Rant: Anti-War Protestors are idiots

[Darth Fanboy]

Id give us 50/50 odds.

shut up and quit making us look bad.

[K. A. Pital]

Yeah right guys, boasting of one's military might does not make one look good.

[Stuart Mackey]

Id give us 50/50 odds.

shut up and quit making us look bad.

No no, let him dig his hole
Actually, I would be more worried bout a mod shutting the thread down if if it goes on like this for to long it is a bit of topic.
Now that I think about it, I wont post on this tangent anymore, I am going to bed, with tea, and a book. I conceed Nothzing!

[Sokar]

Europe and Russia KICK anyone's ass if united.
Imagine German with Russian work together. Oh... And who bragged about the technological superiority?

Sorry: our continent has nothing worse than America.
Edit: Korea also belongs to us, so does China. Wanna kick? Let's see! Your first step as a conqueror?

Sorry you'll all be to busy trying to find enough food to go around to seriously be doing little things like uniting or 'collaborating'. The Chinese hate you with a passion thats so pure it shines like a oil slick, they probaly sieze it as an opportunity to invade

Also, in order to defeat us , you have to cross thoes pesky little puddles known as the PACIFIC and ATLANTIC Oceans. None of you have sufficient blue water naval forces to do this, even united none of you have the naval capacity to seriously challenge the USN in a surface engagement, nor do you have the submarine services needed to deal with our Los-Angeles class attack boat fleet or any new Seawolves we could but back into production. And dont start any bullshit about the 'glorious Russian Fleets" they are rust piles rotting in harbor 10 months out of the year, since even with over a decade of democracy you still cant organize an economy worth two shits. Any new construction you lay down will get blasted to atoms, eiether with Tomahawks or Carrier raids on your shipyards. In short, you all fumbled when you decided to ride the US's coattails on defense(for Europe and Asia) and Russia , you bankrupted yourself just trying to keep up with our steped down, peace time expenditures , military.

[Sokar]

Id give us 50/50 odds.

shut up and quit making us look bad.

Fuck you. This is my opinion , you don't have to like or endorse it. Im at heart an Imperialist , plant the Imperial Flag and crush thoes who oppose us kinda guy I want Empire, simple as that. Today I think we have the opportunity and the capabilitiy to do it , and finally unite this little dirt ball and begin doing something more useful than tearing each other apartt all the time.

Am i crazy, possibily, but who knows , someday you might refer to me as M'lord or Sire

[Sokar]

We could probably split this as we have wandered a bit far afield ....


Off to bed , we'll continue this tommorow evening.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Yep, and If America continues the rest of the world will end up going against America, just as coalitions have always gone against a perceived hegamon.

Coalitions never go against the perceived hegemon. They form around the perceived hegemon. Bush is the most brilliant statesman the USA has had since Reagan, at least - no offense intended to Mike - as he's created a situation where the USA is aggressively using its power to enforce the hegemony. Some people are hating us, but already more than fourty-five countries have committed to the side of the hegemon and will reap the benefits of that in their regions.

Those nations who oppose us will be cowed by the demonstrations of our power, as will pressure groups, as we destroy our enemies in this conflict. The result will be a minimalisation of our opposition and a continued process of the siding of a large number of countries with the USA to reap the benefits of alliance or alignment with the hegemon.

This is the way geopolitics has always worked, amply supported by historical example.

[Enlightenment]

Coalitions never go against the perceived hegemon. They form around the perceived hegemon.

The behavior isn't much of a surprise given that the mechanics at work are little more than the well-known game theory concept of the prisoner's dilemma. Once the US establishes a global empire it's basically game over for everyone else until the US collapses from within or an external force (external to the planet in the case of a global empire) disposes of them.

<much jingoistic chest beating deleted.>

[K. A. Pital]

I'm an Imperialist too, if you haven't noticed, Sokar. But the Empire of Star Wars was fighting against the inner Rebellion, not attacking everyone else around like mad.
If you think Europe is not enough to kick USA: oh, come on, may be you're right. But don't make me laugh saying USA could conquer Europe.
The US army is not the best to fight on ground - in fact, US hasn't been in large scale ground engagements since WWII, and their troops were absolutely inferior to German or Russian, although superior to Japanese in all ways.
So if the US come (not for a nuke war - that's another thing), they will have the best of Europe and Russia's ground tech kicking them everywhere they can. And if they have the sea, WE have the ground. No one shall ever step on this continent and conquer it easily. Even if Eurasia loses the war, the USA will be hated and finally destroyed, torn apart, like the USSR.
Edit: First step in a non-nuclear war America-Eurasia? Who can tell?

[Frank Hipper]

....Bush is the most brilliant statesman the USA has had since Reagan....

Dutchess, do you actually believe either of those two actually authored their foreign policies?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

....Bush is the most brilliant statesman the USA has had since Reagan....

