[weambulance]

(08-08-2014 02:29 PM)rekruler Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:20 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, Saddam was a real hero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

Some of the shit you guys come up with is unreal.

It's clear that about half the people in this thread would be upset with the US no matter what it did.

Nobody is calling him a hero. The man was evil, although probably a LOT less so than the western media would have us all believe. The world is never black and white. The point is he was a badass, which is a designation that is agnostic of moral rights or wrongs.

Think Genghis Khan: a mass murderer and rapist on an unimaginable scale, he left an entire continent-the world's largest, at that- a smoking ruin. Yet because nobody alive today has an ethnic or political axe to grind with Mongols, his atrocities have basically earned him eternal fame with very little in the way of opprobrium. Saddam is a bantamweight on the atrocity scale compared to Genghis, so if we can acknowledge that Genghis Khan was a baddass, we can do the same with Saddam.

Yeah, wasn't really talking to you.

However, since you bring it up, Saddam Hussein was an amoral scumbag, a bully who rose to power through fear tactics. The man himself was certainly NOT a badass. Badasses don't hide in spider holes when the shit hits the fan. Shit, at least his sons fought when their time came.

Somehow I don't see Genghis Khan hiding in a hole and meekly submitting to the hangman's rope.

[Sourcecode]

Because..you would act so much differently.
When the house you built falls on top of you...few men will come out with their legs unbroken.

[weambulance]

(08-08-2014 02:30 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:20 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, Saddam was a real hero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

Some of the shit you guys come up with is unreal.

It's clear that about half the people in this thread would be upset with the US no matter what it did.

Well, actually we support American policy.



Saddam Hussein declared honorary citizen of Detroit receives key to the city.

Yes, your rock solid understanding of the Vietnam war above made it clear you are an authority on American foreign policy. Despite your intimation that we lost to the "stronger" North Vietnam, we actually crushed them militarily and our political goals were met even if we didn't keep South Vietnam independent. We can argue all day about the domino theory, but the reality is the spread of communism halted in Southeast Asia, and there's no way to prove whether our actions in Vietnam caused that or had no effect. Vietnam was a "loss" only because the media so stridently proclaimed it was one. At best it was a military and political win abroad (clear political loss at home), at worst it was a military win and political draw abroad.

In the same way, Iraq and Afghanistan were both clear military victories. The problem was all the bullshit the politicians tried to do once we'd won the war on the ground. Once they tried nationbuilding, both Iraq and Afghanistan became unwinnable situations without devoting a solid 25-30 years of occupation and indoctrination of the youth. Should we have done that instead?

The US does many things I don't support. Most, I'd say. But my point was it's quite clear that a number of posters here are so biased they will find issue with anything the US does.

[weambulance]

(08-08-2014 02:59 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  

Because..you would act so much differently.
When the house you built falls on top of you...few men will come out with their legs unbroken.

I don't need to guess how I respond when the shit hits the fan. I know. BTDT.

[rekruler]

(08-08-2014 02:53 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, wasn't really talking to you.

However, since you bring it up, Saddam Hussein was an amoral scumbag, a bully who rose to power through fear tactics. The man himself was certainly NOT a badass. Badasses don't hide in spider holes when the shit hits the fan. Shit, at least his sons fought when their time came.

Somehow I don't see Genghis Khan hiding in a hole and meekly submitting to the hangman's rope.

You almost make it seem like there is a button anyone can press to "engage the fear tactics" and shit just falls in place for you, if you're scummy enough to stoop so low. You understand that in Iraq, more or less every able bodied man and boy would be perfectly willing to use "fear tactics" if they could, right? Yet somehow out of all these Iraqis, it was Saddam that rose to the top. Because he was a badass.

Truth is you, me, and most everyone alive on this planet would not even be able to get their middle manager to give them a raise using whatever tactics we want, let alone rise from shepherd's son to dictator of a violent dog eat dog shithole.

[Sherman]

(08-08-2014 03:09 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:30 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:20 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, Saddam was a real hero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

Some of the shit you guys come up with is unreal.

It's clear that about half the people in this thread would be upset with the US no matter what it did.

Well, actually we support American policy.



Saddam Hussein declared honorary citizen of Detroit receives key to the city.

Yes, your rock solid understanding of the Vietnam war above made it clear you are an authority on American foreign policy. Despite your intimation that we lost to the "stronger" North Vietnam, we actually crushed them militarily and our political goals were met even if we didn't keep South Vietnam independent. We can argue all day about the domino theory, but the reality is the spread of communism halted in Southeast Asia, and there's no way to prove whether our actions in Vietnam caused that or had no effect. Vietnam was a "loss" only because the media so stridently proclaimed it was one. At best it was a military and political win abroad (clear political loss at home), at worst it was a military win and political draw abroad.

   

US celebrating decisive victory over North Vietnam.

[kaotic]

What a waste, even some of the Kurdish towns are falling ISIS got that dam the news was talking about also.

Fucking useless war.

[Constitution45]

How far do you reckon ISIS will go ? they seem to be getting a lot of support elsewhere around the world. A housing estate in East London started hanging up ISIS flags, the Guardian journalists got chased out of the area by some guys.

[weambulance]

(08-08-2014 03:15 PM)rekruler Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:53 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, wasn't really talking to you.

However, since you bring it up, Saddam Hussein was an amoral scumbag, a bully who rose to power through fear tactics. The man himself was certainly NOT a badass. Badasses don't hide in spider holes when the shit hits the fan. Shit, at least his sons fought when their time came.

Somehow I don't see Genghis Khan hiding in a hole and meekly submitting to the hangman's rope.

You almost make it seem like there is a button anyone can press to "engage the fear tactics" and shit just falls in place for you, if you're scummy enough to stoop so low. You understand that in Iraq, more or less every able bodied man and boy would be perfectly willing to use "fear tactics" if they could, right? Yet somehow out of all these Iraqis, it was Saddam that rose to the top. Because he was a badass.

Truth is you, me, and most everyone alive on this planet would not even be able to get their middle manager to give them a raise using whatever tactics we want, let alone rise from shepherd's son to dictator of a violent dog eat dog shithole.

Perhaps we simply have different definitions of "badass". I'm not saying he had no will, obviously he was ruthless and determined and inspired loyalty in those close to him. That is not the same thing.

I'm not saying this is how it was in Saddam's inner circle, but unless you're carrying around a suitcase nuke in your sidecar that's wired to electrodes in your brain, you don't gain massive power by being a scary, badass motherfucker. In fact, except at the very beginning of your rise to power you don't need to perform violent acts personally at all.

If I wanted to be a ruthless dictator, I would do my best to treat the people around me very well as long as they were furthering my aims. I would treat traitors harshly, yes, but through back channels. When dealing with the common people I would put on my benevolent dictator mask and give freely and generously. I see no need to be a douche to my inner circle or to give common people any reason to see me as anything other than a good guy. The stuff they have in movies where a mob boss, gang leader, dictator, etc is a total dick to the people around him would just get him capped in real life.

Sure, as a dictator maybe I'm using death squads to murder dissidents and my enforcers are doing some pretty messed up shit, but I'm not doing any of that personally. Who even wants to know about the details? So how does me ordering the deaths of my enemies through other people, never in danger myself, mean I'm some kind of badass? I'm basically just a CEO who never gets his hands dirty, a strategist who takes advantage of opportunities to seize more and more power until he's at the top.

A badass is a dangerous, scary bastard one on one. Most badasses do not have the charisma, foresight, or strategic awareness to pull off a rise to the top. Those that do will rarely have the luck or opportunities. For every Saddam Hussein, there are a thousand men who tried and failed because the stars simply did not align for them.

Most leaders throughout history, no matter how ruthless, could hardly be considered badasses at an individual level.

As to the bit I bolded in your last comment, are you serious? Blackmail isn't that hard to pull off, man, and there are plenty of other methods I could use. I don't do shady crap like that because I have morals (and it's not worth the risk), not because I couldn't manage it.

[The Reactionary Tree]

Our military intervention has consequences

[weambulance]

(08-08-2014 03:21 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 03:09 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:30 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 02:20 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, Saddam was a real hero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

Some of the shit you guys come up with is unreal.

It's clear that about half the people in this thread would be upset with the US no matter what it did.

Well, actually we support American policy.



Saddam Hussein declared honorary citizen of Detroit receives key to the city.

Yes, your rock solid understanding of the Vietnam war above made it clear you are an authority on American foreign policy. Despite your intimation that we lost to the "stronger" North Vietnam, we actually crushed them militarily and our political goals were met even if we didn't keep South Vietnam independent. We can argue all day about the domino theory, but the reality is the spread of communism halted in Southeast Asia, and there's no way to prove whether our actions in Vietnam caused that or had no effect. Vietnam was a "loss" only because the media so stridently proclaimed it was one. At best it was a military and political win abroad (clear political loss at home), at worst it was a military win and political draw abroad.

US celebrating decisive victory over North Vietnam.

I like your picture and simplistic caption, they thoroughly illustrates your failure to grasp my points. /discussion

[Fighting888]

Do you guys know how the first Persian Gulf War was sold to the public?

When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, only half of Americans supported military intervention.

The daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador then testified in front of Congress that Iraq was killing Kuwaiti incubator babies. American public support for invading Iraq skyrocketed, which lead to the 1991 Gulf War.

Turns out that the incubator baby story was a lie. A lie sold by the Kuwaiti government, US govt, and a PR firm.

So our public supported the first Gulf War due to fraudulent reasons concocted by a conspiracy.

[Sonsowey]

(08-08-2014 02:20 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yeah, Saddam was a real hero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Anfal_Campaign

Some of the shit you guys come up with is unreal.

It's clear that about half the people in this thread would be upset with the US no matter what it did.

Saddam was a dictator who attempted genocide against the Kurds no doubt.

But he was better than 10+ years of sectarian violence and complete chaos. There is no doubt there.

As many people as Saddam killed, many many more have died in the chaos since he was taken out of office.

[Saweeep]

(08-08-2014 05:32 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

How far do you reckon ISIS will go ? they seem to be getting a lot of support elsewhere around the world. A housing estate in East London started hanging up ISIS flags, the Guardian journalists got chased out of the area by some guys.

I seriously worry about the allegiance of large parts of Britain's muslim population.

I always get the feeling that, under the surface, they pretty much all hate us.

[Sonsowey]

(08-08-2014 06:28 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

I seriously worry about the allegiance of large parts of Britain's muslim population.

I always get the feeling that, under the surface, they pretty much all hate us.

[Constitution45]

(08-08-2014 06:28 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:32 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

How far do you reckon ISIS will go ? they seem to be getting a lot of support elsewhere around the world. A housing estate in East London started hanging up ISIS flags, the Guardian journalists got chased out of the area by some guys.

I seriously worry about the allegiance of large parts of Britain's muslim population.

I always get the feeling that, under the surface, they pretty much all hate us.

It looks that way, In Birmingham I saw a couple of racial assaults carried out by muslim guys on white people. This was in the middle of the city centre as well.

The Jews are talking about leaving France because of the anti Semitic attacks, maybe they know predict some shit is going to go down.

Even the Guardian crowd don't know what to make of the whole thing. When you see middle class muslims in Britain going over to fight in Iraq, and you have these ISIS flags being pinned up on housing estates.

Anyway, it could just be paranoia but it doesn't look good.

[Alpharius]

(08-08-2014 06:35 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 06:28 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:32 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

How far do you reckon ISIS will go ? they seem to be getting a lot of support elsewhere around the world. A housing estate in East London started hanging up ISIS flags, the Guardian journalists got chased out of the area by some guys.

I seriously worry about the allegiance of large parts of Britain's muslim population.

I always get the feeling that, under the surface, they pretty much all hate us.

It looks that way, In Birmingham I saw a couple of racial assaults carried out by muslim guys on white people. This was in the middle of the city centre as well.

The Jews are talking about leaving France because of the anti Semitic attacks, maybe they know predict some shit is going to go down.

Even the Guardian crowd don't know what to make of the whole thing. When you see middle class muslims in Britain going over to fight in Iraq, and you have these ISIS flags being pinned up on housing estates.

Could be the resentment of being stereotyped as hyper-violent is finally getting to them...

[Vicious]

Hearts & minds, this is how to really carry the fight: http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-ama...1618447251

Of course, the military was uncomfortable with his progress

[Constitution45]

(08-08-2014 09:20 PM)Osiris Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 06:35 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 06:28 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 05:32 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

How far do you reckon ISIS will go ? they seem to be getting a lot of support elsewhere around the world. A housing estate in East London started hanging up ISIS flags, the Guardian journalists got chased out of the area by some guys.

I seriously worry about the allegiance of large parts of Britain's muslim population.

I always get the feeling that, under the surface, they pretty much all hate us.

It looks that way, In Birmingham I saw a couple of racial assaults carried out by muslim guys on white people. This was in the middle of the city centre as well.

The Jews are talking about leaving France because of the anti Semitic attacks, maybe they know predict some shit is going to go down.

Even the Guardian crowd don't know what to make of the whole thing. When you see middle class muslims in Britain going over to fight in Iraq, and you have these ISIS flags being pinned up on housing estates.

Could be the resentment of being stereotyped as hyper-violent is finally getting to them...

Yeah I think that explains the actions of ISIS or the Woolwich beheading. Our media must be more politically correct to avoid such things happening in the future... Il expand some more.

Islam in Britain is different to say Islam in the U.S. There are ghettos up and down the country, most of which are self segregated in recent times. The socialist workers party and other groups try to cosy up to them as being some new "black panthers' but its laughable because they are far from it. If you are white, gay or black you can get into a lot of trouble going through some of these places. On top of this a lot of the time these are recent immigrants, who have just moved here from say, Pakistan.

There have been some major controversies in recent years i.e. Pakistani pedophile gangs up north, the Woolwich beheading, protesting at a military funeral. However a lot of the anger was directed towards the media and government who supposedly kept quiet on such things happening or down playing the whole events. If anything the media has been pro actively trying to turn those stereotypes around.

I still remember a funny episode of "the bill", a police drama set in London. Where the police station gets blown up, and the plot line was that it was a racist police community support officer who did it. haha too politically correct.

[Teedub]

I'm not usually one for pro-war sentiments, but the #AmessagefromUStoISIS is making me laugh.

ISIS deserve what's coming to them, it's one of the few times in recent memory where I fully support American military action.

[Orion]

(08-08-2014 03:09 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Yes, your rock solid understanding of the Vietnam war above made it clear you are an authority on American foreign policy. Despite your intimation that we lost to the "stronger" North Vietnam, we actually crushed them militarily and our political goals were met even if we didn't keep South Vietnam independent. We can argue all day about the domino theory, but the reality is the spread of communism halted in Southeast Asia

I don't know how you come with that conclusion, since American withdrawal from Vietnam directly lead to creation of 3 new communist states: Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

[Vronsky]

(08-08-2014 05:32 PM)Constitution45 Wrote:  

How far do you reckon ISIS will go ? they seem to be getting a lot of support elsewhere around the world. A housing estate in East London started hanging up ISIS flags, the Guardian journalists got chased out of the area by some guys.

That is some fucking bold bullshit. How the hell do they get away with that?! The UK is a lost cause, I fear.

[Brian Boru]

ISIS's success is just the logical conclusion of America's support of radical Islamists against Syria. Syrian victories on the battlefield have driven these lunatics from most of their country and into the already quasi-failed state of Iraq. Let's just hope Washington learns this time around. They may not like secular strong-men, but supporting Jihadism and the Muslim Brotherhood is worse, especially given there extensive connections to the Muslim populations of Europe and North America.

On the bright side, Iran and Hezbollah appear to have the Shi'ite areas fortified against ISIS. It remains to be seen how the Kurds will fair without support from Iran or Russia.

And for those who think Israel won't face blowback for their support of anti-Syria militant groups, just look at how long they've struggled against HAMAS, a group a fraction of the size as ISIS, and one that operates in an open-air prison completely surveyed by the IDF. I really do not understand Western logic here at all.

[Tex Pro]

ISIS vows to retaliate for the bombings from the USA

Iraq: Muslim Jihadis Vow to Take Revenge on US Infidels for Isis Bombing Campaign:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iraq-muslim-jih...gn-1460411

Obama says troops will not return to Iraq, but I wonder if that will still be the case if ISIS retaliates against US targets or interests (oil fields).

[Jaydublin]

(08-09-2014 07:24 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

I'm not usually one for pro-war sentiments, but the #AmessagefromUStoISIS is making me laugh.

ISIS deserve what's coming to them, it's one of the few times in recent memory where I fully support American military action.

But is the US also part of the reason they came to power? I am not sure but I would assume that at least some of the US aid to the Syrian rebels has directly helped IS.

When will we stop getting involved in this shit? We keep having to go clean up our own mess which is always worse than what we tried to fix in the first place. Iraq will end in a major civil war, no doubt about that.