Wasn't Korea a UN action?ZombieVampire! wrote:
In Korea you were invited by a stable government, who then agreed you should leave forces behind.
76.4% of the Iraqi people might just think they had something to do with it.ZombieVampire! wrote:
In Iraq you aggressively invaded, and the government you're making deals with only exists because of your military.
There you go, there's another difference.FEOS wrote:
Wasn't Korea a UN action?ZombieVampire! wrote:
In Korea you were invited by a stable government, who then agreed you should leave forces behind.
They might. But the fact is without your military support they would have collapsed.FEOS wrote:
76.4% of the Iraqi people might just think they had something to do with it.ZombieVampire! wrote:
In Iraq you aggressively invaded, and the government you're making deals with only exists because of your military.
No car ftw! Suck it up losers!theelviscerator wrote:
As long as Cameron pays out the yang for gas ..who cares..
Which might play a part in wanting them to stay.ZombieVampire! wrote:
They might. But the fact is without your military support they would have collapsed.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-13 09:27:26)
I thought you were 'liberating' the Iraqi people, not going to war and conquering them?Lotta_Drool wrote:
It is almost like they lost a war with the US.
No, we went to war with Iraq and defeated them with the removal of their leader and destruction of their military. You might have missed it because it only took a few hours.Braddock wrote:
I thought you were 'liberating' the Iraqi people, not going to war and conquering them?Lotta_Drool wrote:
It is almost like they lost a war with the US.
Only neo cons and 1 geordie believe that jackanory.Lotta_Drool wrote:
No, we went to war with Iraq and defeated them with the removal of their leader and destruction of their military. You might have missed it because it only took a few hours.Braddock wrote:
I thought you were 'liberating' the Iraqi people, not going to war and conquering them?Lotta_Drool wrote:
It is almost like they lost a war with the US.
After we defeated Iraq we started a rebuilding process in much the same way we did in Europe and Japan after WWII. This involved providing security, supplies, provisional government, and rebuilding the infrastructure of the country. This part takes years and years to complete and appearently Billions of dollars because this oil rich nation is just too damn impoverished to pay for it themselves. Soon we will be satified that Iraq is no longer a threat to the US, its neighbors, and can provide its own security and then the US will cut all power it holds over the Iraqi government the same way it did in Japan and Germany.
So while it is fun to distort reality and bash on the US with lies, it is quite transparent to everyone reading these threads who is just a hate America troll looking to get attention. This is why these people don't get serious responses to threads they start about real issues.
Yay mentioned!m3thod wrote:
Only neo cons and 1 geordie believe that jackanory.Lotta_Drool wrote:
No, we went to war with Iraq and defeated them with the removal of their leader and destruction of their military. You might have missed it because it only took a few hours.Braddock wrote:
I thought you were 'liberating' the Iraqi people, not going to war and conquering them?
After we defeated Iraq we started a rebuilding process in much the same way we did in Europe and Japan after WWII. This involved providing security, supplies, provisional government, and rebuilding the infrastructure of the country. This part takes years and years to complete and appearently Billions of dollars because this oil rich nation is just too damn impoverished to pay for it themselves. Soon we will be satified that Iraq is no longer a threat to the US, its neighbors, and can provide its own security and then the US will cut all power it holds over the Iraqi government the same way it did in Japan and Germany.
So while it is fun to distort reality and bash on the US with lies, it is quite transparent to everyone reading these threads who is just a hate America troll looking to get attention. This is why these people don't get serious responses to threads they start about real issues.
hmmm...if it were imperialism, wouldn't we keep him from saying that and force the agreement upon the Iraqis?CameronPoe wrote:
Update on the US-Iraq pact from none other than Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki himself:
"We have reached a deadlock, because when we started the talks, we found that the U.S. demands hugely infringe on the sovereignty of Iraq, and this we can never accept."
Source: Reuters
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/COL338415.htm
Doesn't sound much like imperialism to me.....pffffft
Rejoicing at the notion of being infered to as gullible? You go girl!M.O.A.B wrote:
Yay mentioned!m3thod wrote:
Only neo cons and 1 geordie believe that jackanory.Lotta_Drool wrote:
No, we went to war with Iraq and defeated them with the removal of their leader and destruction of their military. You might have missed it because it only took a few hours.
After we defeated Iraq we started a rebuilding process in much the same way we did in Europe and Japan after WWII. This involved providing security, supplies, provisional government, and rebuilding the infrastructure of the country. This part takes years and years to complete and appearently Billions of dollars because this oil rich nation is just too damn impoverished to pay for it themselves. Soon we will be satified that Iraq is no longer a threat to the US, its neighbors, and can provide its own security and then the US will cut all power it holds over the Iraqi government the same way it did in Japan and Germany.
