In Case Anyone Doubts who Rules the Seas~

[jonathan]

This is a great commercial, I've posted it before
but it just has an attitude that says .....

"The Golden Age of American military power"!

America's Navy - 100%
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEtZ5r0CIYI


s

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 17/11/2012 02:35, jonathan ha scritto:
>
> This is a great commercial, I've posted it before
> but it just has an attitude that says .....
>
> "The Golden Age of American military power"!

for me, the golden age of USN was between 1944 and mid-to-late 50s:
Fleet carriers by dozens, more than enough b*, slow and fast, cruisers
by scores, submarines and destroyers by hundreds, small combatants
around 1000, and auxiliary, transporst & landing ships by thousands....

best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[jonathan]

"dott.Piergiorgio" <chied...@ask.me> wrote in message
news:22Sps.7578$5b....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...

It was amazing how many ships the US had built by
the end of ww2. When I look at some of the fleets
we used at Leyte Gulf or D-day it's hard to imagine
seeing those kind of numbers ever again.

I just looked up the battle of Leyte Gulf, maybe the
largest naval battle ever, and I see the US had at that
battle 8 fleet carriers, 26 light carriers, 12 battleships
24 cruisers, and 141 destroyers, plus some 1500
planes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf#The_battle


But today we're the only super power. And the post 9/11
build-up, technology binge, and almost 20 years in an
almost constant state of war, and right now I think the
US military has never been more dominant, well-trained
and equipped. Not to mention very well motivated
by 9/11 and being all volunteer .

Since the Wall Fell, we haven't been under the threat
of a nuclear war, we can use our conventional forces
without that fear for the ...first time, so the US military
can be much more assertive than ever before.

No more proxy wars against russia and china, which
can be devastating to the nations the super powers
were fighting over. The US can now ....do the right thing
and go directly after the worst dictator of the day.

Like the commercial says ..."A global force for good".

That's the world I want to live in.



s

[Bill]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:11:53 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

So how come Afghanistan is still a misogynist Hell hole with US
soldiers dying just about every day?

[Weatherlawyer]

On Nov 18, 1:44 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So how come Afghanistan is still a misogynist Hell hole with US
> soldiers dying just about every day?

Because the soldiers are USAniis.

That means badly trained and overarmed and led by racists.

[Dean Markley]

"USAniis"? Are you too illiterate to type American?

[Malcom "Mal" Reynolds]

In article <abdcfe7f-6ea2-4d87...@googlegroups.com>,

Dean Markley <dama...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "USAniis"? Are you too illiterate to type American?

he's too illiterate to have a cogent thought

[David E. Powell]

+1 to that.

Especially when the correct answer is, they are fighting under very strict rules of engagement, and if he wants to see racism he could try checking some of the ways the west and Israel get portrayed around the world.

[jonathan]

"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ogpha8llbl8usn96q...@4ax.com...

Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Here's a picture of how the Soviets left Kabul
and the effects of their 'plan' for Afghanistan

Kabul 1993
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kabul_during_civial_war_of_fundamentalists_1993.jpg

And here's how American troops are leaving
Afghanistan.

Video tour of Kabul 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RNGKiddfbg

Here's a very touching little video from today's Kabul,
ya think this video would have been possible
ten years ago? Nice song too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93eSM9mWkkk

Like I've said a hundred times, there's an American
in everyone just waiting to get out~



s

[Bill]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 20:35:17 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ogpha8llbl8usn96q...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:11:53 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Like the commercial says ..."A global force for good".
>>>
>>>That's the world I want to live in.
>>
>
>> So how come Afghanistan is still a misogynist Hell hole with US
>> soldiers dying just about every day?
>
>
>Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
>
>Here's a picture of how the Soviets left Kabul
>and the effects of their 'plan' for Afghanistan
>

The reality is that while the Soviet Union ruled in Afghanistan
women's education was far in advance of what it is now.

The veil had been outlawed and women were entering public life.

[Keith W]

jonathan wrote:
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ogpha8llbl8usn96q...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:11:53 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Like the commercial says ..."A global force for good".
>>>
>>> That's the world I want to live in.
>>
>
>> So how come Afghanistan is still a misogynist Hell hole with US
>> soldiers dying just about every day?
>
>
> Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
>
> Here's a picture of how the Soviets left Kabul
> and the effects of their 'plan' for Afghanistan
>
> Kabul 1993
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kabul_during_civial_war_of_fundamentalists_1993.jpg
>

Except for the minor fact that the Soviets left in 1989
under the terms of the 1988 Geneva accords under which
Pakistan and the Afghan government agreed to a treaty
of non intervention and non-interference in each others
internal affairs.

This was completely ignored by the Pakistani government
that organized, armed and backed the forces of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar
which invaded Afghanistan. That army is the one that captured
Kabul in 1992 devastating the city and committing multiple
atrocities on the population.

> And here's how American troops are leaving
> Afghanistan.
>
> Video tour of Kabul 2012
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RNGKiddfbg
>

The Soviets also left Kabul peacefully and in charge
was a Soviet backed government which lasted
for another 3 years.

> Here's a very touching little video from today's Kabul,
> ya think this video would have been possible

Well yes, they showed just such film at the time of the
Soviet withdrawal. Kabul will once again become
the target for the Taliban after western withdrawal
and as the centre of opposition to extermist Islamic
rule will doubtless pay the price again.

Keith

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 18/11/2012 17:29, Dean Markley ha scritto:
> "USAniis"? Are you too illiterate to type American?

I tink he mean "USAian, a derogatory term for US citizens (whose seems
to not have a proper English demonym, in Italian is "statunitense")

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio

[jonathan]

"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cjnqs.550896$vW7.3...@fx19.am4...

> jonathan wrote:
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ogpha8llbl8usn96q...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:11:53 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Like the commercial says ..."A global force for good".
>>>>
>>>> That's the world I want to live in.
>>>
>>
>>> So how come Afghanistan is still a misogynist Hell hole with US
>>> soldiers dying just about every day?
>>
>>
>> Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
>>
>> Here's a picture of how the Soviets left Kabul
>> and the effects of their 'plan' for Afghanistan
>>
>> Kabul 1993
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kabul_during_civial_war_of_fundamentalists_1993.jpg
>>
>
> Except for the minor fact that the Soviets left in 1989
> under the terms of the 1988 Geneva accords under which
> Pakistan and the Afghan government agreed to a treaty
> of non intervention and non-interference in each others
> internal affairs.

When the Soviets left, the Afghan government was in
shambles and most gave it months. And as soon
as the Wall Fell the Soviets stopped sending aid
and it was easily over run. The difference between
then and now is night and day.

>
> This was completely ignored by the Pakistani government
> that organized, armed and backed the forces of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar
> which invaded Afghanistan. That army is the one that captured
> Kabul in 1992 devastating the city and committing multiple
> atrocities on the population.

Your peace loving democratic Soviets killed between
a half million and two million Afghans before they fled.
That was the atrocity. The last one you cite was one
atrocity among a long list.

>
>> And here's how American troops are leaving
>> Afghanistan.
>>
>> Video tour of Kabul 2012
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RNGKiddfbg
>>
>
> The Soviets also left Kabul peacefully and in charge
> was a Soviet backed government which lasted
> for another 3 years.

Did you look at the Video tour of Kabul I posted?
All of it? The last minute or two might surprise you.
How can you possibly compare Kabul 1989
to now with a straight face?

>
>> Here's a very touching little video from today's Kabul,
>> ya think this video would have been possible
>
> Well yes, they showed just such film at the time of the
> Soviet withdrawal.

You're making that up, show me please?

> Kabul will once again become
> the target for the Taliban after western withdrawal
> and as the centre of opposition to extermist Islamic
> rule will doubtless pay the price again.

That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
the level of extremism as Afghanistan.



>
> Keith
>

[jonathan]

"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:d35ja8palbg1p5j89...@4ax.com...

Outlawing the veil must have endeared the Afghans to the Soviets
almost as much as the million or so Afghans they killed.

If is was so nice in Afghanistan, why did 5 to 10 million Afghans
become refugees and flee to Pakistan and Iran? That's out
of a country of 30 million. Why did a quarter of the nation flee
under the Soviets?

[Bill]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:39:23 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>

Because the Soviets were complete and utter bastards.

They were still better than the Taliban.

The fact remains that under the Soviets the women of Afghanistan were
better off than they are now.

[Bill]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:28:36 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message

>> Kabul will once again become
>> the target for the Taliban after western withdrawal
>> and as the centre of opposition to extermist Islamic
>> rule will doubtless pay the price again.
>
>
>That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>the level of extremism as Afghanistan.

Iraq is not, and has never been, a center of fundamentalism.

Well, not until the US led invasion anyway...

Saddam's Iraq was the most highly educated and least misogynistic Arab
state in West Asia and North Africa, except possibly for Egypt.

Both now look likely to fall into the hands of the fanatics.

[Keith W]

jonathan wrote:
> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:cjnqs.550896$vW7.3...@fx19.am4...
>> jonathan wrote:
>>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ogpha8llbl8usn96q...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:11:53 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Like the commercial says ..."A global force for good".
>>>>>
>>>>> That's the world I want to live in.
>>>>
>>>
>>>> So how come Afghanistan is still a misogynist Hell hole with US
>>>> soldiers dying just about every day?
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, a picture is worth a thousand words.
>>>
>>> Here's a picture of how the Soviets left Kabul
>>> and the effects of their 'plan' for Afghanistan
>>>
>>> Kabul 1993
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kabul_during_civial_war_of_fundamentalists_1993.jpg
>>>
>>
>> Except for the minor fact that the Soviets left in 1989
>> under the terms of the 1988 Geneva accords under which
>> Pakistan and the Afghan government agreed to a treaty
>> of non intervention and non-interference in each others
>> internal affairs.
>
>
> When the Soviets left, the Afghan government was in
> shambles and most gave it months.

