the subject to somehow link all evil to the US foreign policy. Sometimes, as is this time, it is only appropriate to recognize that what took place is horrible and take a pause to reflect on that alone.

  89. #189

    Default

    Fake Jewish friends?

    You really are throwing blind punches in you desperate attempts to win an argument. You are attacking others personally rather than sticking to facts.

    I really feel sorry for you and your visious way your think debates and discussion forums should be run.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  90. #190
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    grish, get off your hatred soapbox, it is really sickening. The only one on this forum with hatred is YOU.

    Let me remind you

    Quote Originally Posted by Admin View Post
    One can criticize without "hating" the person, or group they are criticizing.
    yes, one can criticize without "hating" the person, or group, they are criticizing.

    and one can also defend a person or a group, or the actions of a person or a group without hating.

    but one can also post things - as you yourself know - that are indeed hateful even if you subsequently stated that that was not your intent.

    furthermore, one can also post a litany of things that may not individually be hateful but cumulatively create an entirely different perception. and when that happens, the response by others to even the individual posts is pretty much guaranteed to be based on the cumulative and not just the most recent post.

    that's how reputations are built, even in a [mostly] anonymous on-line internet forum.

    indignation and exaggeration and constant one-upmanship are not the stuff of rational discussion. they are the last defense of a position that is ultimately indefensible because it's wrong.

    i don't believe any of my posts or my positions anywhere on this forum to be hateful. i also don't believe my defense of Israel in this and its current sister thread - even while acknowledging she is not perfect - or israel's positions and responses as developed over 66 years in responding to a myriad of things not of her choosing - even when some of them are not perfect either - are hateful either.

    but i have personally experienced hateful acts since i was a child and i have friends and family that have suffered far worse than i at the hands of others. and that does two things to most people. it makes them more aware of hateful acts and statements. and it makes them more empathetic to those towards who those hateful acts and statements are addressed whether those recipients are jews or blacks or first nations or asian or immigrants or arabs. and it makes them less tolerant of those choosing to do those things or make those statements and of those willing to forgive or condone those acts and statements.

    does it make them overly sensitive as well? not usually - if anything that sensitivity means first giving the benefit of a doubt because you know the seriousness involved. after that however, the conclusions are usually pretty accurate ones. and responding appropriately to them - even in a manner others might deem over-zealous - is not hateful, it's healthy both for the individual and for society.

    i don't believe grish is intentionally posting from a soapbox. i do, however, believe that he is frustrated with the regular ongoing sentiment and the insatiable need to prove that regardless of the circumstances israel is to blame and the americans are at fault and no evidence to the contrary is worth the paper it's printed on or the energy necessary to display it on screen because i share that frustration.

    what isis has done and is doing is being condemned by much of the muslim world for what it was and is. none of them said "well it's not so bad in comparision - the americans are guilty of similar incidents in the past and the israelis are worse". the acts stand on their own and are reprehensible. and paying attention to them doesn't warrant trying to deflect that attention.

    and "but my wife is american" is no more a defense than "but i have friends who are black... or native... or jews... or...". the positions have to stand on their own irrespective. and if they can't it doesn't matter who you're married to or who you think your friends are.
    Last edited by kcantor; 25-08-2014 at 04:05 PM. Reason: typo
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  91. #191
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Fake Jewish friends?

    You really are throwing blind punches in you desperate attempts to win an argument. You are attacking others personally rather than sticking to facts.

    I really feel sorry for you and your visious way your think debates and discussion forums should be run.
    Well, at least "fake outrage" didn't get questioned. I rest my case.

  92. #192

    Default

    He's stating that I hate Americans and basically called me anti-Semitic in the other thread simply because I didn't agree with his premise that to disagree with him meant you had to hate Israel. Same for the Holocaust survivors that said the same essentially the same thing I was. Claimed they were either evil, stupid or hopelessly naive. If that's not spreading hatred I'm not sure what is.

    We lived in the states for many years and have may friends there. Disagreement with the single biggest meddler in other people's affairs on the planet doesn't make you hate the people, it makes you disapprove of their policies. Just like disapproving of what I see as self-destructive policies by Israel doesn't make me anti-Semitic.

    Grish seems to believe in the Bush theory of "You're wither with us or against us." What about wanting what's best for all involved and telling people when they are making a mistake?

  93. #193

    Default

    Grish. There you go making false assumptions again. Putting words in other peoples mouths or taking statements out of context does not make them true. Just because someone does not call you out on every single false claim you spout does not make it true either. And just because someone does not agree with you does not make them a terrorist supporter, an ISIS appologist, an anti-semetic US bashing card carrying wife beater with fake friends.

    I thought we were past the McCarthy Era but in your world everyone who does not follow your idealilogical bent is against you personally. There is a term for this. It is called paranoid dilusions.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 25-08-2014 at 04:30 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  94. #194
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    and yet I am still to hear that kkz or eprt think that what happened in Syria to warrant the headline I posted is an expression of pure evil. you take time to fake outrage over posting style but you can't even fake one simple statement to express real outrage over the actions of ISIS. In terms of that relationship building with the wider community and the history that you are building–as referenced by ken–a sincere outrage over ISIS would go a long way to changing my current perception of eprt and kkz.
    Last edited by grish; 25-08-2014 at 07:39 PM.

  95. #195
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    He's stating that I hate Americans and basically called me anti-Semitic in the other thread simply because I didn't agree with his premise that to disagree with him meant you had to hate Israel. Same for the Holocaust survivors that said the same essentially the same thing I was. Claimed they were either evil, stupid or hopelessly naive. If that's not spreading hatred I'm not sure what is.

