BF2S Forums Only Force Works

The_Mac wrote:

Those who try to deny force as the only real diplomatic force to apply to the barbarians currently inhabiting the middle east, I recommend studying up on the World War II and realize that just maybe the horrors of everything of that war could have, no, should have been prevented, but people were too afraid of war because of the stigmas of the past and a fear of upset. They traded temporary peace for 6 years of utter destruction and the final days of European ascendancy.

The United States and Britain, the last real bastions of freedom in the face of a spineless Europe, should not make the same mistake twice.

fadedsteve wrote:

{M5}Sniper3 wrote:

The problem here is that the suburban people in the land of teddy bears and rainbows won't come out to the real world and properly deal with issues like this.

You wouldnt be by chance talking about the European Union would you. . . .

Varegg wrote:

Force may sometimes be necesary but hardly before other solutions have been thoroughly tested to solve a situation.

B.Schuss wrote:

Of course, we could have bypassed all of that, and simply invaded directly, but that would have been illegal, I guess. But hey, don't let that stop you..

usmarine wrote:

lol...how's it feel?

B.Schuss wrote:

usmarine wrote:

lol...how's it feel?

huh?

B.Schuss wrote:

usmarine wrote:

B.Schuss wrote:

Of course, we could have bypassed all of that, and simply invaded directly, but that would have been illegal, I guess. But hey, don't let that stop you..

thats horseshit.  It is illegal to make sure women and kids have food?  whatever.  you people have shit turned upside down sometimes.

no. But we like to follow due process. Isn't that a principle held in high regard in your country, too ?
Historically, A lot of Africa's problems come from the fact that foreign powers have messed with Africa's affairs unilaterally, for economic benefits, with little tribute being paid to the needs of Africans.

Are you really suggesting we do that again, telling Africans how to run their countries ? NGO's such as the WFP, Oxfam, and others are providing support for those who suffer. I think that is great, and they have all of my support.

Governments or multinational entities, however, should only be involved at the request of the sovereign nation of Sudan. If we can't respect that sovereignty, we are no better than those 19th-century-imperialist nations, at least in my book.

Africa must learn to solve its problems on its own. That is the only way a long-term solution can be achieved.

I am not saying we cannot or should not help. Of course we should. But we cannot do Africa's job for Africa.

usmarine wrote:

I know some of you live in the land of teddy bears and rainbows where wars do not need to be fought and everyone can just stay in their own countries and live long and happy.  Thank god they are some of us who live in the real world.  I understand it may not be your faults since most of you have yet to leave your sheltered little suburban life.  But there is only one solution to this, and many other problems like this.  Force.  Plain and simple.  Not songs and celebrities, but men with guns whose mission is to help people, not steal their food.

Or we can just sit around and do some more diplomacy since that seems to be working just fine eh?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080310/ts … stdarfurun
"The agency said it was transporting about half as much food into western Sudan's war-torn Darfur as normal, and that the turnaround time for deliveries had slowed because truckers were unwilling to risk dangerous roads."

Last edited by -=]DeatH1337[=- (2008-03-11 07:48:48)

-=]DeatH1337[=- wrote:

Im just saying how i see it from my point of view. Marine, being a military man probably has only a mentality of force being the only option.

Nevertheless it seems that is his only view and he sees no compromise with regards to diplomacy which is why i said what i did.

Last edited by -=]DeatH1337[=- (2008-03-11 07:54:21)