Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Although i conceed that removing Saddam was the single biggest blunder since Vietnam.
Monumentally stupid. Thanks Obama. Mission Accomplished.
Monumentally stupid. Thanks Obama. Mission Accomplished.
Assange doesn't have shit.
- Thread starter Unclebaldrick
- Start date
-
- Tags
- rapist in hiding
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Oh, and Julian. Nice try. I respect some of what you did, but you are not the story. Get over yourself.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
I repeat. Assange doesn't have shit. What a spectical. Once again, Hillary escapes the noose.
I have never seen more foreign influence in a American election.
I have never seen more foreign influence in a American election.
Olive Drab Green
Well-Known Member
You're smart. I don't think I have to remind you that Saddam was executed during the Bush regime. In fact, pretty sure you're just trolling. But just in case.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Sarcasm. It does not always work right.
Olive Drab Green
Well-Known Member
It's not you. I'm just 'tarded before I have my morning spliff.
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
You can thank the popularity of the internet world wide I would imagine plus EU should get to vote because we are going to make them go to war with Russia if Hitlary wins.
But I guess she is really against global warming so she will put us in a nuclear winter with WW3 only problem is we will not really win we will need to move to the Canadian Arctic to survive. But at least we will save the Polar Bears.
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
Gaddafi was the shit fuck Obama and Hitlary bitch actually had a sadistic laugh about murdering a world leader. He warned us about them they are pushing WW3 like none other. We are now arming ISIS with anti aircraft missiles just to shoot down Russian aircraft. Psychotic much....
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
You can thank the popularity of the internet world wide I would imagine plus EU should get to vote because we are going to make them go to war with Russia if Hitlary wins.
But I guess she is really against global warming so she will put us in a nuclear winter with WW3 only problem is we will not really win we will need to move to the Canadian Arctic to survive. But at least we will save the Polar Bears.
I think you are missing the big picture. She killed my cat and Obama did nothing to stop her.
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
Probably because Obama is crazier than Osama certainly much more homicidal.
Olive Drab Green
Well-Known Member
To be fair, Stalin was worse.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Stalin had a real paranoia thing going. That and he was a psychopath made for some bad times in Mother Russia and associated states. Putin is far more professional.
Olive Drab Green
Well-Known Member
In all seriousness, I think it's a really bad idea to fuck with Russia. Like, Yeltsin was a drunk and Gorbachëv was a patsy. Putin at Russia's helm is definitely foreboding, and I see any engagement with Russia under Putin as potentially and completely devastating.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
I don't see that coming. I just don't. Putin knows what Russians like in a leader and what they are willing to give up to get it. I don't think the people would support a war. Putin is a smart guy. War would be devastating to both sides. I think I might consider Putin more stable on an international basis that I would TRUMP!.
Oh, Gorby wasn't no patsy.
Rizlared
Well-Known Member
Discussing politics on here is a waste of time.
It stops being a discussion and becomes an abusive troll fest...tedious. I have those discussions elsewhere.
Just about foreign influence in an American election...is this not the inevitable consequence of the USA causing chaos globally, implementing regime change, dictating to sovereign states whilst all the while empire building in the name of capitalism.
Just an observation.
Cant wait for this Mickey mouse election to be over. Either way the world has to deal with a twat
It stops being a discussion and becomes an abusive troll fest...tedious. I have those discussions elsewhere.
Just about foreign influence in an American election...is this not the inevitable consequence of the USA causing chaos globally, implementing regime change, dictating to sovereign states whilst all the while empire building in the name of capitalism.
Just an observation.
Cant wait for this Mickey mouse election to be over. Either way the world has to deal with a twat
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
no.
Big_Lou
Well-Known Member
I agree with both of you on much of this. I don't believe that Putin is an off-the-chain madman (cough, Kim, cough), but he certainly has the potential for pot stirring.
And I dunno, Baldrick, Gorby was kind of a patsy off and on....think Blair, only swap the Bush cucking for a senile Ronny.
Rizlared
Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green
Well-Known Member
I agree with you. I'm just saying, I have serious concerns regarding going to war with Russia, even if it were more unlikely than otherwise. I think we'd be pretty fucked. Even if we did win, I estimate huge civilian and infrastructural loss within the borders of this country as well as theirs, and more than likely across the world.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
My point is, I believe you are falling into the fallacy of believing that everything is about us (as in the US). It isn't. Trouble in that region is nothing new and it has been simmering for pretty much forever.
Yes we have meddled in the region because the imperative of foreign affairs has always been to "protect the interests of the United States". That is not to say that everything we have done has protected our interests But I believe that we have meddled for that reason overall. It is all in how you define our interests. Historically, this has meant that we have supported many dictators because they protected our interest of a non-communist world. It was a wonderful goal but ended up bad. Wars always end up badly. They should - they are shitty things. I believe that they should be avoided.
But how best to avoid them? You can't turn back the clock and uninvade Iraq. You are here. It is now.
Empire building is a way you can look at it. The model was always open to that criticism. At best I believe it carried an implied cultural preachiness and superiority to it in a way that would particularly offend radical religious groups anywhere. They are not democratic. Democracy was what we were importing at the time. There was going to be a conflict but the conflict is not new. The US did not cause it. It was why we sought to export democracy in the first place - a bulwark of radicalism. Just because it seems to be failing doesn't make it responsible for all the regions problems.
Maybe it had elements of imperialism to it. Pretty much anything does. I think the policies of exporting democracy were well-meant. But sometimes the people won't do what democracy considers "the right thing". Sometimes they are pissed. Maybe the experiment is still going on. I studied under some critical academics who were promoting it. We knew the risks. They were discussed at length. I guess my point is, any new state is a risk and a struggle. Sometimes things have a momentum of their own and we can merely react.
It is not easy. Mistakes were made. But we were merely players in the game.
Oh, regime change. Regime change is not black or white. The US and every other international actor has taken this as an implied element forever. It is a complicated thing. WWII was about regime change. Other forms of "supporting it" might be to say kind things in the press. The entire concept of cooperation between countries hinges on not tolerating certain things. To ignore it would be to repeat the mistakes of the League of Nations which fostered WWII.
States have a right to protect their interests. Regime change is a tool. How you use it or even whether you use it is another thing.
Most of the world has come to support regime change in Syria. I do too. How to achieve it is the question.