Well, it looks like Bush Jnr is about to finish off what Bush Snr started, sometime early next year with an invasion on Iraq planed.

It is sounding pretty scary, with the US holding nothing back (unlike the Gulf War). They are going in for Saddam.

"USA is planning a major air campaign and ground invasion, with initial estimates contemplating the use of 70,000 to 250,000 troops."

Will Australia be pressured into involvement in this conflict?

As I mentioned before, the invasion (and inevitably war) is set to start early next year, for a number of reasons.

"These include avoiding summer combat in bulky chemical suits, preparing for a global oil price shock, and waiting until there is progress toward ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

so start stock-piling your own petrol, cos it is gonna get hella expensive.

The 'chemical suit' bit worries me, the US is expecting Saddam to use his Chemical an Biological weapons against ground troops.

This is going to get messy, things are going to be very different this time next year

now that i have ausforums and ausgamersmail i can die a happy man :)

but yeah i dont know if they will actually go through with it.

anyway we are so far away from everyone that we will be all left alive and can become the new rulers of the world, just like in that sliders episode

s***... this is getting dodgy... apocolypse anyone?

f***in hell, my relatives over there better not be killed. This is becoming gay.

i bet the first to die is the creators of southpark.

America, the Global Gestapo

on a more serious note, this is a horrible thing :( im old enough to be conscripted now, well i will be when the war starts :(

/me delibrately starts consciption scare.

i bet the first to die is the creators of southpark.

So true!! And so tragic... they are geniuses of profound vision!!!

just like in that sliders episode

I rememeber that episode, we were the only country where males were still fertile so we became the sex gods of the Earth

I find it pretty weird that they'd go ahead and say "yep we're gonna invade you next year" wouldnt Saddam just go "Oh f***, better start the biological warfare crap now then ey"

Surprise is a HUGE advantage in war, but so is Anticipation (or like being prepared for a war..theres probably a better word :D) and America has just given Saddam a helping hand...doesnt make sense to me

Maybe they are ready now, and are just saying that to make Saddam think that he has time, but the US are really gonna attack sooner!!!!

or maybe there is no point in hiding it because sadam has spies and spy aircrafts that pick it all up anyway.

/me waits for Goa'uld's anti-American rubbish

Guys i wouldn't be underestimating saddams powers, not that i like him, its just he's a genius in a evil way.

me waits for Goa'uld's anti-American rubbish

trog i wouldn't say its really rubbish.

"An EVIL petting zoo??"

:P

evil genious? roofle

There isn't anything to say here. I think it's obvious to everyone that America's involvement with this war, as with every other war faught by America, is not over a moral issue, it's over furthering the wealth of their nation. Clearly they are fighting for their oil (again), and who can blame them? The very fibre of American wealth is based on exploiting poor countries to their benefit. And don't you dare question America's integrity - oh no! - or you will be ridiculed by those around you as instructed by the American media.

Thats the way of the west - extreme capitalism. If you dont' like it, go live in Afghanistan and see how you like it.

careful what you say around here, that dirty suhaib is a SPY

, it's over furthering the wealth of their nation.

Historicaly most wars are fought over riches than necessity, or moral reasons.

If only because wars are expensive.

and to this.

And don't you dare question America's integrity - oh no! - or you will be ridiculed by those around you as instructed by the American media.

I have no problems with people bad mouthing Americans... although it is normaly nice for people to have a grounded place to start bitching from.

There isn't anything to say here. I think it's obvious to everyone that America's involvement with this war, as with every other war faught by America, is not over a moral issue, it's over furthering the wealth of their nation.

does it really matter what americas true intentions are

sadam is a despot, and should be removed by any reasonable means
(its regrettable that the US didn't go all the way the first time)

he violates his citizens and poses a threat to the nations around him

America denies their intentions to gain support of their citizens, and of other nations. They conjure tales of a heroic end to terrorism, and threaten those who would oppose them.

s***... this is getting dodgy... apocolypse anyone?

haha, you big gay

*hugz*

the only reason the yanks did not assassinate saddam the first time around, was they feared they would turn him in to a martyr and make his cause an anti-american crusade.

saddam's successor could have been even more nuts, it is better the devil you know.

