The European army.

  • Thread starter Thread starter crazy_vasey
  • Start date Start date
>>You fail to see that it is in the interest of a COUNTRY to prevent a potentially serious war by sacrificing a few.
>
>Could you explain it to me,
>because I fail to see
>the big picture too. What
>was the US's interest in
>preventing war in Serbia/Yugoslavia ?

Political instability. When you're dealing with ethnic clashing you're not dealing merely with nations, you're dealing with people from nations that are not even involved. Some people speculated that the war could spread to countries such as Turkey or even Greece.

Yeah, there were probably ulterior motives, like NATO finding a way to justify its existance, or taking control of the Caspian oil reserves, but ignoring instability was a cause for WWII.

>The few US citizens living there
>could be easliy evacuated.
>The US has no serious economical
>interest in that area.
>The neighbor countries in Europe could
>easily protect themselves without US
>help.

However when you're involving a racial/ethnic war, you're talking about all kinds of trouble, the same trouble which took place in the Bosnian war where the Croats expelled over 100,000 Serbs. What happens if countries like Macedonia, already trying to deal with her own economic problems, has to deal with 200,000 ethnic Albanian refugees? What if they form an alliance to crush Serbia? Then you get nations backing Serbia in the conflict, and a multi-national war erupts.

Who knows?

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
>MY OWN FAMILY WAS IN THE
>WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG
>TIME? Okay, that's supposed to
>convince me that the U.S.
>are the good guys? So
>Uncle Sam can bomb my
>family just because some Albanians
>want a city?

Oh I'm sorry, I guess being kicked out of your own country, having your uncles and brothers mass-slaughtered and your village burned to the ground does not compare to the *inconvenience* you felt because you heard cluster bombs exploding in your city.

Maybe we should have taken that stance with all the German civilians in WWII huh? Nope, can't attack a country because *maybe* we'll wake up the civilians at night with our bombs.

>Here's another
>one of my 101 reasons
>to hate Bill Clinton: HYPOCRISY!
>He says that we shouldn't
>use violence to solve problems,
>but he did it plenty
>of times!

Do you not think we tried to negotiate? The Clinton administration gave an ultimatum to Milosevic to not stir up any trouble in Kosovo at the beginning of the presidential term. Nations do not simply attack without using diplomacy first?

>A few casualties? They're going to
>suffer A FEW casualties? Well,
>I suppose two million counts
>as a few. Yup.

Oh I am sure.. 1/5 of Serbia's total population, GET REAL. We'd have to kill every person in Belgrade and more to equal that many. I highly doubt your country suffered losses equal to those in the Holocaust (wrong war?)

>>Even the Soviet Union
>
>You do believe that the Soviet
>Union still exists. I mean,
>it disbanded some time ago...

No kidding. I was referring to the Gulf war which took place when the Soviet Union STILL EXISTED.

>Kuwait? The Iraqis shouldn't have invaded,
>but hey, the U.S. sure
>as hell would have in
>their position. Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy,
>goddamnit!

If we wanted to acquire any more land, we could at any given moment. The last 150 years are pretty good evidence of that.

>Have you seen the "war footage"
>of the end of the
>Gulf War? Ever notice that
>ALL of the Iraqi tanks
>and trucks are on roads
>and headed BACK TO IRAQ?

No kidding, that's because they were stopped cold. He occupied Kuwait for only a few days before they were forced out. A few Barrett sniper rifles helped with that too.

>Maybe they were retreating? The
>U.S. wouldn't let its people
>know that, of course, since
>they planned to blow up
>the Iraqi military while it
>waved write flags in the
>air.

From what I've read we were pretty nice to them in that conflict. We pushed them back, and didn't persue them. The people we did capture were treated nicely and given good food (that was something one of the Iraqi soldiers noted).

>You're not bastards, it's just that
>one of the spoils of
>war is the pen with
>which to write history, and
>the U.S. gets this pen
>in every single situation, using
>it to evilly portray their
>enemies.

It sounds like you're envious.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
>Alas. Without media, we have no
>information besides first-hand experience. So
>the only people who are
>not slaves are witnesses and
>clueless.

And without media, the government could kill every person in a country and we'd never know about it. Media is not bad.

>>Bill Clinton is a GOOD president?
>
>Just found out that he sucks,
>because he banned import of
>assault rifles. I wanted to
>get me AK103.

Hey APTYP, you can still buy Barrett Sniper rifles, quite possibly the most powerful gun on the planet. Get this: Sniper-targettable range: 1.2 miles. Ballistic range: 4 miles. It has the same impact at 2 miles that a .45 magnum has at point blank. 0.50 rounds come in armor piercing, shrappnel, and explosive tipped varieties. The 28-pound gun sells for $7000 (online) which includes a 10x scope, case, and two 10-round clips.

Last of all, sniper rifles are the least regulated type of gun there is. They fall below hunting rifles in their regulations. If you have a background checker ID you can get it shipped the next day, even to Washington DC!

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
Well, Mr. Karmalade, America can kiss my ass.

It WOULD have been my last post if they hadn't told me that it was perfectly alright for the U.S. to bomb my family.
 
I never said the media was a bad thing, just that the bias of the U.S. media during times of international crisis is. If you didn't cut up quotes into deranged mutations of what they originally were, it would show.

Apparently, the reason for giving Kosovo to the Albanians was because there was a larger % of Albanian population there. So why doesn't the U.S. live up to its standards of international fairness and surrender every last inch of itself to the Aryan Nations?

Slobodan Milosevic isn't God's favorite angel, neither is Saddam Hussein... but to punish THEM and THEM ALONE for THEIR crimes, the U.S. has to bomb their civilians and specifically target bomb shelters? I fail to see the moral logic in that.

And, on a side note, sorry about this but I was referring to Iraq with the two million casualty thing. Should have used quite then.
 
>Well, Mr. Karmalade, America can kiss
>my ass.
>
>It WOULD have been my last
>post if they hadn't told
>me that it was perfectly
>alright for the U.S. to
>bomb my family.

The USA wasn't bombing your family purposely (e.g. we didn't aim for you), we were trying to shut down Milosevic which has come about successfully. Your family was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You can whine all you want, but the fact is that casualties happen in war, and as much as you like to sob about how your family was inconvenienced by the sound of bombs, there are many other who were in the same plight or worse and have gotten on with their life. Honestly, grow up.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
>I never said the media was
>a bad thing, just that
>the bias of the U.S.
>media during times of international
>crisis is. If you didn't
>cut up quotes into deranged
>mutations of what they originally
>were, it would show.

Really now, I cut up quotes? Here's an exact quote:

"It is no use arguing with you people. This will be my last argument. You are idiotic slaves of the media. If you really want to be so patriotic, how about walking up to an Iraqi mother who had her baby killed by a cluster bomb and telling her about how the ends justify the means."

Now it seems to me that you're implying the media is some sort of propaganda machine and therefore bad.

>Apparently, the reason for giving Kosovo
>to the Albanians was because
>there was a larger %
>of Albanian population there. So
>why doesn't the U.S. live
>up to its standards of
>international fairness and surrender every
>last inch of itself to
>the Aryan Nations?

Because the United States *isn't* filled with Ayrans. It's a grand mixture of practically every European nationality and people from all over the world. It is commonly known as the "melting pot." Milosevic was kicking out Ethnic Albanians into neighboring countries.

>Slobodan Milosevic isn't God's favorite angel,
>neither is Saddam Hussein... but
>to punish THEM and THEM
>ALONE for THEIR crimes, the
>U.S. has to bomb their
>civilians and specifically target bomb
>shelters? I fail to see
>the moral logic in that.

We weren't bombing your shelters and civilians on purpose, why would we do that? It's not worth the money spent on the bombs to kill civilians. Civilians were just unlucky enough to be in the proximity of military targets.

You have to understand that NO COUNTRY targets defenseless civilians except TERRORISTS, or people like Saddam Hussein who wants to scare people like in Israel because he can't HIT or FIND any legitimate military targets. That's why in a nuclear war, the major cities would not be attacked first, if at all, nuclear weapons would be used to destroy fleets or other nuclear weapons, or for ceremonial value, like blowing up NYC to demoralize people.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: My take on this...

[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-02-00 AT 06:44AM (GMT)[p]There will bee no such thing as am european army in a while.
Because: The richest countrys like UK, France and Germany etc will have to pay the most of the cake and they will not do that, and if they do the whole army will be financely unstable so they have to ask the US army to help tem out here because off shortage on men and airplains.
I think they should first try to get the economy upp and working inn the countrys where it is not going that god.
Then they would maybe consider an europen army.
And why Norway is not using their money is actually simple if you think about it but it is a hell a lot off eksplaining to do. I can tell you this KARL IN FUCKING HAGEN is WRONG, for all you norwegians out here.
And using money will make money, perhaps in the USA but not in Norway we are to small, i think.
 
As my english teacher said "You can not convince an american that he is wrong if he don't think he is wrong."
Also I have heard from a person who knows what he is talking about(Not american media)that Saddam did no have much biologic weapons.
And then he said to the american media that he had biologic weapons and they sudenly made half a tonn into on million tonn an voila everybody said that he could kill everything on this planet.
And just now they are not giving the peapole in Irak alowence to sel their oil so if someone gets sick they are likely to die.
Wich just makes them much more angry towards america.
Still your fight is useless 8-ball they don't know better.

PS. today peapole say that they were really stupid in the 1950-1975 I bet that they will say the same in 50-60 years in america and they will apologice for bombing Irak
 
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-00 AT 00:14AM (GMT)[p]Well, I could come up with another 50 arguments and joke about your PAS tag, but screw it. I can't convince you. And I'm not coming back, no matter how many times you insult my country (which I think you've never been to) and my family (which you definitely haven't met).
 
Europe is a deathrap

Look what is happening in Ireland. becasue of all of the Euro funding their economy is on the verge of collapse. The euro is going down by the day and the recent enviroment conference failed miserably.

Give these people weapons and you're asking for trouble. It's as stupid as Einstien designing a A-bomb for the US, look what that did to the world!

M
 
>As my english teacher said "You
>can not convince an american
>that he is wrong if
>he don't think he is
>wrong."

Your English teacher needs to realize that it does not apply solely to Americans, it applies to all humans.

>Also I have heard from a
>person who knows what he
>is talking about(Not american media)that
>Saddam did no have much
>biologic weapons.

And this reliable source of information is...?

It is also not an issue of "much" or rather "many" biological weapons, it is a matter of *having* biological weapons. I don't really expect Iraq to have many biological weapons because it really isn't worth preparing them.

>And then he said to the
>american media that he had
>biologic weapons and they sudenly
>made half a tonn into
>on million tonn an voila
>everybody said that he could
>kill everything on this planet.

Who said that? What source said this? I never read anything like that. Maybe the Russian stockpile could take out some major population centers, but I doubt that of Iraq.

>And just now they are not
>giving the peapole in Irak
>alowence to sel their oil
>so if someone gets sick
>they are likely to die.

Actually phase 6 of the food-for-oil program is scheduled to end on the fifth of December, 2000. If the past is any indication, the deal will be renewed for another time period.

http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/latest/basfact_000610.html

>Still your fight is useless 8-ball
>they don't know better.

It's useless because he's got no comprehension of the real-world and politics.

>PS. today peapole say that they
>were really stupid in the
>1950-1975 I bet that they
>will say the same in
>50-60 years in america and
>they will apologice for bombing
>Irak

You mean "Iraq?" The only things people find stupid in that era were the *internal* problems like McCarthyism and the cost of the war against Vietnam. More people think the Reagan administration was where the government got stupid than the 1950s. Also, why would we applogize for bombing Iraq, where does the past indicate that?

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
>Well, I could come up with
>another 50 arguments and joke
>about your PAS tag, but
>screw it.

Sure you could...

>I can't convince
>you.

You can't convince me because you're blinded to the facts of the *real world*

>And I'm not coming
>back, no matter how many
>times you insult my country

I've never insulted your country or your people. I don't plan on it. However I am stating that your view on the situation is from the losing-country-civilian point of view, the accidental victims of an attack on their government.

>(which I think you've never
>been to) and my family
>(which you definitely haven't met).

And that has absolutely nothing to do with this debate.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Europe is a deathrap

>Look what is happening in Ireland.
>becasue of all of the
>Euro funding their economy is
>on the verge of collapse.
>The euro is going down
>by the day and the
>recent enviroment conference failed miserably.

They expected that a single currency would be a stablizing factor for Europe because the currencies kept falling in value for the individual countries. However they didn't realize that those individual countries' inflation *still* affects the European economy, and the currency, despite unifying the type of currency used.

That's why England was pretty smart to stay out of using the Euro. It's like a good player joining a loser team, they only drags the good player down.

>Give these people weapons and you're
>asking for trouble.

What I'm wondering is what their army is going to do? Realistically, there's nobody to fight.

>It's as
>stupid as Einstien designing a
>A-bomb for the US, look
>what that did to the
>world!

Einstein developed nuclear physics (not all, but enough), but the creation of the nuclear bomb, or just nuclear weapons in general was inevitable with the discoveries of nuclear physics. Hell, if it wasn't for Swiss commandos sabotaging a lab of Hitler's, Germany would have had nuclear bombs by the end of the war. His first target would have been London. No amount of black-outs could have saved the city. I wouldn't have been surprised if England surrendered then and there.

Also, what *has* the nuclear bomb done to the world? Practically nothing. Only two in history have ever been used offensively, the rest are sitting around in silos, probably never to be used.

The technology that has spawned because of nuclear physics has greatly improved our lives.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: Europe is a deathrap

I just don't like to think what would happen if some nutter like Hitler got to be American president all those nukes oh it would be bad.
 
RE: Europe is a deathrap

>I just don't like to think
>what would happen if some
>nutter like Hitler got to
>be American president all those
>nukes oh it would be
>bad.

I'd be more afraid of the USSR. It's a very unstable country which in its prime had more nukes than the USA ever had.

-Xotor-

[div align=center]

http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
 
RE: My take on this...

Norway's economy is mismanaged. If the politicians were CEOs they would be fired on the day, like some guy down in EU said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top