| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Ruthless racism and greed. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Blake the conquest for oil just exposed who they were as any stressful event reveals charactor. | ||
| Hootowl |
Japan's expansion of its territory was done with the intention of owning all the places where the rubber tree would grow. Ford tried to grow rubber trees in the US and failed. WWII saw the creation of synthetic rubber by the US. This was not a happy accident. Japan didn't "enter" WWII per se. They started it (in the Pacific) with their territorial expansions. | ||
| Sayitaintso |
Japan didn't "enter" WWII per se. They started it (in the Pacific) with their territorial expansions....which was driven by resource acquisition for the most part. (Sort of a "we need resources and since we are Japanese and superior we are entitled to take what we want") Thats my understanding of the past....and then punched the US in the nose at Pearl in an attempt to knock us completely out of the Pacific before we came into the fight. Overall, it was an ugly time in human history. (Message edited by sayitaintso on April 07, 2011) | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Pearl Harbor was an attempt by Japan to destroy the ability of the US to intervene in Japan's seizure of strategic materials territory. It was an effort to buy time for Japan to build bullworks and bases to solidify their hold on seized territory. Look at what was possible in just a short time at Iwo Jima. Given more time, Japanese forces would have been impossible to remove. Their hope was that the death toll of trying to extricate them would be so high that the US wouldn't have the stomach to continue the fight. Interesting that this EXACT tactic was used by the US against Japan with the use of nuclear weapons. | ||
| Cowboy |
I see in this morning news where those BRAVE muslim warriors attack a bus full of those visious children. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Gutless scum. I have more respect for kamikaze pilots. At least they targeted combatants and not women and children. | ||
| Buellkowski |
If you get into a public, heated argument with your neighbor and respond by socking him in the nose, the rest of the neighborhood is likely to determine you are a jerk and will treat you accordingly. If you get into the same public, heated argument with your neighbor and you respond by burning down his house, killing his wife & kids, the rest of the neighborhood is likely to determine you are a dangerous, criminal sociopath and will treat you accordingly. Do you reject the "just war" doctrine? | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
There is a difference between a conflict of "neighbors" and war. Would you define the use of atomic weapons on Japan in keeping with the "just war" doctrine? What about fire bombing Dresden or Tokyo? How does one wage a "just war" against an enemy who is willing and able to conduct war "unjustly"? | ||
| Slaughter |
A WAR is never "just" - the reasons for STARTING a war may be "just" - certainly justifiable. Once started, it's war. Period. Trying to make it something different, some perversion of war as warmer and fuzzier only gets us to where we are now. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Attempting to conduct a "just war" instead of fighting a war to win is like trying to pick up a dog turd from the clean end. | ||
| Buellkowski |
The "neighbor" thing was a metaphor. How we conduct ourselves in conflict can carry greater consequences than the reasons why we enter a conflict. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I agree it was a metaphor. It was a poor metaphor. If you shot your neighbor, it would be called murder. If you shot an enemy soldier, it would be called war. The metaphor simply doesn't translate. War is unlike anything else in society. It is, for all intents and purposes, the absence of society. I agree how we conduct ourselves in conflict is important. I do not agree with the idea of a "kinder, gentler" military. We fought in Kosovo with one hand tied around our balls by NATO and the other tied behind our back by the UN. We are fighting the same way in Afghanistan and Iraq. Were Iraq or Afghanistan populated by heathens rather than muslims, we'd have leveled the place a long time ago. Kosovo is a great example of how NOT to conduct a war. I don't agree with pulling grandmothers off buses and putting a bullet in their head and burying them in a shallow mass grave. I don't agree with raping young muslim girls and women. I don't agree with hacking off arms and legs with machetes. I don't agree with using chemical weapons. I don't agree with using nuclear weapons unless it is a last resort. I DO agree that civilian casualties are useful in war. You can't just destroy the soldiers and leave the civilians who hold the same beliefs and ideals of the soldiers and announce you've "won". "Winning hearts and minds" is sometimes better accomplished with fire bombing and crater damage than chocolate bars and nylons. In war, the enemy soldiers AND enemy society should fear you first THEN you can win their hearts and minds. Make two cities vaporize, and the Japanese people fear you. Show up and help them recover, and then you win their hearts and minds. | ||