It lasted years

> And as soon
> as the Wall Fell the Soviets stopped sending aid
> and it was easily over run.

Well no the wall fell 3 years before Kabul was captured
and the Russian post communist government under Yeltsin
supplied aid for quite some time.

> The difference between
> then and now is night and day.
>

Lets see we have two locally unpopular regimes
propped up by foreign aid and troops.

Looks pretty similar to me. Threaten to withdraw US troops
and watch Karzi howl.

>
>
>>
>> This was completely ignored by the Pakistani government
>> that organized, armed and backed the forces of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar
>> which invaded Afghanistan. That army is the one that captured
>> Kabul in 1992 devastating the city and committing multiple
>> atrocities on the population.
>
>
> Your peace loving democratic Soviets killed between
> a half million and two million Afghans before they fled.
> That was the atrocity. The last one you cite was one
> atrocity among a long list.
>

Indeed it was

>
>
>>
>>> And here's how American troops are leaving
>>> Afghanistan.
>>>
>>> Video tour of Kabul 2012
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RNGKiddfbg
>>>
>>
>> The Soviets also left Kabul peacefully and in charge
>> was a Soviet backed government which lasted
>> for another 3 years.
>
>
> Did you look at the Video tour of Kabul I posted?
> All of it? The last minute or two might surprise you.
> How can you possibly compare Kabul 1989
> to now with a straight face?
>
>

Because I recall the TV covereage at the time.

>
>>
>>> Here's a very touching little video from today's Kabul,
>>> ya think this video would have been possible
>>
>> Well yes, they showed just such film at the time of the
>> Soviet withdrawal.
>
>
> You're making that up, show me please?
>

Google is your friend

>
>> Kabul will once again become
>> the target for the Taliban after western withdrawal
>> and as the centre of opposition to extermist Islamic
>> rule will doubtless pay the price again.
>
>
> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>

You are dead wrong about the extremism, Iraq is a
much more mixed society with Shia, Sunni, Kurdish and
Christian communities.

Keith

[David E. Powell]

If the US abandons Afghanistan (As they did after the 1980s war ended, losing a chance to help stabilize the place some) without any ocntacts or support, it will be a disaster that will eventually blow back on the west again.

Basically if we do the Afghans who are on our side like the South Vietnamese, it won't just be Afghanistan falling, they will come back and hit us because we will be showing that we'll retreat even after 9/11.

This is why keeping the end on training, support (especially air support) and possible otehr stuff like private contractors and status of forces agreements are key.

Also use of soft power and investment deals which the Chinese have done to great effect there and for some reason the US has been averse to using.

[Bill]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 06:54:39 -0800 (PST), "David E. Powell"
<David_Po...@msn.com> wrote:

>Also use of soft power and investment deals which the Chinese have done to great effect there and for some reason the US has been averse to using.

What's also interesting is the vast investment being made by India
into Afghan industrial development, specifically steel making, coupled
with similar investment into Iran but steered towards infrastructure
development, especially port development.

Is it just India being busy alienating Pakistani possible allies or is
something more economically significant going on?

[Andrew Swallow]

Afghanistan may have fewer regulations than India.

Bulk raw materials are better processed near the mine because they are
expensive to transport.

Andrew Swallow

[Bill]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 15:15:53 +0000, Andrew Swallow
<am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote:

>On 20/11/2012 15:10, Bill wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 06:54:39 -0800 (PST), "David E. Powell"
>> <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Also use of soft power and investment deals which the Chinese have done to great effect there and for some reason the US has been averse to using.
>>
>> What's also interesting is the vast investment being made by India
>> into Afghan industrial development, specifically steel making, coupled
>> with similar investment into Iran but steered towards infrastructure
>> development, especially port development.
>>
>> Is it just India being busy alienating Pakistani possible allies or is
>> something more economically significant going on?
>>
>
>Afghanistan may have fewer regulations than India.

Almost certainly.

>Bulk raw materials are better processed near the mine because they are
>expensive to transport.

The level of investment seems to be in $Billions.

You could build a railway for much less.

Don't forget Afghanistan is land locked and any export route is via
either Pakistan (unlikely for Indian made steel) or Iran...

Oh look, a brand new (Indian paid for and built) port on Iran's
Arabian Sea coast...

[Alistair Gunn]

Bill twisted the electrons to say:

> Is it just India being busy alienating Pakistani possible allies or is
> something more economically significant going on?

A little from collumn a, a little from column b?

