News /
America: Take your missile base and shove it! [116]
actually when you speak of a country as an entity this represents a failure to do so.
Something you yourself do quite frequently. Pot, Kettle. Glad to meet you.
And it's not me that should feel threatened but the people who stand to become the target of aggressive u.s. foreign policy.
While it is apparent that to many such as yourself America is somehow the root of all evil, but on the other hand, it is not America threatening to "remove" entire nations whilst you turn a blind eye and attribute it (once again) to the Americans. Honestly, if you can tell me how a purely defensive system is a "threat" to anyone other than those with
offensive intentions, please do so.
If you cannot do so then I would like to further my argument that in fact it has been american activities in the last 50 years or more that should not only be called into question but have been the cause of untold deaths the world over and future american iinternational intervention ought to be viewed accordingly.
And yet, it wasn't the Americans who created your favorite nation of Israel, it was the Europeans. It wasn't the Americans colonizing the middle east and Africa, it was you British and the French. America does have her problems, but you have a bad propensity to drag out completely irrelevant accusations that have nothing at all to do with whether or not a defensive missile base would be helpful.
Spare me such drivel and i am disappointed that you'd waste my time with such a response. You show me where i'm off the mark or drop the insinuations. But frankly i grow tired of root'n toot'n folks like yourself who are simply unable or unwilling to entertain the notion that their government and military could do any wrong in the world and can't imagine themselves involved in anything wrong.
I see. Those who disagree with your tirade are "root'n-toot'n folks". This complete statement is both misguided and wrong. No one has said America hasn't/doesn't make mistakes. We do. What I want to know, is what does it have to do with the topic? nothing. Imagine if every time Britain had a good idea, I brought up atrocities from the Boer war, the Falklands, and the "Good 'ol Days of Empire", or Churchill allowing British to be bombed by German planes in WWII just to keep a secret decoder we stole a secret...Or if every time Russians had a benevolent idea I pointed out the massacres of millions under Stalin as evidence of their "goals". Hmm?
You seem to be a very intelligent man, but realize most of my posts are in response to ones (like some of yours) which seem unable to get away from "America is Evil" long enough to weigh the possibilities of what is actually on the table.
Just my opinion.
like weapons of mass destruction? support of dictators? support of terrorist organizations? go on take your pick, or shall i provide you with a wider selection?
But again what comes across is your complete failure to grasp the notion that (in fact i've had a genuine like for many americans i've met but also a dislike for many too, like people from poland, czech rep, hungary, canada, australia and the uk) a mistrust of what your leaders choose to do regarding foreign intervention must be seperated from american citizens.
While such would be an interesting discussion, this is a topic about a proposed interceptor base, not whether or not you like Americans or what we have done or you think we have done in the past. You seem very full of distrust, which isn't completely unhealthy, but it proves my point. Not everything is about how evil you think Americans are. Perhaps I am the devil incarnate. Doesn't mean interceptors are a bad idea.
Well things in america are getting closer and closer to that reality.
You on the other hand, have been there quite awhile, haven't you. It didn't protect your tubes, did it. Seems the UK government wants to license anything sharp and pointy or dangerous in the slightest. Perhaps they don't trust you. To think, many when very young used to
want a chance to be on camera, just to show friends. Now I'm sure there's footage somewhere of almost all of you folk in the UK...you should be happy!
Ah you had left those last four letters out last time. Nonetheless- it's ok for your military to be pointing missles where ever because they're old? But everyone should be afraid of the iranian military cause of something we're told they could do?
In case you missed it, we were discussing an interceptor screen designed to shoot down
ICBMS and to imply you did not realize these were the missiles being discussed when one talks of WMDs etc....well you aren't fooling anyone. US missiles are pointed where they are pointed. There are treaties controlling much of it and pretty sure they are no longer targeted anywhere specifically, but if they are on their old programs, my bet would be Russia and China, much like Russia's are still targeted at the US and China and perhaps now, Europe, if they were ever de-targeted in the first place. My point was, why get all bent out of shape for the
offer of missiles simply for the purpose of shooting down other missiles-a very specialized task, and hardly a projection of force, while your friends the Russians (and Iranians, too) are
testing very
OFFENSIVE pieces of equipment, which are also very specialized, but designed to
kill hundreds of thousands, not intercept missiles??? Turn a blind eye, if you wish.
Ok you give your own a free pass but want to see iranian civilians suffer for what their leader may or may not have said. Double standard.
Who said anything about me wanting to see Iranian civilians suffer? Not me. You are far too intelligent to be putting words in my mouth. I assure you that the ability to shoot down an Iranian (or otherwise) ICBM will not hurt one single Iranian civilian. It simply keeps their leader's options a little more limited on capabilities to attack elsewhere. Back to our Bullet resistant vest analogy, if I gave you a Kevlar vest, it would no more hurt the guy considering shooting you than it would if I bought you a beer. It simply does not relate.
And if russians or iranians were really hell bent on blowing up parts of europe then do you think they'd do it out in the open or covertly?
What would either groups have to gain by doing so in the first place?
You tell me. It isn't the evil American leaders threatening to wipe complete nations from the earth, whilst developing weapons grade plutonium and ICBMs, but call me paranoid. While Poland would get the revenue from a proposed interceptor site, the interceptors are not like PatriotII's, because ICBM's would have to be hit shortly after launch or while they were reaching space; as such, an interceptor base in Poland would not just protect Poland, but in theory all of Europe from ICBM's launched from anywhere in the nearby region and perhaps, elsewhere as well. Russia's shiny new ICBM's would be considerably less effective, perhaps even worthless against Europe, which is what, I think, has Putin all spooled up. Funny, he's still in charge, isn't he.
It doesn't make us American haters. It just means we see a different picture to the one that you paint.
Perhaps not. Your statement would be easier to swallow if most of your (as a whole, not individually) comments were not primarily pointing out your perceived faults in the U.S. In previous discussions we've been accused of everything from murdering civilians, torturing innocents, and everything else short of wishing to enslave the globe, but then you say "but we don't hate Americans". I guess it depends on how you define hate. It certainly isn't "like". I definitely don't agree with everyone, but I feel there are only a few voices here asking the questions like "where's your proof" or "how do you know". Not every topic, even about US offers of interceptors, is about whether Americans are involved in seedy organizations or if we have corrupt politicians. Show me one nation that isn't/doesn't. It is your apparent inability to see the difference that leads to my deduction that you hate. If all my posts were about horrors British committed in the Boer war, or the Falklands, or Sierra Leone or in the former Yugoslavia, regardless of whether they really pertained to the topic or whether they had been proven beyond a simple suspicion, you could just as easily make the same claims about me. I will not be making such accusations as a whole, simply because, by and large, the UK has been one of our greatest allies and have been in some of the same @#!tholes we have been, right there alongside us.
I imagin that they will dish the credibility of my source.
No need. Even without looking at the article, there is no secret we and quite a few others provided weapons and funding to Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. (for the uninitiated, Iraq was the country that had *not* taken hostages, declared the USA the "Great Satan" and called for Infidel blood...]Some things, even, that today would be frowned heavily upon. Saddam was no fool, and he got plenty of supplies from quite a few places that you might be surprised if you knew. Whether it is illegal to provide supplies to a nation fighting one's sworn enemy, I seriously doubt it, as it's the way foreign policy has been done by almost every great nation since the beginning of time. The Babylonians, Greeks, Romans-all of them did it as did the British Empire, we Americans, and the Soviets. IMHO there is nothing wrong with this. America supplied England with rifles, submachine guns, fighter planes, and even ships prior to entering WWII, rather than see her completely decimated. There was a policy and will here of "hands off" and let Europe finish killing each other, again....and had the Japanese not blundered and bombed Pearl Harbor and Germany honored it's treaties (and torpedoed some ships) perhaps the US would have NEVER entered WWII. Or the war would still be going. Who knows.
......when the reallity is JohnP that the only country in the world that has waged nuclear war is the good old US of A. You go on and on about the "threat" of Iran when the reallity is JohnP that the ONLY war that Iran has EVER been involved in was against the AMERICAN backed Iraqi's. It's not the Iranian government that has been involved in constant military action all over the world since the 1950's that has resulted in the deaths of millions of people. That's your country, the US.
There you go again pointing the finger at us for WWII. A simple reminder, the US wasn't the only nation with an A-bomb program, just the only ones to successfully use one in combat. It ended the war, at any rate. Perhaps we should ask the citizens who survived your bombing of Dresden how they feel about THAT particular plan? WWII was a total war, not some controlled conflict such as we have in modern times. Bring it up if you wish, but remember America isn't the only nation to have made decisions that cost lives. Also notice that many of the military actions you accuse us of...also involve your own forces. Not only that, in most cases they were in
response to not the
cause of those millions of deaths you refer to. Communist forces pouring into Korea killing all who disagree in their path, to the point arriving allied troops initially thought there were stacks of cord wood floating in the sea-it was executed civilians, tied together in bundles...anyway, those were killed by the Communist forces, not Americans. Armed Forces types are killed and kill in war. That's our lot. Civilians are completely different, on the other hand and at least WRT American forces, civilian deaths are avoided if at all possible in spite of what rumors you may have heard. There is the movies, then there are editorial commentaries, then there is the truth. Often none of these will be the same. Personal opinion, were we able I feel we should have fought the Communists even more than we did. Who says Stalin gets E. Germany or Poland or Czech Republic, after all? IMHO it should have been a referendum to the citizens, but that is the dirty nature of politics when one has unfortunate allies in order to win.
By the way, the Military Industrial Complex that the video refers to isn't opinion or a conspiracy theory, it's a fact. Eisenhower warned against it, and so did Kennedy, just before they blew his head off.
While it is only a theory that "they blew his head off" there really is a military industrial complex, but I believe it was warned against for different reasons. It seems that top generals/admirals etc. either seek to go into politics or search for employment after the military. These same generals are in a position should they choose, to use their pull in support, perhaps unfairly, of one contractor over another in hopes of employment in some high level at that contractor at a later date. It makes for billion dollar guided superweapons, which we are all told we need to prevent "collateral damage" to the wrong house, for instance, when in the old days we simply taught troops to *aim* the weapon they already have. Just an example. The US isn't the only nation that suffers from this, either, when entire contracts are given to one company over another, jobs and incomes are on the line, and some of the contractors tend to play dirty.
Americans trying to buy the world again, how sad!!
Not really in this case. Poland made requests for help in exchange for sticking its neck on the line and it is only fair they get it, IMHO.
Now, sure we Americans have issues to clean up at home, but this thread wasn't about that.
Seanus, you've put a good thought in my head. It's been fun ladies and gentlemen, now I'm off to have one myself.
John P.