Dutchess, do you actually believe either of those two actually authored their foreign policies?

Not entirely. Sufficiently to offer the attribution, however.

[Darth Wong]

The American strategy is based on the notion that in order to preserve the hegemony which their apologists insist is nonexistent, they must act now, and act aggressively, and act unilaterally. Other nations will either fall in line or be pushed out of the way and eventually punished/marginalized in other ways.

However, it hinges upon the assumption that other major world trading blocs will not grow to the point that America is no longer economically dominant. If that happens, they lose the "legitimate" economic stick that they wield and they are left with only the military threat, which is difficult to use against nations which are only aggressive in the economic sense unless they drop all pretense of being a civilized nation.

In any case, none of that changes the fact that Bush has a unique knack for ruining international relations, and is in no way a "brilliant" statesman for doing so. In saying this, Marina is basically arguing that no one could have possibly handled this any better, which seems ludicrous. Even given the same desire to start a war in Iraq, I'm sure virtually any competent diplomat could have handled international relations better than Bush has.

[Edi]

Coalitions never go against the perceived hegemon. They form around the perceived hegemon. Bush is the most brilliant statesman the USA has had since Reagan, at least - no offense intended to Mike - as he's created a situation where the USA is aggressively using its power to enforce the hegemony. Some people are hating us, but already more than fourty-five countries have committed to the side of the hegemon and will reap the benefits of that in their regions.

Those nations who oppose us will be cowed by the demonstrations of our power, as will pressure groups, as we destroy our enemies in this conflict. The result will be a minimalisation of our opposition and a continued process of the siding of a large number of countries with the USA to reap the benefits of alliance or alignment with the hegemon.

This is the way geopolitics has always worked, amply supported by historical example.

Flawed reasoning. Nobody will go directly against a hegemon who can destroy them at will (militarily or economically), but there are ways to indirectly undermine the hegemon's position, such as establishing economically competing power blocks and once that happens, like Mike said, it's either deal on equal ground or drop all pretense of being civilized. In the first case the hegemon status goes away and there will be multi-polarity. In the second case, you will just get everyone against you or favoring the victim of the aggression, which will in the long run hurt you more. There is also the little matter that even if the US is militarily powerful enough to crush almost any nation it chooses (excepting China and India), it is not powerful enough to occupy huge territories. Not enough population base. A country like India or China has enough population to be a much greater threat if given the same resources, but the US definitely runs into the problem of protracted attrition if it tried to first force others to do its bidding and control with occupation that its bidding was actually done.

If we want a scifi parallel, take a look at the Star League in Battletech, and what happened to it in the Rim territories.

As for Bush's brilliance, he's a moron, as Mike pointed out. A competent person, such as Colin Powell, would not have screwed up that badly. If the US had to have a Republican president, why could it not have been John McCain?

Edi

[Tsyroc]

If the US had to have a Republican president, why could it not have been John McCain?
Edi

The "extreme" right didn't like him because he was too middle of the road. Lots of people claim the Democrats were using him to sabotage the Republican party. Personally, I think that if he had the nomination he would have done better against Gore than Bush did. What I think is odd is that the party let the hard right influence things so much. If they were smart they would have backed the more centrist choice from their own party, hoping to garuntee Gore's defeat, and then pushed his policies more towards the right once he was in office. Granted that would have been tough to do with McCain but it would have happened to at least some degree.

I don't know why the Republican party listen's so much to the extreme right. Why not make them vote for the "lesser of two evils"? It's not like they would have voted for Gore or Nader.

[Enforcer Talen]

the u.s. could tie in a war, but thered be no one left to do the victory dance.

in a conventional war, it would get bloody. I wouldnt put bets on the u.s. surviving the war, even if they won.

[Oberleutnant]

If USA needs several months of preparations for a war against Iraq, a single country with a medicore military and a terrain badly suited for defence, how can you expect to win in a situation where you have to attack, invade and occupy the entire world united against you? Oh please, stop wanking!

"Europe and Russia would be paralyzed by famine , as all England and Continental Europe are dependent on overseas food imports, 60% of which come from the god old US of A."

What would these food imports be? Big Macs, Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Mountain Dew? Seriously, I'd like to see your source for your figures.

....Bush is the most brilliant statesman the USA has had since Reagan....

Dutchess, do you actually believe either of those two actually authored their foreign policies?

Not entirely. Sufficiently to offer the attribution, however.

The biggest hawks of Bush administration, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld, had laid out basic plans for the current US foreign policy in the mid nineties. After listening to his advisors, the only thing that Bush does himself is the final decision. He doesn't do the "thinking part".

[K. A. Pital]

Oberleutnant

"Europe and Russia would be paralyzed by famine , as all England and Continental Europe are dependent on overseas food imports, 60% of which come from the god old US of A."

Yeah, I think that's a hyperbole. They think we won't survive without McDonalds.

[Col. Crackpot]

Id give us 50/50 odds.

shut up and quit making us look bad.

Fuck you. This is my opinion , you don't have to like or endorse it. Im at heart an Imperialist , plant the Imperial Flag and crush thoes who oppose us kinda guy I want Empire, simple as that. Today I think we have the opportunity and the capabilitiy to do it , and finally unite this little dirt ball and begin doing something more useful than tearing each other apartt all the time.

Am i crazy, possibily, but who knows , someday you might refer to me as M'lord or Sire

i think it's about time you shut the fuck up.....oh, yeah i almost forgot, David Duke called, you left your secret plan for world domination at his house, you can pick it up this afternoon.

[Stravo]

Hey, for all those saying we can or want to conquer the world, please stop it. Most Americans myself included have no interest in conquering ANYTHING. We just want to listen to our music, buy our made in Taiwan products and eat our fast food. Let the rest of the world do what it wants. It's when the rest of the world intrudes on America (terrorsim) that I say lets get out there and kick some ass to secure the safety of our citizens and insure our position as the global power. But in no way would I or most any other American support conquest of ANY sort.

[Joe]

Hey, for all those saying we can or want to conquer the world, please stop it. Most Americans myself included have no interest in conquering ANYTHING. We just want to listen to our music, buy our made in Taiwan products and eat our fast food. Let the rest of the world do what it wants. It's when the rest of the world intrudes on America (terrorsim) that I say lets get out there and kick some ass to secure the safety of our citizens and insure our position as the global power. But in no way would I or most any other American support conquest of ANY sort.

You're right. If you ask the average person on the street what he thinks of the "American Empire" he'll likely just stare at you blankly.

[Kelly Antilles]

I agree with you Stravo.

However, how the FUCK did my rant turn into this bloodfest?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Hey you anti-war nuts! GROW THE FUCK UP!

Hey you pro-war fucks, stop lumping all anti-war people into a single category of "peaceniks" or whatever other derogatory title you care to use today.

Guess what? There are extremists on both sides. I lean toward anti-war, but do you see me running around equating anyone who is pro-war to Nazis or gun nuts? Am I accusing all the pro-war people of masturbating to CNN news stories detailing troop advancements? Am I telling all the pro-war people to get their hands off the shaft of their unregistered firearms? No. Because I recognize that there are perfectly legitimate reasons both for going to war and against it.

You want to play the extremist game? Fine. On the extreme anti-war side, you've got people who are rioting and just not getting the fact that the war has been going on for five days. On the extreme pro-war side, you've got people who eat conservative propaganda up like pigs eat slop and who apparently get off to the idea of our fighting men and women going overseas to risk their lives while cloaking that bloodthirst as "respect" for the armed forces.

Guess what? They're both assholes. One is an impractically abd overly patient naive twit who can't realize that sometimes war is necessary, and the other is a war-mongering fuck who has his trigger finger permanently curled into a firing position.

Both the sides need to grow up.

You have an excellent point Durandal, but you directed it at the wrong person.

Kelly did not lump them all into one category. She said "Hey you anti-war nuts"

Meaning those that throw eggs on cars, and are otherwise fucking immature assholes.

[K. A. Pital]

Kelly Antilles,
die Flammenbrigade entschuldigt sich. Sorry for flame. But the thread's name's pretty bad.
I also don't support anyone's expansion or agression. That's why I'm anti-war
Kamakazie Sith
Right. Nuts. I neved did the things of this sort, I just signed a petition agains Mr. President's policies.
Edit: The thread was against anti-war nuts, but the name had: anti-war protestors. See a difference?

[NecronLord]

Sokar, what the hell are you talking about? The US economy is based on international trade, if you were to embargo the whole world it would implode. The USA has the world's largest international trade defecit. And with certain exceptions, it is relatively the largest. It also has a massive current account defecit, (which is set to increase due to the Bush administration's refusal to raise taxes to pay for it's increased expeniture) and both are still increasing every year.

Let's ask the avrage american (any of you). How far would you support your current government if it's actions resulted in all your wealth (including offshore investments, which would be inaccesible to you.) suddenly shot through the plughole, to the extent that you had Weimar germany style hyper inflation, I.E. a wheelbarrow of thousand dollar bills doesn't get you a loaf of bread?

[Joe]

Let's ask the avrage american (any of you). How far would you support your current government if it's actions resulted in all your wealth (including offshore investments, which would be inaccesible to you.) suddenly shot through the plughole, to the extent that you had Weimar germany style hyper inflation, I.E. a wheelbarrow of thousand dollar bills doesn't get you a loaf of bread?

Not very far. In any case, even with the way our government spends money, I don't think we'll need to worry about Weimar-style hyperinflation any time soon.