"Sir! I have a plan which should make us a profit, increase our
influence on the world-stage and incidentally annoy Pakistan!"
"Hmm ... A plan with no flaws, tell me more!"
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

[Bill]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 18:18:55 +0000 (UTC), Alistair Gunn
<palmer...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Bill twisted the electrons to say:
>> Is it just India being busy alienating Pakistani possible allies or is
>> something more economically significant going on?
>
>A little from collumn a, a little from column b?
>
>"Sir! I have a plan which should make us a profit, increase our
>influence on the world-stage and incidentally annoy Pakistan!"
>"Hmm ... A plan with no flaws, tell me more!"

By Jove, I think he's got it...

[Rich Johnson]

On Nov 20, 3:04 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 18:18:55 +0000 (UTC), Alistair Gunn
>

> <palmerspe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Bill twisted the electrons to say:
> >> Is it just India being busy alienating Pakistani possible allies or is
> >> something more economically significant going on?
>
> >A little from collumn a, a little from column b?
>
> >"Sir!  I have a plan which should make us a profit, increase our
> >influence on the world-stage and incidentally annoy Pakistan!"
> >"Hmm ...  A plan with no flaws, tell me more!"
>
> By Jove,  I think he's got it...

It sounds as if they learnt well from Perfidious Albion

[jonathan]

"David E. Powell" <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:e97e8a9f-49b5-4d70...@googlegroups.com...

> This is why keeping the end on training, support

> (especially air support) and possible other stuff like

> private contractors and status of forces agreements are key.

I think the US is currently commited to another five
years of substantial aid to the Afghan govt. And several
other nations have also pledged assistance.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/08/us-afghanistan-clinton-idUSBRE86601120120708


But I think another important part of success is if
the people want the govt to succeed. Look at the
astonishing events happening today, now that many
of the Middle Eastern leaders are more accountable
to the people, they're falling all over themselves
to support Hamas. It may seem democracy is working
against our side, and helping the extremists, but a
terrorist group like Hamas can't last long in a real
democracy, where the rule of law is enforced.

We have to have faith in the democratic process
in the long run, even if it turns against us in the
short term.

And these Islamic politicians are also trying to play
peacemaker and be the hero, for the votes. Look
at Morsi.


s

[Bill]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:43:25 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"David E. Powell" <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:e97e8a9f-49b5-4d70...@googlegroups.com...
>
>> This is why keeping the end on training, support
>> (especially air support) and possible other stuff like
>> private contractors and status of forces agreements are key.
>
>
>I think the US is currently commited to another five
>years of substantial aid to the Afghan govt. And several
>other nations have also pledged assistance.
>http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/08/us-afghanistan-clinton-idUSBRE86601120120708

That isn't going to be enough...

>But I think another important part of success is if
>the people want the govt to succeed.

Well, those who know about it anyway.

They're shutting schools...

Look at the
>astonishing events happening today, now that many
>of the Middle Eastern leaders are more accountable
>to the people, they're falling all over themselves
>to support Hamas.

Well, not yet...

It may seem democracy is working
>against our side, and helping the extremists, but a
>terrorist group like Hamas can't last long in a real
>democracy, where the rule of law is enforced.

Ah yes, the rule of law...

Unfortunately the US isn't obeying it at Guantanamo Bay so the despots
of the world feel somehow vindicated...

>We have to have faith in the democratic process
>in the long run, even if it turns against us in the
>short term.

Except for people in the US concentration camp on Cuba...

Look, idiot, if I know the degenerate Gulf despots know...

>And these Islamic politicians are also trying to play
>peacemaker and be the hero, for the votes. Look
>at Morsi.

Which ones exactly?

The one currently brokering a deeply unpopular cease fire or the ones
hanging on to their despotic powers by their fingernails?

[jonathan]

"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:erkla8lf969vi7e9g...@4ax.com...

You are seriously deluded.

[Bill]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:55:20 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Oh no I'm bloody not son.

[jonathan]

"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message

news:doHqs.538759$Rc7.3...@fx04.am4...

> jonathan wrote:

>>
>> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>>
>
> You are dead wrong about the extremism, Iraq is a
> much more mixed society with Shia, Sunni, Kurdish and
> Christian communities.

Extremists and terrorists of all stripes flooded into Iraq
from every corner of the world during the US occupation.
We took on the worst the terrorist world had to offer
and we beat them in a war of attrition.

Something no one thought was possible.

Victory is a successful Iraq democracy. So far so good,
they're making it on their own, and the oil wealth to come
should make Iraq an example and force...for democracy
in the region.

It's Syria and Iran that are holding the region back.


>
> Keith
>

[Bill]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 21:08:29 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:doHqs.538759$Rc7.3...@fx04.am4...
>> jonathan wrote:
>
>>>
>>> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>>> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>>>
>>
>> You are dead wrong about the extremism, Iraq is a
>> much more mixed society with Shia, Sunni, Kurdish and
>> Christian communities.
>
>
>Extremists and terrorists of all stripes flooded into Iraq
>from every corner of the world during the US occupation.
>We took on the worst the terrorist world had to offer
>and we beat them in a war of attrition.

Well no.

It seems the really nasty ones stayed in Afghanistan.

>Something no one thought was possible.

Nobody ever actually doubted the ability of the US armed forces to
pacify Iraq.

What people doubt is their ability to impose a long term democratic
solution.

Now at the time I applauded the sentiments used by President Bush, and
any US government unseating dictators has to be a good thing, but the
implementation of the 'nation building' programme that followed was
shocking in its waste and corruption.

>Victory is a successful Iraq democracy.

True.

So far so good,
>they're making it on their own, and the oil wealth to come
>should make Iraq an example and force...for democracy
>in the region.

I do so hope so, however the signs are not good...

>It's Syria and Iran that are holding the region back.

No.

It's your allies the Saudis and their degenerate friends running the
Gulf despotisms who are the major backwards looking tyrannies.

They're actually worse than the Ba'athists currently in trouble.

But hey, they're on your side...

[Keith W]

jonathan wrote:
> "David E. Powell" <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:e97e8a9f-49b5-4d70...@googlegroups.com...
>
>> This is why keeping the end on training, support
>> (especially air support) and possible other stuff like
>> private contractors and status of forces agreements are key.
>
>
> I think the US is currently commited to another five
> years of substantial aid to the Afghan govt. And several
> other nations have also pledged assistance.
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/08/us-afghanistan-clinton-idUSBRE86601120120708
>

They were pledged to support South Vietnam after US troops
pulled out. In reality Congress voted through the Case-Church
amendment which made that impossible, the rest is history.

Keith

[Keith W]

jonathan wrote:
> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:doHqs.538759$Rc7.3...@fx04.am4...
>> jonathan wrote:
>
>>>
>>> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>>> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>>>
>>
>> You are dead wrong about the extremism, Iraq is a
>> much more mixed society with Shia, Sunni, Kurdish and
>> Christian communities.
>
>
> Extremists and terrorists of all stripes flooded into Iraq
> from every corner of the world during the US occupation.
> We took on the worst the terrorist world had to offer
> and we beat them in a war of attrition.
>

Afghanistan has been swallowing foreign armies since
the time of Alexander the Great, it has always been
a far wilder and more difficult proposition than Iraq,

> Something no one thought was possible.
>
> Victory is a successful Iraq democracy. So far so good,
> they're making it on their own, and the oil wealth to come
> should make Iraq an example and force...for democracy
> in the region.
>

Democracy in Iraq is a delicate flower at best,

> It's Syria and Iran that are holding the region back.
>

The West crushed democracy in Iran in 1953, the mess
there is one of our own making and as for Syria when
a new democratic regime arose in Syria in 1945 it
was France that bombed Damascus and tried to arrest
the new leadership. The military coup that overthrew
the Syrian elected government in 1949 was, like the one
in Iran sponsored by the CIA who thought both regimes
too socialist. The civil war this brought about in Syria
lasted until 1956 when the winners decided that the
USSR was a better partner than the west.

The lessons learned by the Arabs and Persians was that the
West is only in favour of democracy in the middle east
if it does what its told.

Keith

[Arved Sandstrom]

On 11/21/2012 05:02 AM, Keith W wrote:
> jonathan wrote:

[ SNIP ]

>> It's Syria and Iran that are holding the region back.
>>
>
> The West crushed democracy in Iran in 1953, the mess
> there is one of our own making and as for Syria when
> a new democratic regime arose in Syria in 1945 it
> was France that bombed Damascus and tried to arrest
> the new leadership. The military coup that overthrew
> the Syrian elected government in 1949 was, like the one
> in Iran sponsored by the CIA who thought both regimes
> too socialist. The civil war this brought about in Syria
> lasted until 1956 when the winners decided that the
> USSR was a better partner than the west.
>
> The lessons learned by the Arabs and Persians was that the
> West is only in favour of democracy in the middle east
> if it does what its told.
>
> Keith

Go easy on the facts, Keith, it's probably a bitter pill for the
youngster to swallow. Wait until he reads up on the history of US
intervention in the Caribbean, Central and South America - say in just
the 20th century, let alone before that.

Come to think of it I'd also be interested in hearing what perspective
he's got on modern Chinese history say from 1900 on, with particular
attention drawn to US politics wrt China in the 1940's and 1950's. I've
got a gut feeling he's an original China Lobby kind of guy.

AHS

[Andrew Swallow]

On 21/11/2012 02:22, Bill wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 21:08:29 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>

{snip}

>
>> It's Syria and Iran that are holding the region back.
>
> No.
>
> It's your allies the Saudis and their degenerate friends running the
> Gulf despotisms who are the major backwards looking tyrannies.
>
> They're actually worse than the Ba'athists currently in trouble.
>
> But hey, they're on your side...
>

Currently.

One enemy at a time.

Andrew Swallow

[Andrew Swallow]

The same applies to dictators in the Middle East.

Andrew Swallow

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

Yes, we kill people to:
1. control their oil (else no SUVs or iPads for us)
2. prop up the Jewish religion

Democracy has nothing to do with it.
;-)

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

While I don't always agree with your posts (without disrespecting your
point of view), I think in this case I am in 100% agreement.

--
Gernot Hassenpflug

[jonathan]

"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message

news:HM0rs.957521$it2.7...@fx22.am4...

> jonathan wrote:
>> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:doHqs.538759$Rc7.3...@fx04.am4...
>>> jonathan wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>>>> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are dead wrong about the extremism, Iraq is a
>>> much more mixed society with Shia, Sunni, Kurdish and
>>> Christian communities.
>>
>>
>> Extremists and terrorists of all stripes flooded into Iraq
>> from every corner of the world during the US occupation.
>> We took on the worst the terrorist world had to offer
>> and we beat them in a war of attrition.
>>
>
> Afghanistan has been swallowing foreign armies since
> the time of Alexander the Great, it has always been
> a far wilder and more difficult proposition than Iraq,
>
>
>> Something no one thought was possible.
>>
>> Victory is a successful Iraq democracy. So far so good,
>> they're making it on their own, and the oil wealth to come
>> should make Iraq an example and force...for democracy
>> in the region.
>>
>
> Democracy in Iraq is a delicate flower at best,
>
>> It's Syria and Iran that are holding the region back.
>>
>
> The West crushed democracy in Iran in 1953,

I don't care much about the past, it's the future
that matters. You can argue all day over who
started what, look at Israel and the Palestinians?
Who fired first and who fired in retaliation?
You can't tell anymore.

Which is what this cease fire is all about, Israel
is going to show the world which side is is in
the wrong once Hamas is the first to break the
cease fire. They will, whenever it serves Iran's
interests, they'll open up again. Probably just
before Israel or the US finally decides to
take out the Iranian nuclear sites.

And Iran's arming Gaza with missiles that can
reach Tel Aviv only shows the world why Israel
and the US are so concerned about Iranian nukes.

the mess
> there is one of our own making and as for Syria when
> a new democratic regime arose in Syria in 1945 it
> was France that bombed Damascus and tried to arrest
> the new leadership. The military coup that overthrew
> the Syrian elected government in 1949 was, like the one
> in Iran sponsored by the CIA who thought both regimes
> too socialist. The civil war this brought about in Syria
> lasted until 1956 when the winners decided that the
> USSR was a better partner than the west.
>
> The lessons learned by the Arabs and Persians was that the
> West is only in favour of democracy in the middle east
> if it does what its told.
>

And President Obama and Hillary Clinton still think
in 1950 terms? Look at what happened with the
cease fire, it was the new democratic leader in
Egypt that played a crucial role with negotiating
with Hamas. And don't forget Morsy has strongly
denounced Assad and is calling for more help for
the Syrian rebels.

Democracy is the solution.


> Keith
>

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

jonathan wrote:
>
> Which is what this cease fire is all about, Israel
> is going to show the world which side is is in
> the wrong once Hamas is the first to break the
> cease fire. They will,

As long as your only news is from the Jewish Israel side then you
will always hear that the non-Jews are at fault.

It's a propaganda setup...always has been.
;-)

[jonathan]

"Arved Sandstrom" <asand...@eastlink.ca> wrote in message
news:e32rs.8958$Sv5....@newsfe05.iad...

And if I were to pick and choose from the illustrious European
history with the third world ? I think my anecdotes
would outnumber yours ten to one. But, of course, all that
is just meaningless pissing into the wind when it comes
to deciding right and wrong decisions today and
for the future.

And if the Middle East were so angry and distrustful of
America, then why do they gladly host so many
of our military bases?

Look at the map, anyone that doesn't think Iran is next
to fall to democracy is dreaming. It's only a matter
of time, and sooner is always better.
http://antiwar.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/1.-us-bases-in-the-middle-east-a.jpg










>
> AHS
>

[jonathan]

"Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." <dr...@coldine.edu> wrote in message
news:cu6dndwPBPT21jDN...@supernews.com...

> Yes, we kill people to:
> 1. control their oil (else no SUVs or iPads for us)
> 2. prop up the Jewish religion
>
> Democracy has nothing to do with it.
> ;-)

People always dismiss our policy as just
based on oil. But as the world oil market goes
so goes the world economy. Protecting
the world economy from sociopathic dictators
is maybe the most justifiable reason for war
around, aside from humanitarian problems.

And the long term solution to protecting the
world oil market and economy is the spread
of democracy.

[Keith W]

You may not care but the people who live there do.

> Which is what this cease fire is all about, Israel
> is going to show the world which side is is in
> the wrong once Hamas is the first to break the
> cease fire. They will, whenever it serves Iran's
> interests, they'll open up again. Probably just
> before Israel or the US finally decides to
> take out the Iranian nuclear sites.
>
> And Iran's arming Gaza with missiles that can
> reach Tel Aviv only shows the world why Israel
> and the US are so concerned about Iranian nukes.
>

And makes them heros to much of the Muslim world,

>
> the mess
>> there is one of our own making and as for Syria when
>> a new democratic regime arose in Syria in 1945 it
>> was France that bombed Damascus and tried to arrest
>> the new leadership. The military coup that overthrew
>> the Syrian elected government in 1949 was, like the one
>> in Iran sponsored by the CIA who thought both regimes
>> too socialist. The civil war this brought about in Syria
>> lasted until 1956 when the winners decided that the
>> USSR was a better partner than the west.
>>
>> The lessons learned by the Arabs and Persians was that the
>> West is only in favour of democracy in the middle east
>> if it does what its told.
>>
>
> And President Obama and Hillary Clinton still think
> in 1950 terms?

To the people of the middle east the answer is yes.

They have signally failed to help the Syrians, continue
to support the repressive Saudi regime and provide
support to the government of Bahrain which bloodily
repressed the rebellion there. But then the USA needs
Saudi oil and the naval base in Bahrain.

> Look at what happened with the
> cease fire, it was the new democratic leader in
> Egypt that played a crucial role with negotiating
> with Hamas.

And a bigger role in turning a blind eye to the smuggling
in of Iranian missiles to Gaza through tunnels from Egypt.

> And don't forget Morsy has strongly
> denounced Assad and is calling for more help for
> the Syrian rebels.
>
> Democracy is the solution.
>

Tell that to the State Department.

Keith

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

jonathan wrote:
>
> I don't care much about the past, it's the future
> that matters.
>

> Democracy is the solution.

I too favor democracy in Israel, but you cannot have democracy in
a religious government...the non-Jews are 2nd class citizens.
A *real* democracy is what the non-Jews originally proposed to the U.N.
All talk of democracy (by you, the Jews, the non-Jews) is a *ruse*.

The resulting decades of war was very predictable...and avoidable.

Until you understand the Jewish objective of "re-claiming" all the land
that they say G-d gave to them, then you will never understand the
very predictable future...now unavoidable.
;-)

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

jonathan wrote:

> "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." <dr...@coldine.edu> wrote in message
> news:cu6dndwPBPT21jDN...@supernews.com...
>
>
>>Yes, we kill people to:
>> 1. control their oil (else no SUVs or iPads for us)
>> 2. prop up the Jewish religion
>>
>>Democracy has nothing to do with it.
>>;-)
>
>
>
> People always dismiss our policy as just
> based on oil.

No...as I said...also to prop up the Jewish religion...Jewish Israel.

Take away either #1 or #2 and the U.S. would not be there.

> But as the world oil market goes
> so goes the world economy. Protecting
> the world economy from sociopathic dictators
> is maybe the most justifiable reason for war
> around,

I say we should not be killing vast numbers of people just so we
can have luxury items like SUVs and iPads. There are alternatives
to war.

What's so hard about understanding that?

> And the long term solution to protecting the
> world oil market and economy is the spread
> of democracy.

I say we should not be "spreading democracy" by starting wars
and killing vast numbers of people. There are alternatives to war.

What's so hard about understanding that?

Your solution to most anything is war...very naive...10th grader reasoning.
;-)

[David E. Powell]

Morsi is now able to join Hamas in what they usually do after declaring a cease fire, which is invariably done when they are running short on ammo and getting bombed hard by the Israelis: Declare victory.

Note also that the word after the deal was announced was that the deal had been agreed on about 24 hours before. Time was taken to allow the U.S. Secretary of state time to arrive and finalize it. It was during that window that Hamas set off the bus bomb in Tel Aviv. There were also several Palestinian rockets fired after the "cease fire" was announced. What are the odds regular fire will begin again as soon as Hamas can get a new supply of rockets?

Also, who controls the non-Israeli border with Gaza, where such supplies would have to pass to get into Gaza? Egypt. This is going to be interesting, though I have a few predictions. Also the border passage is one part of the journey for many of the rockets, as they originally come from Iran.

If some think that Morsi being involved is all about peace I'm not seeing it really.

As for the two state solution for many reasons it is now basically done as a concept.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/11/20/palestine-is-dead--prepare-for-3-state-solution

<http://www.torontosun.com/2012/11/20/palestine-is-dead--prepare-for-3-state-solution>

I wonder how long it will take the things mentioned in that column to be noted in the diplomatic community. Basically the West Bank and Gaza now have separate policy n just about everything & separate governments. Not really a "Two state solution" when Israel is the third.

Of course, a Palestinian State in Gaza that only exists as a launch pad for rockets and which doesn't want any Israel, period isn't really a starter as far as a peaceful long term answer either.

[Bill]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 06:07:09 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>I don't care much about the past,

We noticed.

>Which is what this cease fire is all about, Israel
>is going to show the world which side is is in
>the wrong once Hamas is the first to break the
>cease fire.

Nobody cares.

Everyone has already picked sides.

>> The lessons learned by the Arabs and Persians was that the
>> West is only in favour of democracy in the middle east
>> if it does what its told.
>>
>
>And President Obama and Hillary Clinton still think
>in 1950 terms?

For someone who has no interest in history that's a very historical
outlook...

[Bill]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 03:22:20 -0800, "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D."
<dr...@coldine.edu> wrote:

>jonathan wrote:
>>
>> Which is what this cease fire is all about, Israel
>> is going to show the world which side is is in
>> the wrong once Hamas is the first to break the
>> cease fire. They will,
>
>As long as your only news is from the Jewish Israel side then you
>will always hear that the non-Jews are at fault.

Watch the BBC then, they're always cheering on the Arabs...

[Bill]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 06:24:10 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>And if the Middle East were so angry and distrustful of
>America, then why do they gladly host so many
>of our military bases?

They're not...

[David E. Powell]

Well said, not to mention that a lot of Western Media in general which did not report on missile and rocket attacks on Israel over the last how many months or years, and only began covering this stuff again when Israel began returning fire.

The sympathies of the press in nations which allow press freedom for the regimes and types who would gladly off them if they could and impose strict controls if they had their way is a question for a Psychology study I suppose.

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Fred J. McCall wrote:

> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:28:36 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>

>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>

>>>> Kabul will once again become
>>>> the target for the Taliban after western withdrawal
>>>> and as the centre of opposition to extermist Islamic
>>>> rule will doubtless pay the price again.
>>>
>>>

>>> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>>> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>>

>> Iraq is not, and has never been, a center of fundamentalism.
>>
>> Well, not until the US led invasion anyway...
>>
>> Saddam's Iraq was the most highly educated and least misogynistic
>> Arab state in West Asia and North Africa, except possibly for Egypt.
>>

>> Both now look likely to fall into the hands of the fanatics.
>>
>
> When he's not busily touting the various Communist regimes,

This would be an excellant opportunatity, for you, FREDFREAKA, to show "the
various Communist regimes", that YOU believe William is talking about !

Wee Willie
> seems to gravitate toward terrorists and other sort of right bastards.

Gee, a fact free post from Fredfreaka ,who knew !

cheers....Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Fred J. McCall wrote:

> "Jeffrey Hamilton" <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>
>> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:28:36 -0500, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>> Kabul will once again become
>>>>>> the target for the Taliban after western withdrawal
>>>>>> and as the centre of opposition to extermist Islamic
>>>>>> rule will doubtless pay the price again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That hasn't happened in Iraq, which has ten times
>>>>> the level of extremism as Afghanistan.
>>>>
>>>> Iraq is not, and has never been, a center of fundamentalism.
>>>>
>>>> Well, not until the US led invasion anyway...
>>>>
>>>> Saddam's Iraq was the most highly educated and least misogynistic
>>>> Arab state in West Asia and North Africa, except possibly for
>>>> Egypt.
>>>>
>>>> Both now look likely to fall into the hands of the fanatics.
>>>>
>>>
>>> When he's not busily touting the various Communist regimes,
>>>
>>
>> This would be an excellant opportunatity, for you, FREDFREAKA, to
>> show "the various Communist regimes", that YOU believe William is
>> talking about !
>>
>

> You really do have the memory of a mayfly, don't you? Wee Willie is a
> big fan of the old USSR and of Cuba.

And again, your proof is ? Which "various Communist regimes" is William
*touting* ?
It's _your_ claim _you_ back it up !

>>
>>> Wee Willie
>>> seems to gravitate toward terrorists and other sort of right
>>> bastards.
>>
>> Gee, a fact free post from Fredfreaka ,who knew !
>>
>

> Yeah, noting the facts (like Wee Willie's admiration for Saddam,
> above) is 'fact free' for Skipshite....

Proof ? Cites ? Yeah, I thought not, my 'fact free' assertion is correct
then...

cheers....Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

> It's not my job to try to compensate for you having the memory of a
> mayfly.

So no proof of William touting *"various Communist regimes"* then, I thought
not.

>>>>> Wee Willie
>>>>> seems to gravitate toward terrorists and other sort of right
>>>>> bastards.
>>>>
>>>> Gee, a fact free post from Fredfreaka ,who knew !
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, noting the facts (like Wee Willie's admiration for Saddam,
>>> above) is 'fact free' for Skipshite....
>>
>> Proof ? Cites ? Yeah, I thought not, my 'fact free' assertion is
>> correct then...
>>
>

> Oh, Jesus H. Christ, you illiterate wanker. It's right up above in
> this very article.
>
> Wee Willie Black: "Saddam's Iraq was the most highly educated and
> least misogynistic Arab state in West Asia and North Africa..."

Oh Jesus H. Christ, you sociopathic wanker, that's a mere statement of fact,
dipshit, it's not indicative of any admiration for Saddam.

> So your defective mentality can't even retain statements from the
> start of an article to the end...

So your defective mentality can't even differentiate between a statement of
fact and admiration...

cheers....Jeff