| 2734 |
While I agree with the idea of winning a war and making foreign resources our own and also with the idea or making war on the enemy so terrible that they wont make war on us again these views a bit narrow and bordering on the naive. You have to understand that all conflicts have a political/religious/monetary aspect so there is no real desire to win outright.Politicians have no need to win any of the wars we are currently engaged in because thers is no profit in it. Think about it... If the U.S. did indeed take over a large part of the oil in the middle east it would not have the desired effect for U.S.(or global for that matter)oil corps.The oil market would stabilize and prices would go down and remain steady with no major spikes in oil prices to gut our wallets with. It would be good for us as consumers and citizens but why would the oil companies and wall street want that? It's simple... There is no profit in it for them The same goes for our military industrial complex. No war? no contracts. We are dealing in trillions of dollars and do you think they will let a little thing like peace and stability in the marketplace get in the way? Really? Same way with religion,if we all dumped religion or learned to coexist there would be no profit or expansion of power over our daily lives from the Church of ANY religion. Do you think the Pope will stand for that?More to the point this is how most 3rd world countries maintain order and can consolidate wealth and power. Race is also a money maker. Look how much money minority leaders rake in. Jesse Jackson,Al Sharpton,Farrakahn and the rest would lose millions of dollars and political power if we flipped the switch and there was no racial tension in this country(or the world for that matter) tommorow. Do you really think they want that or are willing to let it take place? There is always profit in human conflict thats why we will always be at war politicaly,racialy,religiously and economicaly. | ||
| Xdigitalx |
Why did I open this thread again....  | ||
| Brumbear |
There is a whole lot of truth in a whole lot of these threads. I found after watching this I start to see how easy it can be to believe in something so strong you become blind to right and wrong. Sometimes you can not see it till it's to late. I will ask you to do something not easy to do but try clear your mind watch this clip and try to put yourself in the shoes of the people in it. I was surprised and even MAD at myself when I think of what I saw. I do however think that we risk doing this to our own kids and ourselves. But the way they waged WAR was IMO the only way to do it with the current cituation. We can not have half a war anymore it only prolongs the inevitable. But I am sure the political leaders will drop the ball and the interviews could be our children 50 years from now and that gives me reason to pause. Sorry this stuff stirs up emotions more than sense in me sometimes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZiTNLqr5V4&feature =related | ||
| Sifo |
What does history tell us about how we fight wars? In WWII we fought to win and left their hearts and minds splattered across the battle fields. Since that time both Germany and Japan have been quite good countries in the world and for the most part decent allies. Anyone care to contrast that with the numerous engagements where we were more concerned with hearts & minds, or how the rest of the world would view us. If it isn't worth smashing an enemy into complete capitulation, then it probably isn't worth engaging them at all. | ||
| Sifo |
Didn't take long to go from no way, no how, to maybe.  General: U.S. may consider troops in Libya (Message edited by SIFO on April 08, 2011) | ||
| Xdigitalx |
no cameras, no press, no facebook, no youtube, no twitter or internet at all ... a total blackout.. then do it. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
War is won when the population of the enemy asks themselves the question "is it worth it to continue our current course of action?" "Radical" Islam will only continue to be a problem if the population of muslims believe that waging Jihad is worth it. When they see that Jihad is a dead end street, muslims will police their own, will reject the teachings is Islam. If a leader came to power in Germany and stated that the course of action that they should follow would be world domination and extermination of Jews, I'm pretty sure the general population would reject them outright. Once muslim people believe that pursuing the destruction of the west is a losing battle, imams who advocate this course of action will be rejected. Until the population rejects Jihad, winning hearts and minds is irrelevant. It's a lost cause, a loosing battle. | ||