    We lived in the states for many years and have may friends there. Disagreement with the single biggest meddler in other people's affairs on the planet doesn't make you hate the people, it makes you disapprove of their policies. Just like disapproving of what I see as self-destructive policies by Israel doesn't make me anti-Semitic.

    Grish seems to believe in the Bush theory of "You're wither with us or against us." What about wanting what's best for all involved and telling people when they are making a mistake?
    i think it's the constant apples and oranges comparisons that drive people crazy.

    i'm reminded a bit of some of justin trudeau's responses following the boston marathon bombing:

    "...we have to look at the root causes.”
    “Now, we don’t know now if it was terrorism or a single crazy or a domestic issue or a foreign issue,” he said. “But there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded. Completely at war with innocents. At war with a society. And our approach has to be, where do those tensions come from?

    “Yes, there’s a need for security and response,” Trudeau added. “But we also need to make sure that as we go forward, that we don’t emphasize a culture of fear and mistrust. Because that ends up marginalizing even further those who already are feeling like they are enemies of society.”

    until of course the terrorism or single crazy or domestic or foreign issue struck a little closer to home leading to the following:

    “It’s basically a tenet of me being able to do the job that I do that I think my family is safe and OK and it’s not a dangerous thing that I’m not there for them,” Trudeau said.

    “And when my wife and kids, with the nanny, are at home on their own and someone breaks in and engages in some fairly disturbing behaviour, I think it’s certainly something that gives me pause in my ability to do the travelling and the job that I’m doing that takes me away from them so much.

    “For all the sacrifices that we put through in our line of work, the one thing that we don’t feel that we should have to sacrifice is personal security.”

    emphasis added.

    unfortunately, although security of person and place is the one absolute that everything else that is civilized relies on - including freedom of speech - it is often the least recognized element of civilization. until of course it's your own - or your families - security of person and place that is at risk.

    i am prepared to take your "Just like disapproving of what I see as self-destructive policies by Israel doesn't make me anti-Semitic" at face value.

    but your insistence that others who are clearly anti-semitic - and that continuously prove that fact through both actions and words - are the ones that can do no wrong while everything israel does and everything israel is trying to achieve is pure evil doesn't add much shine to that face value.

    and if you need to confirm that - or wonder how anyone else could come to such a conclusion - simply do a search in that other thread for all posts by kkozoriz and read them. even if you felt you were being reasoned and reasonable at the time you posted them and at the time you chose the quotes and links you chose to include, what you presented yourself as was/is anything but reasoned and reasonable. if anyone has been "you're either with us or against us" based on their posts, it's been you.

    if what you wanted was really what's best for all involved and if you only intended to tell people when they were making a mistake - which implies that what is important to israel is as important as what's important to gaza and that everything israel does is not a mistake - then you failed miserably.

    and that's not grish's fault.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  96. #196
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,250

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Grish. There you go making false assumptions again. Putting words in other peoples mouths or taking statements out of context does not make them true. Just because someone does not call you out on every single false claim you spout does not make it true either. And just because someone does not agree with you does not make them a terrorist supporter, an ISIS appologist, an anti-semetic US bashing card carrying wife beater with fake friends.

    I thought we were past the McCarthy Era but in your world everyone who does not follow your idealilogical bent is against you personally. There is a term for this. It is called paranoid dilusions.
    isn't the paranoid disillusionist the one who would say:

    "I have answered many questions and posted my sources.

    "I did not know that this was a forced interrogation."

    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  97. #197
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,261
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    ...gosh...who knew Rod Smart was...well...SMRT..



    http://content.sportslogos.net/news/...s-2001-XFL.jpg

    sadly sums up this thread...
    Onward and upward

  98. #198

    Default

    No Ken, not everything Israel does is wrong. I have never stated that. However, they are not doing themselves any favours at this point in time by continuing an assault on Gaza that will simply harden the radicals opinions against them and convince the moderates that perhaps the radicals are right after all.

    Even in the battle in Afghanistan we found that we had to talk with members of Al Quaida and the Taliban. That's not a sign of weakness. It's acknowledging the fact that in order for there to be peace people cannot feel that they're being sidelined and ignored. You'll never get everyone over to your side but you at least have to reach out the hand even if it gets slapped aside from time to time.

    When the Americans toppled the Iraq government one of the biggest mistakes they made was to marginalize the members of the Ba'ath party simply because that was the party of Saddam.

    In June 2003, the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority banned the Ba'ath Party, and banned all members of the party's top four tiers from the new government and from public schools and colleges, a move which some citicised for blocking too many experienced people from participating in the new government. Thousands were removed from their positions, including doctors, professors, school teachers and bureaucrats. Many teachers lost their jobs, causing protests and demonstrations at schools and universities.

    Under the Ba'ath Party, one could not reach high positions in the government or in schools without becoming a party member. Membership was also a prerequisite for university admission. While many Ba'athists joined for ideological reasons, many more joined as a way to improve their options.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_So...27athification
    The more you keep people on the outside the more resentful they'll become. Besides, you can influence people more from within a society than from without.

  99. #199
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    I suppose, kkz, in the spirit of toning down the rhetoric, you may also finally acknowledge that sometimes something evil happens in the world and all good people out there can do is point to it and say: this was an extreme expression of hate and we resolve to not let it happen again.
    Last edited by grish; 25-08-2014 at 07:37 PM.

  100. #200

    Default

    You mean like adding an extra k to my name, thus making it look like I also hate blacks in your eyes?

    Pretty sneaky of you to slip that in.

Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •