04-14-2003, 11:06 AM | #1 | |
Galvatron
Join Date: January 10, 2002
Location: Upstate NY
Age: 56
Posts: 2,109
|
This article captures (much more eloquently than I'm capable of) my primary concerns regarding the true repurcussions of the war. It also succinctly conveys what I tend to think of as the real risks (US policymakers acting unilaterally and rashly, simply because they feel they can get away with it) and potential rewards (hegemonically enforced global stability) of the path we seem to be on.
from http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/04/14/nyt.bernstein/ - New York Times article: Quote:
The real question in my mind is where will it lead... Will the "Rummie's" in the US Government run roughshod over domestic and international opposition? IMO this would lead us down a path of sequential conflicts, each causing increased alarm and anger in the domestic and international community. Will we step back and try to recover some sense of mulitlateralism? I HOPE this is where things go, I honestly don't see any evil empires out there that should be an immediate target. Syria? - Come on... just media hype I hope. They're a small country with limited resources, they've been very cooperative in the past when it came to working with us. If we start beating war drums against Syria, I'll be attending anti-war demonstrations... and I've never protested anything in my life. Iran? - They're well on their way to forcing demacratic change from within... any action against them would be plain stupid IMO. North Korea? - They're well on their way to self destructing, and other coutries in the region seem inclined not to do anything. I say ignore 'em and let China and Russia sort them out. As long as they don't specifically threaten Japan or Australia I don't think we should do a thing, including talks (unless they include all regional powers). What does everyone else think? |
|
04-14-2003, 11:30 AM | #2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I think Germany has some answering to do for their part in providing weapons to Iraq and for doling out contracts in Iraq that they lost btw because we went in and got rid of the regime.
I think they need to sit back and seriously see where they further harmed the people of Iraq with those contracts before they whine about not being allowed a role in the reconstruction. And Russia. And France. You asked. |
04-14-2003, 11:36 AM | #3 | |
Galvatron
Join Date: January 22, 2002
Location: california wine country
Age: 60
Posts: 2,193
|
Quote:
__________________
“This is an impressive crowd, the haves and the have mores. <br />Some people call you the elite. <br />I call you my base.”<br />~ George W. Bush (2000) |
|
04-14-2003, 11:43 AM | #4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
If Bush has any integrity they should.
|
04-14-2003, 04:36 PM | #5 | |
Quintesson
Join Date: September 12, 2001
Location: Ewing, NJ
Age: 42
Posts: 1,079
|
Quote:
Germany was much more heavily involved in supplying Iraq with chemical weapons then the US was. Depending on what you count as "supplying" there were somewhere between 4x and 7x as many German companies supplying Iraq then there were US companies. This is the list of US comapnes that appeared in the Iraqi Declaration. Legend used in this list: A = nuclear program, (Due to the nature of nuclear weaons research this can include a lot of stuff) B = bioweapons program, C = chemical weapons program, R = rocket program, K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi Defense Ministry and the building of military plants. 1 Honeywell (R, K) 2 Spectra Physics (K) 3 Semetex (R) 4 TI Coating (A, K) 5 Unisys (A, K) 6 Sperry Corp. (R, K) 7 Tektronix (R, A) 8 Rockwell (K) 9 Leybold Vacuum Systems (A) 10 Finnigan-MAT-US (A) 11 Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K) 12 Dupont (A) 13 Eastman Kodak (R) 14 American Type Culture Collection (B) 15 Alcolac International (C) 16 Consarc (A) 17 Carl Zeiss - U.S (K) 18 Cerberus (LTD) (A) 19 Electronic Associates (R) 20 International Computer Systems (A, R, K) 21 Bechtel (K) 22 EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R) 23 Canberra Industries Inc. (A) 24 Axel Electronics Inc. (A) |
|
04-14-2003, 04:41 PM | #6 | |
Banned User
Join Date: September 3, 2001
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Age: 62
Posts: 1,463
|
Quote:
1. The US/UK go to war without UN authorisation saying to the UN: "Sod you, we don't need you". 2. $76billion dollars later, Bush suddenly discovers that going it alone means paying for it alone. Oops! (and that $76billion doesn't even cover the cost of replacing all that spent ordinance). 3. Bush doesn't have the cash to rebuild Iraq so he goes to the World Bank and asks for a reconstruction loan for Iraq. "Not a chance" says the World Bank, "We don't lend money to governments not recognised by the UN". "Oh!" says Bush, then I'll go to the IMF. 4. The IMF says "What goes for the World Bank goes for us too, come back after you've been to the UN". 5. US Treasury Secretary, John Snow discovers that Iraq owes more than $100billion dollars to Russia, France and Germany and that those debts must be paid first or renogiated with any money that Iraq does get from loans. So he asks France, Germany and Russia to 'forgive' the debts! France Germany and Russia say "Perhaps you'd better tell us what is in it for us first..." That's where we have gotten to. Bush now has a stark choice, he can either: a) Underwrite the reconstruction loans to Iraq (not sure how he is going to do that given that he has so generously paid off his political allies with big tax cuts and didn't even have the cash to reward the veterns) or b) Come to an economic agreement with France and Russia (and possibly Germany, depending on how much the others ask for)... Humble pie anyone? 4. |
|
04-14-2003, 04:49 PM | #7 | |
Silver Dragon
Join Date: March 4, 2001
Location: Knoxville, TN USA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,641
|
Quote:
1. The US/UK go to war without UN authorisation saying to the UN: "Sod you, we don't need you". 2. $76billion dollars later, Bush suddenly discovers that going it alone means paying for it alone. Oops! (and that $76billion doesn't even cover the cost of replacing all that spent ordinance). 3. Bush doesn't have the cash to rebuild Iraq so he goes to the World Bank and asks for a reconstruction loan for Iraq. "Not a chance" says the World Bank, "We don't lend money to governments not recognised by the UN". "Oh!" says Bush, then I'll go to the IMF. 4. The IMF says "What goes for the World Bank goes for us too, come back after you've been to the UN". 5. US Treasury Secretary, John Snow discovers that Iraq owes more than $100billion dollars to Russia, France and Germany and that those debts must be paid first or renogiated with any money that Iraq does get from loans. So he asks France, Germany and Russia to 'forgive' the debts! France Germany and Russia say "Perhaps you'd better tell us what is in it for us first..." That's where we have gotten to. Bush now has a stark choice, he can either: a) Underwrite the reconstruction loans to Iraq (not sure how he is going to do that given that he has so generously paid off his political allies with big tax cuts and didn't even have the cash to reward the veterns) or b) Come to an economic agreement with France and Russia (and possibly Germany, depending on how much the others ask for)... Humble pie anyone? 4.[/QUOTE]Or we could tell France, Russia and Germany to go screw themselves and we'll just go ahead and pay for it all. That's my vote! [img]smile.gif[/img]
__________________
Sir Taliesin<br /><br />Hello... Good bye. |
|
04-14-2003, 05:03 PM | #8 |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
|
I think you make good points about Syria, Iran, and N.K. Thoran. I think you set up a fair scenario, Skunk, though I'll tease you by saying I completely disagree with point "4" and think it is absolutely stupid on your part. I certainly don't want to bankroll any more war with my taxes. So far it has cost every tax-paying American about $2K. I would never in my life ever ever send $2K to overseas to charity, assuming I'd even spend that much at home.
I think the US track record regarding imperialism is amazingly good and we are not colonialists nor have we ever been. We have taken over and subsequently given away most every piece of real estate we have ever conquered. We could own land all over the world, yet we lease instead. Our citizens don't want imperialism and neither does the government - we do not have the patience to micromanage the lives of other peoples - we just want them not not annoy the pee-water out of us all the time. I think Karl Otton Honrich from the article desires hegemony in the world 'cause daddy and grand-daddy were Nazis and he's a control freak. [img]tongue.gif[/img] |
04-14-2003, 06:43 PM | #9 |
Manshoon
Join Date: February 3, 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 206
|
Despite what some people are saying about the evils of so called "US imperialism" today, there is still a much greater threat in the explosive combination of Islamic Fundamentalism and Arab nationalism.
Something has to be done to curb or redirect this kind of emotional extremism. The US now has a really has a good chance now to build something better than what existed in Iraq with Saddam. Certainly a better chance of understanding between ordinary Muslims and Americans in general. As for North Korea, it's sad to see that millions more will die of starvation before any significant changes can happen. that society is going to implode soon and deprogramming a society is going to be a huge undertaking. [ 04-14-2003, 06:50 PM: Message edited by: Wutang ]
__________________
Hula dancer lover! |
04-15-2003, 12:28 AM | #10 |
Drow Priestess
Join Date: March 13, 2001
Location: a hidden sanctorum high above the metroplex
Age: 54
Posts: 4,037
|
Don't you know that the United States has a destiny that has been molded for the last two centuries? We are at the culmination of a dream of creating a Grand Unification of all the nations of the world under one flag. Yes, the One World Government is about to become a reality. Are you ready to become a member of the permanent Coalition of the Willing? [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img]
[img]graemlins/firedevil.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/firedevil.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/firedevil.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]
__________________
Everything may be explained by a conspiracy theory. All conspiracy theories are true. No matter how thinly you slice it, it's still bologna. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Age of Empires 2 | Dave G | Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) | 16 | 01-06-2007 03:40 AM |
Age of Empires 3 demo released !!! | johnny | Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) | 13 | 09-23-2005 01:51 PM |
Any Good: Space Empires 4 Gold??? | --Twilight-- | Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) | 2 | 07-23-2002 01:42 AM |
Age of Empires II | SSJ4Sephiroth | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 9 | 11-26-2001 03:52 AM |
Are Multinationals the new empires? | Leonis | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 7 | 04-10-2001 07:19 PM |