| Blake |
Brumbear, >>> I will ask you to do something not easy to do but try clear your mind watch this clip and try to put yourself in the shoes of the people in it. I was surprised and even MAD at myself when I think of what I saw. Such hand-wringing is difficult to justify in America. You think America will turn into a racist supremacist nazi regime? Is there a similar video for Lenin's or Mao's socialist revolutionaries? That is MUCH more likely. | ||
| Brumbear |
ah forget it That wasn't what I was looking for I have problems putting this one in words but whatever. | ||
| Fast1075 |
I'm pretty sure that I personally will not live long enough to endure "on your knees or die"....but it will come to that unless someone takes action to prevent it...it has gone so far now with the general "please be nice" bullshit, that it will take some truly forceful action to stop it. Pick an example city, warn the populace to leave and leave a smoking crater...post a list so they know who is next if a single ••••••• causes trouble...keep bombing until they believe hell itself has opened up and swallowed them. | ||
| 2734 |
Ft Bstrd your are correct but the prob is when you are dealing with a culture/religion like this the phrase "Bombs can't kill ideas" comes to mind. I dont see the harm in trying though.... I looked this morning but could not find a link to a survey from not long after 9/11. It was taken in Gaza and the pool was women of age 14 and up as to wether thay approved of suicide bombings.If I recall correctly 68% approved.In another online news article I saw a clip of a reporter asking a very young group of women a line of questions and I remember one blurting out" I want to have 10 sons and name them all Osama" I honestly dont think you can defeat Islam simply because of where it comes from. The places in the world where Islam is strong are mostly 3rd world. These folks I think honestly dont know ant better. My case in point is that we dont see the same actions from Muslims on the same scale in the US as we do in Europe and the Middle East simply because the standard of living is so much better here.I firmly beleive that Muslims here "talk the talk but won't walk the walk"because the are way too comfy here and have a real life to lose. I think the best we will be able to do is limit their capacity to harm us. By this token I think we should aggresively profile them and take the gloves off when dealing with their sensitve spots here and over seas. This B.S. of not being able to engage the enemy because they are held up in a Mosque or in a nuetral village is just that.... B.S. | ||
| Sifo |
Islam is a progressive doctrine like socialism/communism. It isn't viewed as "successful" until higher and higher levels of it are achieved. Land conquered by Islam can go from completely modern with equal rights for men and women, modern cities, modern world view to backward and abusive under Islam. In fact, the koran promotes it. Requires it in order to be viewed as a true adherent. This is a big part of the problem of trying to separate out the "extremists" from the "moderates" in Islam. They both believe in a world that is governed under Sharia law brought about through jihad. For them to believe otherwise would be like a Christian that doesn't believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ. The details may vary, but believe in a second coming is a common theme. The big detail that separates extremist/moderate Muslims largely has to do with the definition of jihad. Both groups also acknowledge multiple definitions for the word jihad so from a philosophical point of view they are very close together in their view points. This is what makes me think that even a very moderate Muslim is hard pressed to believe that the murderous extremist is really wrong in their actions. It's simply a difference of opinion on a detail of prophecy that can only be answered for certain as history plays out. Undoubtedly the moderate Muslim is watching history play out thinking "if violent jihad does bring about a world of Muslim domination, then I guess I must have been wrong on that little detail". It certainly isn't a detail that would shake the foundation of their religious belief though. | ||
| Sayitaintso |
I'm surprise I haven't heard a "kill them all and let God sort them out" comment yet. The only thing that I think everyone can agree on is that the status quo isn't acceptable. After that there are way to many variables to make definitive/blanket statements as to what should be done. | ||
| Blake |
Richard (2734), >>> These folks I think honestly don't know any better. They don't know any better than what? Bin Laden was a privileged son of a wealthy family; his right hand man is a medical doctor. The 9/11 hijackers were mostly college educated Saudi middle class young men. What is it that they "don't know any better"? Please explain. I'm confident that they know and believe they are doing allah's will. It's difficult for some to identify and face evil. It's imperative that we do so if we wish to continue enjoying our freedoms and our lives. >>> My case in point is that we don't see the same actions from Muslims on the same scale in the US as we do in Europe and the Middle East simply because the standard of living is so much better here. I cannot disagree more strongly, both on the relative standard of living--see comments above re al qaeda personnel--and that we don't see the problem here on the same scale. We don't yet see the same scale of jihadi violence here compared to other nations becuase we don't have as large a proportion of muslims here, yet. Read their holy plan of jihad. They don't go full scale violent until they've established a solid significant population base from which to do so. It is the law of allah. Read the koran and the hadith. It's all in there including their policy of lying to infidels to cover up their jihadi/islamist agenda. Islam is sorely outrageously OFFENDED by western values and principles of freedom, equality for women, and secular culture. We've certainly suffered the worst of the attacks. Then there was Fort Hood, the threats against the South Park mohomod episode, and a BUNCH of others. Yeah, it's not Iraq here. I'd not dismiss it though. >>> I firmly believe that Muslims here "talk the talk but won't walk the walk" because they are way too comfy here and have a real life to lose. I strongly suggest you study the history of Lebanon. Start here. | ||
| 2734 |
Blake,I guess I wasnt clear enough.. Osama is a pinacle point.He is not your average Muslim living in Iraq,Afganistan or wherever.The same as the 9/11 hijackers they are the exception not the rule. Most of the folks in these countries eat a plate of dirt a day and do nothing but survive for a living and are uneducated(obviously being educated doesnt mean you cant be a radical)and go by what they are told by the political and religious leaders of their respective countries.The leaders of these countries try very hard to keep the masses of their realms very focused on their hate of the West so that that dont realize the oppresion they are living under day by day. Those guys you see on LiveLeak getting the shit blown out of them everyday are not all multi-gazzillionaires and Ivy leauge college educated men now are they? I have a long time customer that I have spoke with about this a few times. He is an educated and worldy man from Iran and still has family there. He has often joked about the "less than sane" parts of his family.In fact he moved here to "get away from that silly shit".I have to take him for his word because...well... he's from there and I am not. I know full well the Jihad plan for domination. Im not oblivious to Hezbollah High and the Center for Islamic American Relations and similar groups.Part of that plan was defeated here in Oklahoma when it was voted down last year when there was an attempt to enact Sharia laws in cases concerning Muslims in Oklahoma.The way I see it is if your in America you are ruled by American law.It is now on appeal but I can assure you I will vote against it again,again and again. I agree that if their numbers are great enough the will make a move(Look at the Mexicans.... they already are)at some point.That has become painfully obvious in France for the last few years right? Oh and BTW since you are strongly suggesting I look at history then that must mean that you do the same. To not do so would be presumptious....and we know what that leads to. Look at the Crusades, and look what happened to Russia when it came to trying to stamp out Muslims as a whole. Worked out real well didnt it? I qoute myself: >>>>I think the best we will be able to do is limit their capacity to harm us. By this token I think we should aggresively profile them and take the gloves off when dealing with their sensitve spots here and over seas. This B.S. of not being able to engage the enemy because they are held up in a Mosque or in a nuetral village is just that.... B.S. ***and edit to add**** even if that said Mosque or residence is in the U.S. (Message edited by 273-4 on April 08, 2011) (Message edited by 273-4 on April 08, 2011) | ||
| Cowboy |
There is a lot of ways to hurt Americans besides killing them . The worst terroist in the world is not Osama Bin Ladin. He is living in the white House. | ||
| Kenm123t |
The best way to kill an idea is insure there are no survivors. Killing them all may be the only answer they glorify maryterdom. Ok I can help them with that Fuel air bombs with extra lard we dont want a virgin shortage in paradise do we? |