Its really quite amusing to watch people with no political or military power dicuss these type of events like they actually have the power to affect their outcome.

If you have no idea what im talking about, i suggest you visit the political section of one of the many forums with primarily american posters...

while we are (sort of) on topic i've been thinking about creating a forum specifically for long (and i mean long) discussions.

From what i can see a lot of threads are being taken off topic by idealogical discussions that are better suited for places where they don't annoy people.

Anyway I just want to see if anyone is interested. I'm not saying i think i should be the Admin or Moderator of said forum, i think there are a lot of smart people who could do a better job. However if people like the idea and would be willing to move discussions to that forum then i think it'd help clean up the environment around here.

Cheers.

PS: IMO America is acting in it's own self interest but by all means argue away :P

PS: IMO America is acting in it's own self interest but by all means argue away :P

is it really relevant though
if they go in and remove sadam
and find a way to properly democratically elect someone
and give them a japanese constitution

then they will be acting in everyones interest

I still dont get why they would say we are going to invade your arse on a specific date..

careful what you say around here, that dirty suhaib is a SPY

lol, heheheh.

And don't you dare question America's integrity - oh no! - or you will be ridiculed by those around you as instructed by the American media.

I don't know how you can say that, being one of the many Australian clueless rabid anti-Americans in existence.

Sure, there's a lot of oil in Iraq. Yeh, the Americans probably do want it. Guess what - America isn't the only country that buys oil from Iraq. I don't know if Australia does, but it wouldn't surprise me if we did, nor would it surprise me if we needed to in the long run.

The stated reason that I have heard publically announced - and by announced, what I've seen really appears to be largely conjecture from Australian journalists and politicians - is that Iraq refuses to play with the other kids when it comes to chemical and biological weapons.

See, being a leet CS server admin, I can imagine the frustration. You've got one f***wit in a pool of people that is just behaving like a petulant child and refuses to get along with the others. What do you do in CS in that case? You banid 0 them. In the real world, while not so simple or as passe, it is pretty much the same thing. If some world leader is going to refuse to play with the rest of the world, then in my humble opinion, they need to be forced to play ball.

Personally, I don't want _any_ country having weapons like that, especially one that has rained death down via scud missiles to neighbours. If America are going to wade on in there to make sure that the world is a safer place for everyone, and well, at the same time installing a government that will ensure stable oil prices and is nicer to its citizens, well... who's going to stop them?

Remember, a lot of this wouldn't have happened if Sep11 hadn't happened. This is all the USA making the world a better place by stamping our terrorism. Sounds good to me.

hast: agreed.

However my reaction to this whole thing is very sceptical. Yes saddam should be removed and Yes america is more than welcome to do it, whatever their reasons.

If you'd been following what's happened in Venezuela in the last couple of months you'd realise that America isn't always pro-democracy. In short a democratically elected leader was ousted by a coup backed by the Venezuelan Military. THE NEXT DAY America recognised the new UN-ELECTED leader as the legitimate government/leader of venezuela.

Everything isn't so black and white anymore is it.

ffs, why the f*** do people have to keep starting s***.

Maybe I have no idea whats goin on in the world, but things with Iraq seemed to be pretty much non-eventful.

Noone was shooting anyone, and now they are.

f*** that. f*** it all.

*cut*

there there maxe,

I still dont get why they would say we are going to invade your arse on a specific date..

I think when you have a military as good/big as the US military then you could a) specify the date b) the location c) the types of forces and still kick some "rag-head" (sorry it's used for emphasis) ass.

Bio Weapons are nasty. Uncurable diseases could easily be made, and with many missiles easily deliverd. If a dodgy old man that has lauched attacks before is playing with these bio-weapons and refuses to let them be inspected/destroyied then I dont care who removes the dodgy old man, or for what reasons. As long as he is gone, and his weapons of mass pain and suffering. (Bio Weapons probably wont kill outright, it will be a slow painful process...)

just america throwing its political weight around.
But they always have a self-righteous justification for doing so, which will one day come back to bite them in the ass.
The same reason america is having a "war on terror" is the same reason every american war movie portrays them as all conquering victors..

think about it

edit:
think when you have a military as good/big as the US military then you could a) specify the date b) the location c) the types of forces and still kick some "rag-head" (sorry it's used for emphasis) ass

*cough* Vietnam *cough*

*cough* Vietnam *cough*

damn, i was hoping no-one would put up the obvious counter-example.

America's biggest problem in Vietnam was the lack of popular support for the war. Seconded only by their approach to guerilla warfare.

edit: another point is that this war will play out very differently to 'Nam. There is no jungle for the Americans to destroy with carcinogens hence they can actually use their Air-Force to it's full effect.

imo the yanks should have shawt saddam in the ass years ago.

f***ing little raghead.

Let's presume America really has no hidden agenda. Iraq must know about this attack by now, being that they have to have at least one guy who checks cnn.com everday :P, it amazes me they haven't used any of these scary biological weapons on their proposed attackers. It's almost as if they didn't have them at all!
To say this is all because of September 11 is foolish. The American military was preparing to invade Afghanistan in early 2001, long before the people of America knew about september 11, with the attack set to take place in October.

ok denny, Korea is also another fine counter-example...


another thing denny, Americas greatest problem in war is confidence..

When they entered WWII they were s*** scared, and quite rightly so, for if not for poor choices made on behalf of hitler (Operation Barbarossa), and some pretty unlucky weather at certain times (battle of the bulge), The Americans would have never re-taken Europe so quickly, or perhaps at all.

The American war trend seems to be, go in confident, come home a loser.

Korea - years of war, identical border
Vietnam - need i say more.

who cares.. it's time earth became civlised. If this means killing off some ruthless terrorists, s*** yeh.. die fagets!!

now lets praise the lord for the united states of america.

/me prays.

sorry, that is how this world is. i was born an anglo saxan.. and i live in australia. im entitled to my opinion. i dont see you donating money to third world countries, or helping unfortunate people. i see you sitting around in your sheltered little house, having some s*** biased view, on your pc.

if it wasnt for america there would be no queensland.. it would be jap land. aus was willing to give up everything north of nsw.. i have respect for the usa.. i dont have respect for some gay little desert land country.

now you f*** off, i bet you are foreign, with some chip on your shoulder against the world. go do something productive you immature faget.. even better, go and fight the americans?

i dont see you donating money to third world countries

actually i donated 300 bucks last month. so suck this ..|.,

Actually i am pretty much australian i was born here and pretty muich lived my whole life here, i have no "chips" for against the world. I just hate the american goverment thats all, and there ways of taking control over the world. f*****.

cool, care to show a receipt? and how you earned 300 dollars in one month?
no, i dont beleive you. a person with as foul language as you have, is highly unlikely to be a kind person.

asif they want to take over the world.. its just being made a better place so our kids can have a backyard to play in. you are what, 12 years old with no grasp on how the world actually works. maybe i should send a copy of your writings to you parents, im sure they would be disgusted.

cheer up charlie :):D

oh and asif you would "hate" anyone.. aus is so influenced by usa its not funny. go hang out with some afghani's hater boy... i have relatives in the usa, however i dont pretend and "hate" usa's enemies.. grow up child.

They think like me and i am 16 yrs old, no i am slaving in a chicken shop for 5 months thats how i go thte money, and i donated the 300 last month.

i think he is pissed off because he said he has relatives in iraq

as stated before the whole middle east is f***ed, i dont really care what happens to it

Man it maybe f***ed but theres still inocent people that live there.

lol 16.. and slave in a chicken shop, and earnd 300, and donated all of it..which charities?

asif you dont have a chip on your shoulder..

good luck finding a girl with the same f***ed up views that you have.. oh your mum does! match made in heaven! that kind of thing is allowed in your family right?

yeh true, i said kill the terrorists. but somehow the lad interpreted that as kill his relatives and innocent schoolkids. so i decided to start a flame. :D

I just wish there was a way for the yanks to take out saddam WITHOUT hurting anyone else...


unfortunately there isn't :( it's a sad time for this world.

no i earned more than 300, thats how much i donated poof.

what charity did you donate it too.

Thats so true pharcyde, in the golf war 3 quartores of the bombs we hitting the wrong target, and thats because they told the media that they were some homing missile or some smart bomb, and none hardly missed, all these things show up after a couple of years.

Just stop f***ing abusing eachother, it's got nothing to do with any of you (maybe bar strex and other army people if they go to war) so stop causing flame wars to boost your gay ego's & postcounts.

It wasn't a charity, i just gave it to some guy that went to iraq, and he shared the money to his relatives, cos they were pretty much real poor.

im basically concerned about the weapons iraq posses, i mean fair enough, tanks, planes, infantry etc, thats regular war stuff that most wars have been fought with. But, chemical and biological warfare, im sorry fellas, but thats just not cricket. I dont care what they're doing with weapons like that, but just possesing such devices is enough ground to justify an attack.

In a way, i think its really un-called for, Iraq and america havent really gotten into any conficlts lately, its pretty 'out of the blue'.

but anyway, I guess it has to be done :/

I bet America have a few Bio-weapons..

dude thats fine going in to destroy weapn slike that but there not. simple as that.

I bet America have a few Bio-weapons..

yes but we are on the americans side.

I bet America have a few Bio-weapons..

you should also realise they havent ever used them...because after WW1 everyone was scared s***less of gas attacks...like nuclear weapons its used as a detterent

ie, "if you attack (such & such a place) we will nuke/gas your ass to hell & back"

Long thread, I'll read the rest later but I wanted to address this first:

the only reason the yanks did not assassinate saddam the first time around, was they feared they would turn him in to a martyr and make his cause an anti-american crusade.

saddam's successor could have been even more nuts, it is better the devil you know.

Someone may or may not have said this, but not all assasinations have to be blatant. By that I mean they could easily have induced his death without using obvious means (eg bombs, bullets etc). There are hundreds of undetectable drugs which can result in a seemingly natural death.

That said, doesn't he have prostate cancer?

Maybe I have no idea whats goin on in the world, but things with Iraq seemed to be pretty much non-eventful.

Noone was shooting anyone, and now they are.

In a way, i think its really un-called for, Iraq and america havent really gotten into any conficlts lately, its pretty 'out of the blue'.

Well apparently Iraq has been funding terrorist organisations, but whether that is true or not I don't think anyone has proven it yet.

yes but we are on the americans side.

But not by choice. I can guarantee you that America would do jack s*** if we happened to be invaded (unlikely but not impossible). You see we don't have anything they want anymore - they don't even need Pine Gap any longer thanks to new technology. And I wonder if any of you know that the Americans pay nearly nothing for the privilege of locating a potential target in the middle of our country.

verticalseafoodtaco i respect what u say but u should really care becasue you need petrol. iraq, jordan and others have the power to cut back on petrol but except saudi Arabia. stupid king.

i also really don't care if the whole of america is blown by suicide bombers.

one last thought they will never find sudam husain. becasue like Antisane said they said that they are going to get him therfore he will prolly be out there like a jiffy.

you should also realise they havent ever used them...because after WW1 everyone was scared s***less of gas attacks...like nuclear weapons its used as a detterent

Nah they've been used by Iraq against its "enemies" before. Nerve gas and bioweapons were used against a few countries in the mid-80s. Anyone who's seen the video footage of the dead bodies would know that it doesn't look like a very peaceful death.

funny thing he tested it on his own people :( sadam should be shot up the arse with a shotgun

G.W Bush could do with a bit of that too Greasy

ouch! (althou he does deserve it with all the pain and suffering hes caused, saddam that is)

down with conscription :(

there's a reason I didn't join the army

i was gana try it to a cow but couldn't find any one to lend to a cow for life :(

i guess those people considering joining the army eds and co. will have second thoughts, i know i would.

I bet America have a few Bio-weapons..

i bet she's got more than a few

if you think about it take way acrylic, if you had to join one of the forces because of war with iraq, you'd wanna be in the navy, all ya gotta do is hold a blockade, and last time i checked, iraq doesn't have much of (if any) a navy

why would it have a navy theres no great body of water near it

they had blockades of the persian gulf during the gulf war,

in any future war in the middle east, i would assume they would have another blockade

if you think about it take way acrylic, if you had to join one of the forces because of war with iraq, you'd wanna be in the navy, all ya gotta do is hold a blockade, and last time i checked, iraq doesn't have much of (if any) a navy

what about that ritual where they spank your ass when you go over the equator, sorry im gonna stay home under my bed with a pot ban on my head beating it with a wooden spoon. or join the home guard.

Nah they've been used by Iraq against its "enemies" before. Nerve gas and bioweapons were used against a few countries in the mid-80s. Anyone who's seen the video footage of the dead bodies would know that it doesn't look like a very peaceful death.

my comment was in relation to America.

i know other countries have used gas but most civilised countries are aware of the horrors inflicted in nerve warfare.

I read somewhere that, on average up until 1993, America had invaded or been at war with 1 country per year...
The USA, Iraq, Afganistan, Palestine and Israel are all terrorists, because they all hit civilian targets.
The USA is just using Sept 11 and the resulting nationalistic frenzy as an excuse to settle some old scores. That's all there is too it.

I don't like the look of it ... in the past there have always been empires and they had all fallen

egyptians, greeks, romans, napoleon, I, II and III Reich ... USA is looking like those empires now

The USA, Iraq, Afganistan, Palestine and Israel are all terrorists, because they all hit civilian targets.

except Israel & USA dont intentionally hit civilian targets.

dke, back when Israel was trying to get itself as a country they used suicide bombers on some civilian targets

except Israel & USA dont intentionally hit civilian targets.

Wanna bet? The US did just that in Vietnam. And the UN has strong evidence of a massacre in Jenin (ie that shot unarmed civilians and soldiers after the surrendered).

Wanna bet? The US did just that in Vietnam

its pretty hard to hit a sam site when they put it in a school playground, still filled with running children...not as if your just going to keep on flying an not bomb the s*** out of it

its pretty hard to hit a sam site when they put it in a school playground, still filled with running children...not as if your just going to keep on flying an not bomb the s*** out of it

No it wasn't that - its the fact that the VC and NVA were almost indistinguishable from pro-democracy supporters.

there is no way you can possibly put the USA and Israel up on the same pedastal as a bunch of gun-totting terrorists whoes only ambition in life is to cause as much destruction, mayhem and murder because of their misguided perception of what should be a peaceful religion.

its strange, people look at it like
"A few civilian casualties here and there are bound to happen"
the question is how much is too much? seems in recent times its too much when they're American.
Lets just blow up the pentagon, and all the terrorist networks all at once and make everyone dead/happy.

I'm pretty much pro-American pre Bush, his administration is f***ed, they don't even attempt proper peace talks.

just a question: what/where/when was Jenin?

I'm pretty much pro-American pre Bush, his administration is f***ed, they don't even attempt proper peace talks.

I agree, Bush is a dirty war monger. Either that or he is being controlled by elements who were up until recently themeselves controlled by the previous Democrat government.

the question is how much is too much? seems in recent times its too much when they're American.

yes, but you dont see the american public shouting "death to towel heads" or burning flags of various middle-east nations. This puts them several steps ahead on the humanity scale.

just a question: what/where/when was Jenin?

In Palestine.

If you've played MGS2, you'll have figured this whole thing out by now!

Games. They tell all.

War itself is something that no country wants to commit to, the loss of young blood is a blow to the entire nation and the mental anguish causes scares that never heal. But when the peace talks fail each and everytime, there comes a time when its obvious the message of peace just isnt gettin through. Steps must then be taken to insure the further loss of life is kept to a minimum, even if this means short term warfare.

i think its time for the Palestinians to grow up and except the fact they can only gain their land back in a Democratic fashion. All their bombs succeeded in acomplishing was the complete destruction of many Palestinian towns, and moving one step further from ever having peace

the only reason the yanks did not assassinate saddam the first time around, was they feared they would turn him in to a martyr and make his cause an anti-american crusade.

saddam's successor could have been even more nuts, it is better the devil you know.

I read somewhere that that is why they fear assasinating him, as there are more whackos crazier then him next in line.

I read somewhere that that is why they fear assasinating him, as there are more whackos crazier then him next in line.

And you know who they are? there his sons.

So.. they're gonna attempt to start a democratic proper thing in Iraq, and just "coincidentally" grab a whole bunch of oil at the same time
seems like a pretty seethrough story book to me

And you know who they are? there his sons.

didn't he try to have one of them killled though?

Before Arafat pulled out of the peace process, Israel had offered a settlement which would have provided Palestine with 98-99% of what they were asking for.

In effect, Palenstine pulled away from the peace process for that remaining 1-2% of their demands!

A good site to get up to speed on the Mid-East conflict is Thomas Friedman of the NY Times. You can read his column here:

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/columns/index.html

sorry no link.

didn't he try to have one of them killled though?

no some people tried to kill him :) but failed

clinkified

except Israel & USA dont intentionally hit civilian targets.

So when Isreal launches missiles into refugee camps, they are only killing military personell? And when the USA and GB flattened and firebombed entire cities in Germany during WW2, those cities were military targets, huh?
And what about then the USA supports corrupt national leaders? The USA supported both Iran and Iraq at different times. And now they are friends with Russia. They were the `Evil Empire', remember? And what about Turkey? They slaughter Kurds by the hundreds. And the Chinese? They have `most favoured nation' status (so does most of the rest of the world, but anyways), and they kill babies during delivery.

There are so many reasons to dislike America, i'm having a hard time deciding on one.

So when Isreal launches missiles into refugee camps, they are only killing military personel?

IMO Israel's kinda lost it lately...really gone overboard. That refugee camp thing in Jenin was horrible. I think Israel and Palestine are pretty much as bad as each other.

And when the USA and GB flattened and firebombed entire cities in Germany during WW2, those cities were military targets, huh?

I thought that was pretty much what bombing consisted of in WW2. Just flying over places and letting piles and piles of bombs fall. Didn't really have the technology to pick and choose targets. And the USA has progressed beyond that now for the most part.

And what about then the USA supports corrupt national leaders? The USA supported both Iran and Iraq at different times.

Yeah...one of those "it seemed like a good idea at the time, but in hindsight..." things.

And now they are friends with Russia.

Well...Russia aren't communist anymore, are they? And they still disagree quite often.

And the Chinese? They have `most favoured nation' status (so does most of the rest of the world, but anyways), and they kill babies during delivery.

Taking on China isn't quite as easy as a lot of other countries...I can't understand why the USA is reluctant.

There are so many reasons to dislike America, i'm having a hard time deciding on one.

There are so many reasons to dislike pretty much every country. And to be honest, the USA does do a lot of good things, though they really need to change their foreign policy...it's simply not working.

as long as conscription isn't brought in I couldn't care less.


It's a shame that if this happens that many innocent people will die... but Saddam is a f***ing madman and needs to be stopped.

I really feel sorry for the other good people over there that are caught up in this :( they're not all bad people, I mean, look at suhaib... he's one of the nicest fellas I've met.



but yer, no conscription = big win

I don't think conscription will be bought in. It'd probably end up consisting mostly of air strikes, followed up by a ground assault. Look at the Gulf War...not a lot of USA/NATO casualties. And although toppling Saddam would be a fair bit harder, I think you'd have a long way to go before conscription would be needed.

I thought that was pretty much what bombing consisted of in WW2. Just flying over places and letting piles and piles of bombs fall. Didn't really have the technology to pick and choose targets. And the USA has progressed beyond that now for the most part.

The Germans started that when one of their pilots "accidentally" dropped his payload of bombs on London. Apparently this was directly against Hitler's orders not to attack London. But its a good thing they did because it allowed the RAF time to rebuild its airforce and airfields since the attacks were now focussed on the cities.

Later in the war the Americans developed precision bombing tactics, probably not to prevent civilian casualties like they claim, but probably to conserve bombs and ensure the target is definately hit.

Yeah...one of those "it seemed like a good idea at the time, but in hindsight..." things.

No its because they were serving their own interests at the time and didn't have the foresight to realise that it would bite them in the arse further down the line. Proof of this comes from the first US Green Berets in Vietnam in the late 50's. One famous Green Beret officer spent a year or so with Ho Chi Min travelling around the Vietnamese countryside and at the end reported to his superiors that they should "keep an eye on Ho Chi Min". As usual the top brass ignored this and paid the price with other people's lives later on.

Well, yeah, of course they were serving their own interests. I also think they were serving the interests of quite a few others as well at the time though. But yeah, they probably didn't care all that much about the others...just that the interests seemed to co-incide :).

As usual the top brass ignored this and paid the price

Yeah, as usual. Happens everywhere though...and to the USA (and others), they probably dealt with the situation the way they thought best at the time. Of course, now we see that they were quite silly :)

I don't really agree with what they did (and are still doing...), which is why I mentioned they need to change their foreign policy. I just thought it's a lot easier to accuse them with the aid of hindsight.

Taking on China isn't quite as easy as a lot of other countries...I can't understand why the USA is reluctant

There is one of the main issues I have with the American Government (and many Americans themselves when they get in a tizzy). They have a habit of picking on countries or groups they percieve to be weaker than themselves; Korea (pre-China), Cambodia, Cuba, Spain, most of South America, Mexico, half the countries on the Southern Mediteranian, Vietnam (although they got their arses handed to them there). For 50 years they could have made good on their threats against the USSR, but they didn't, cause they knew they simply wouldn't win (at best, both sides would both simply run out of men and meterial, call it a draw, and go and lick their wounds) and now, despite the obvious agnst with China, they prance around the edge, trying to take the high moral ground.
Don't get me wrong, i'm glad they didn't take on the USSR, cause we wouldn't be here now, and I don't think taking on China is a good idea either, mainly because she'll bite back and make the Yanks do something even more stupid than they do now. They just need to realise they aren't always right, and let other countries live by their own rules.

a lot of you guys are hypocrites, you denounce the USA when they take action, yet in other circumstances you are bitching at them to step into stiuations they didnt

draffa that whole post is a pile of steaming s***

The Germans started that when one of their pilots "accidentally" dropped his payload of bombs on London. Apparently this was directly against Hitler's orders not to attack London. But its a good thing they did because it allowed the RAF time to rebuild its airforce and airfields since the attacks were now focussed on the cities.

Hunter is right on the money there....but at that same time Hitler was stupid enough to order his bombers to continue to attack London. Mainly a problem when your commanders are all 'yes' men. The only time his commanders disagreed with him it started with a failed assassination attempt & ended with the subsequent 'suicides' of a bunch of his top commanders, including Erwin Rommel.

Mainly a problem when your commanders are all 'yes' men.

That's right. Who'd argue with Hitler? :) Even further proof of this comes from the success of Operation Mincemeat. It was a deception planned by the British to convince ze Germans that an attack would occur in Sardina when in fact they were going to attack Sicily. To cut a long story short, British Intelligence (MI5) borrowed a corpse, created an entirely new identity for the guy and put false papers on him. They then dropped it from a submarine so it would wash up on shore and be found by the Germans.

Originally the Abwher (German Intelligence) suspected it was a hoax but didn't want to disagree with Hitler's "intuition". As a result it saved many lives because the Germans weren't prepared for an assault on Sicily.

Oh and I found a couple of links on Mincemeat:

Link 1

Link 2

^BUMP^

There is one of the main issues I have with the American Government (and many Americans themselves when they get in a tizzy). They have a habit of picking on countries or groups they percieve to be weaker than themselves

Well...it makes sense. Picking fights with larger/more powerful countries is quite a stupid idea, regardless of whether the other country is right or wrong.

If a large country sees a small country doing something wrong, they're in a position to take action. If a large country sees another large/larger country doing something wrong, they might make threats and so forth...but taking action would be far too costly, for both sides. :|


And yeah, Operation Mincemeat was quite interesting. I have a book about it somewhere around here (it wasn't solely about Mincemeat, but had quite a bit on it)...was quite an interesting read.

sif sif sif sif, go watch 13 days. then tell me what war is about/over

Money... Thats all the US cares about...

If the country in question has no resources which it can leech out of them after they have been blown up by large bombs, then they wouldn't bother...
It costs FuC loads to wage war and will cost even more if a lot of US soldiers get killed or disabled by the war...
So they go for countries which they can move large spy satalellites over, i.e. the nice clear skies and semi flat desert...
They pick out all targets in a computer game type fashion, getting satalellite controlled misselles to hit easy seen targets while thier generals sit around in a lush air con room, drinking thier coffee's watching the show, saying things like "nice shot" or "ooopps.. that one strayed, oh well s*** happens"...

The US will bomb and starve the country into submission, sending the country back 30 years, killing a lot of peaple in the process, then the US will demand large payments of resources(i.e. oil) from the new government of the now s*** hole of a newly formed 3rd world counrty...
The US will even be nice and help rebuild the country, for a cost that is...
This will cripple the counrty in every way and the US will suck the counrty dry of all resources...

My question is, which counrty are they going to suck dry next?

again most of you guys are talking out of your arse...dont make sweaping generalisations, actually give examples to back your lame arguements up e.g.

If the country in question has no resources which it can leech out of them after they have been blown up by large bombs, then they wouldn't bother...

pass us the bong!

Isn't there a movie doing the foxtel encore round the last couple of weeks based on the whole mincemeat opperation. Not a bad viewing for an old talkie type Fil-lum.

The truth hurts...

that whole post is a pile of steaming s***

You're going to have to do better than that...

Picking fights with larger/more powerful countries is quite a stupid idea, regardless of whether the other country is right or wrong

You're right. It's incredably stupid. But despite the fact the UAa sees itself as the moral guardian of the world, it never does anything where it could get badly hurt.

98-99%??

Bulls***, if that was the case, then why didnt Israel just give em that measly 1 - 2 percent seeing as it was so small.

It would have been a MAJOR sticking point for the Palestinians and a major coup for the Israelis.

I think the 1% was Jerusalem....

no the main thing they didnt want to give were the Golan Heights. To do so would be inviting another war, one which they might not win.

Weren't the Golan Heights Syrian?

im pretty sure the peace process involved giving away all land that Israel had captured in previous conflicts.

most of this land was taken to remove a tactical advantage their adversaries had....assiph you would give it back

They've got nukes now. Who thinks they wouldn't use them if the fighting (full war lets assume, not this tit-for-tat s*** that's going on atm) got desperate?

Israel has had nukes since like the 70's ....someone correct me please.

being the only country with nuclear weapons keeps the peace far better then if everyone had nukes. A while back Iraq tried to produce its own nuclear weapons, but the facility was shutdown when Israeli f-16's launched a suprise attack and flattened the facility.

besides they have been in 3 wars so far...all of which were started by other nations. Israel is yet to lose, even when the attacks were launched during the biggest celebrations in the county with most of the military personnel on break.