So while it is fun to distort reality and bash on the US with lies, it is quite transparent to everyone reading these threads who is just a hate America troll looking to get attention. This is why these people don't get serious responses to threads they start about real issues.
Al-Maliki is a puppet though. What da problem yo?CameronPoe wrote:
Update on the US-Iraq pact from none other than Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki himself:
"We have reached a deadlock, because when we started the talks, we found that the U.S. demands hugely infringe on the sovereignty of Iraq, and this we can never accept."
Source: Reuters
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/COL338415.htm
Doesn't sound much like imperialism to me.....pffffft
Yes, making demands on a country that 'hugely infringe on the sovereignty' of that nation doesn't smack of imperialism at all.... (a country in which over 150,000 of your troops are stationed...)FEOS wrote:
hmmm...if it were imperialism, wouldn't we keep him from saying that and force the agreement upon the Iraqis?
Sounds remarkably like a sovereign government making its own decisions...which is like imperialism in that it's the opposite of it.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-14 10:59:20)
Not if the one making that claim stays in power.CameronPoe wrote:
Yes, making demands on a country that 'hugely infringe on the sovereignty' of that nation doesn't smack of imperialism at all.... (a country in which over 150,000 of your troops are stationed...)FEOS wrote:
hmmm...if it were imperialism, wouldn't we keep him from saying that and force the agreement upon the Iraqis?
Sounds remarkably like a sovereign government making its own decisions...which is like imperialism in that it's the opposite of it.
Is it your Irish heritage that makes you unable to comphrehend the fact that the US defeated this country in a war? You infringe on sovereignty when you invade a country and defeat its military, hello!CameronPoe wrote:
Yes, making demands on a country that 'hugely infringe on the sovereignty' of that nation doesn't smack of imperialism at all.... (a country in which over 150,000 of your troops are stationed...)FEOS wrote:
hmmm...if it were imperialism, wouldn't we keep him from saying that and force the agreement upon the Iraqis?
Sounds remarkably like a sovereign government making its own decisions...which is like imperialism in that it's the opposite of it.
lolLotta_Drool wrote:
Is it your Irish heritage that makes you unable to comphrehend the fact that the US defeated this country in a war? You infringe on sovereignty when you invade a country and defeat its military, hello!
You're just jealous becasue Ireland has never invaded a country, rebuilt it, and installed a puppet government.
Sorry FEOS but wanting control of another nations airspace and waters is imperialistic. Period.FEOS wrote:
Not if the one making that claim stays in power.CameronPoe wrote:
Yes, making demands on a country that 'hugely infringe on the sovereignty' of that nation doesn't smack of imperialism at all.... (a country in which over 150,000 of your troops are stationed...)FEOS wrote:
hmmm...if it were imperialism, wouldn't we keep him from saying that and force the agreement upon the Iraqis?
Sounds remarkably like a sovereign government making its own decisions...which is like imperialism in that it's the opposite of it.
No, exerting control of another nation's airspace and waters is imperialistic. Wanting is irrelevant.CameronPoe wrote:
Sorry FEOS but wanting control of another nations airspace and waters is imperialistic. Period.FEOS wrote:
Not if the one making that claim stays in power.CameronPoe wrote:
Yes, making demands on a country that 'hugely infringe on the sovereignty' of that nation doesn't smack of imperialism at all.... (a country in which over 150,000 of your troops are stationed...)
So Hitler wasn't imperialistic before 1939...FEOS wrote:
No, exerting control of another nation's airspace and waters is imperialistic. Wanting is irrelevant.CameronPoe wrote:
Sorry FEOS but wanting control of another nations airspace and waters is imperialistic. Period.FEOS wrote:
Not if the one making that claim stays in power.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-14 13:18:53)
Long way to go before its rebuilt. Its being blown apart every day. New wave of fighters on the front line after a short rest period in jail, heroin output trebled, coalition troops being killed every day...........Puppet government voicing their concerns and throwing the dummy out of the pram. Long, long way to go.Lotta_Drool wrote:
You're just jealous becasue Ireland has never invaded a country, rebuilt it, and installed a puppet government.
So if you want a given country to behave in a given way, then you're imperialistic? I guess every country in the world that has relations with any other country in the world is imperialistic then.CameronPoe wrote:
So Hitler wasn't imperialistic before 1939...FEOS wrote:
No, exerting control of another nation's airspace and waters is imperialistic. Wanting is irrelevant.CameronPoe wrote:
Sorry FEOS but wanting control of another nations airspace and waters is imperialistic. Period.
"the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence"