A tale of war and politics [was: Racist Japanese Players]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dalecooper said:
Ezekiel, I think we were posting at the same time and I just read your post.
I essentially agree.
Its funny, we were posting responses at the same time and came up with mostly the same thing.
Though I think you support the war in Iraq more than I do. I support the end of tyrrany. We ended Saddam's tyrrany. I just don't think we did it as a first step to end ALL tyrrany. Or for any other really good reason like that.
Click to expand...

I do support it more. The man, and his regime needed to be removed, and there was no other way. Could you imagine what it would've been like when his sons took over?

Sadly, I am sure that I am probably the ONLY Republican on this board. Flame if you want. I am also Christian, and in the 30% tax bracket. I work very hard to achieve and attain goals, and don't like when things are taken from me (taxes). I was born to a very poor family, and vowed that my life would not be like that. My wife gets to stay home with my son, and I donate 10% of my income to charity. The american way is- If you want it, go get it. I firmly believe this.

Ok that's enough about me..... sorry for the rant, wanted to defend myself, before the barrage starts.
 
Dalecooper said:
The world shouldn't be greatful that we bombed hiroshima, the world should be greatful that we ended the imperialistic designs of the Axis powers. Aren't you? Would you rather be living under a facist boot-heel?
Click to expand...

Fact, the Allies were winning the war before the American's made the decision to stop proffiting off of the sale of ammunitions, get off the fence and join the allied forces. The americans didn't join the war to stop the Nazi's they joined the war because of Pearl Harbor. The victory of the the Allied forces started once they defeated the Nazi's at D-Day. It would of taken a little longer but the Allied forces would of won the war reguardless of the fact that the US bombed Japan.

Don't even get me started on Iraq. Iraq is a backwater little 3rd world nation that posed no threat to the American people. The event that triggered this whole war with the US vs the middle east had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. Afganastan, remember them? That war that the US started, (And yes the US started that war, bombing a country because of a terrorist action is like blowing up a school because one kid is carrying a gun) that the UN told them not to do, that all the members of UN are still trying to clean up? Why didn't the US stay in Afganastan, the country that supposidly started this "War on Terror"? Money. There's no money in Afganastan and the US economy is in a slump.

There are places in the world that need more help than Iraq - Sudan for example. If the US wants to free the world send out peacekeepers to countries that want it's help and stop bombing houses.

Anyway don't think this is an attack on anyone. I"m actually really enjoing this civil argument that hasn't resulted in name calling and it's all with a good heart. I'm a wee bit obsessive about politics and saw an opportunity to bring up an intelligent discussion. Dale I have lost no respect for you and can agree to dissagree but am all about this conversation continuing the way it has been. Maybe not on the flameboard of all places but just making sure you know that in no sense am I trying to disrespect anyone, I just like to give my brain a jog every now and then and this is usually how I do it. Feel free to respond - you guys rock :D
 
BTW that post up there...that wasn't done by Dugrasse - It's me Sabia, I'm on his computer - need to check his plants @_@
 
Ezikila....nah bro, ur not the only one. Mr. radical right over here, and I'm a Christian too. Anyway, I'll yield a bit and say that those WMDs prolly didnt exist, but like Ezy said, the guy needed to be removed. Iraq under Saddam's reign was a threat to America. If you want me to add a list of other threats to America, I'll throw in Pakistan and Palestine. They were rejocing in their streets, and passing out candy to little kids when the world found out about 9-11. IMO, any country rejoicing over the deaths of some 5k American ppl should be considered a threat to us. Wouldnt that mean attacking half the world? Heh, no. 9-11 was just as much a barbarity as it was a wake-up call to the US. We stick our nose in far too many countries' business not to be hated by half the world. But back on track here, Iraq was a threat, plain and simple. Lets forget about the WMDs and think about the bigger picture. Fine, perhaps the motive behind attacking Iraq was misleading, but it prevented any probable risks in the future. This is only the beginning, other countries may attack us once more, and we will have to retaliate. Until its deomnstrated that any attack on our homeland means the declaration of war on your own country (and we will win), attacks on America wont end.
 
Well said Pseulen.

Sabia you're right. Iraq did not pose a threat to the US anytime soon. Iraq posed a threat to it's own people- read my earlier post, for humanity's sake he and his sons had to go.

The difference with Afganistan is not money. It's the fact that you are not fighting a country or a government, you are fighting a rouge group of terrorists. Terrorists that claim jihad on Americans and Jews for ethnic (and biblical) reasons. Unfortunately, this rouge group can hide very well and blend in with innocent people (vietnam anyone).

Yes, Sudan needs help. Many African countries need help. Where is the wonderful UN in all of this? I thought that it was their job to help these nations? What about the US right? Well I can aggree with that. Though the US did a big, and dangerous thing by defying the UN with Iraq, and aren't likely to do it again soon.
 
you and can agree to dissagree but am all about this conversation continuing the way it has been
Click to expand...
Disagree? Shit, its OTHER people who say we should get back on topic... I just try to appease them by relating the two. It isn't as if the entire qcdn flameboard is now devoted to politics, in game and out.
Preach on brother, I WANT to read it!
 
Did saddam need taking out? ... yes... but...
I really don't think we did this for the right reasons. I am not sure what Bush's agenda is. I wish that I knew. I Doubt its because he saw a bad man that needed removing. There are lots of bad men needing removing, and we aren't doing much about them, and have no plans to do so, and HAD no plans to do so.
If you want to argue that the ends justify the means, that REGARDLESS of WHy, we've done the world and Iraq a favor by removing Saddam from power? Ok. That has merrits and dertactions. I've wondered myself and come to no conclusion other than while yes, in the end we did a good thing, the means justify the removal of Bush from office.
And it IS nice that no-one has resorted to name-calling.
I ALWAYS try to avoid that and have to be pushed pretty hard before I resort to that. Calling someone "stupid" is never a good argument. Call them "mistaken" and explain why.
 
Just wanted to quickly point out the title of this thread and what it turned into. LOL, read the beginning and watch it transform,....hilarious....uhhh, just randomly posted to point that out.
 
The bottom fact for me is... I don't give shit about all that while in game. On a board, especially one designed for flames, all that political talk is more than fit. But when I PT with a group of other people, there is only one thing that truly matters to me: can I communicate with them?

Language can be a barrier. Luckily, I learned English while I was young, so I have no trouble reading and typing both in French and English. And though I am part of a French-"speaking" (most members located in Quebec, Canada) linkshell, I still PT with anglophones from all over the world. Who knows, I might have partied with an Australian, or even an English-speaking Italian! But I never really ponder the origins of the players in game, unless I need to communicate with them through the translator.

It's my choice to not involve real-life politics in the game. Some players might want to do so though. That Japanese player mentioned in the original post might or might not have decided to discriminate a large group of players due to geographical location (why would language matter in a Bazaar?) If someone asks me where I'm from, and after I tell them I'm from Quebec, Canada, and they start bullying me, saying stuff like "You live in friggin' North America, learn the damn language!" Be sure I'll be leaving the PT. I'm free to choose who I'm partying with, and for which reasons.

Am I being discriminitive against those who have decided to involve real-life politics? YOU BET!!! Those are the people who tend to irk me, whether it's an American who accuses me to be piggy-back riding their international influence, or a fellow Canadian starting to brag about Canada > U.S.A., I don't care. I can't deal with that kind of attitude when all I want while playing this game is to evade real world issues.
 
p.jpeg


:lol:
 
Hey Tyrion, I don't mind being on top :twisted:
 
Ok that picture could be construed as offensive but honestly its pretty funny. :roll:

Yes Sudan needs help, but isnt that the domain of the UN <---(see the N not an S its an N) If US got involved in Sudan right now, the same arguements would be brought up... We have no right to be there etc etc... Why doesnt the UN do its job so we dont have to?

Do i know the full motivations behind our entry into Iraq? No. Do i think its good sadaam and his family is gone for good? Yes. Lets liken global politics to FFXI for fun. lets say... im a lvl 75 WHM. Why should i put my EXP on the line to raise your decimated pt in Eldieme Necropolis? (why should i risk american lives to help a country with oppressive gvmnt)
A) i'm a nice guy
B) reward
C) (thats too bad) (see you again!)

in country-country politics, A just isnt ever EVER going to happen... OK lets see everyone in america donate taxpayer dollars to help out those poor ppl in the sudan. uh huh... right. if you can convine ppl to do that then by golly run for president cuz your awesome.
B sounds good to you but all the other players (countrys) think your a dick
C all the other players (countrys) think your a dick

So our only choices, B and C, make us look like dicks. (joy)

And we DID go to afganistan. we are still there. There are plenty of american soldiers policing countries all over the world because the UN is (too weak). They dont get things done. The UN is seriously going to fail just like its predecessor, League of Nations, (i THINK was the name...) because if ppl dont follow its rules, its power is empty. Once countries stop obeying the UN it has nothing to back it. Nothing. Obviously some already have.
 
Ezikiel said:
Well said Pseulen.

Sabia you're right. Iraq did not pose a threat to the US anytime soon. Iraq posed a threat to it's own people- read my earlier post, for humanity's sake he and his sons had to go.
Click to expand...

That is not why the US decided to topple Saddam Hussein. If it was, they could have done it a long time ago and prevented the genocide of many Iraqis. The US promised military backing to any group who would rise up and overthrow Saddam within Iraq. The Kurds, seeing their chance, rised up... and the US changed their mind about the military backing, leaving Saddam free to gas millions of Kurdish people. If the US was so concerned about Iraqi citizens, why didn't they keep their own word in the first place and support the Kurds?

Also... did you know that under Saddam, Iraq was one of the most forward-thinking Arab nations in the world? Women were allowed freedoms that were unheard of in neighbouring countries, such as ability to have a career. Don't get me wrong, the Iraqis were being repressed... but there were countless other nations in the Arab world and in Africa especially in which the citizens were far worse off. Of course, those nations weren't oil rich.
 
aixlachaise said:
Also... did you know that under Saddam, Iraq was one of the most forward-thinking Arab nations in the world?
Which is why Baghdad, pre-Saddam rule, was an industrialized and extremely bustling city and only afer Saddam, went to hell in a handbasket in ruins.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
aixlachaise said:
Ezikiel said:
Well said Pseulen.

Sabia you're right. Iraq did not pose a threat to the US anytime soon. Iraq posed a threat to it's own people- read my earlier post, for humanity's sake he and his sons had to go.
Click to expand...

That is not why the US decided to topple Saddam Hussein. If it was, they could have done it a long time ago and prevented the genocide of many Iraqis. The US promised military backing to any group who would rise up and overthrow Saddam within Iraq. The Kurds, seeing their chance, rised up... and the US changed their mind about the military backing, leaving Saddam free to gas millions of Kurdish people. If the US was so concerned about Iraqi citizens, why didn't they keep their own word in the first place and support the Kurds?

Also... did you know that under Saddam, Iraq was one of the most forward-thinking Arab nations in the world? Women were allowed freedoms that were unheard of in neighbouring countries, such as ability to have a career. Don't get me wrong, the Iraqis were being repressed... but there were countless other nations in the Arab world and in Africa especially in which the citizens were far worse off. Of course, those nations weren't oil rich.
Click to expand...

One point that i want to hit mainly is that the second a nation decides to send in troops for some altruistic crusade to save an oppressed people is the same second a government acknowledges that the lives of their citizenry are less than equal or even equal to the citizens of another nation. It is a governemnts first responsiblity to protect there own citizens, then such idealistic endeavours are at least somewhat justifiable. Quite frankly, i do not see how liberating the people from Saddam has benefited our nation. Many of you may be thinking how heartless, but this would bring to another point. The only way Iraq will be a place better to live in is if they take an initiative to help themselves which was not present at the time of US occupation, they may look better off now but how long will that last, how long will it take for the power vacuum we have created to be filled by another dictator or oppressive government. If this works as a catalyst to make the Iraqi people self motivated than i think it is an ok step but not a prudent one at this time when we are already stretched to thin.

Aix brings up some good points. To elaborate on a couple: around 1990 (pregulf war) there was a large coalition of anti saddam groups that wanted him ousted but required some United States backup but the US gave no such support. An Iraqi initiative to oust saddam that was not supported by the US.

But mainly, looking at Iraq in comparison to other arab nations. Of course nations like Saudi Arabia havent committed genocide against kurds but they tend to do some pretty bad shit. Pakistani and Saudi Arabian school systems entrench radical islam in their curriculum (as did Iraq i know). Pakistan still has terrorist camps. Saudi Arabian royal families still pump money to terrorist organizations. Pakisatn and India often threaten one another with Nuclear Weapons. And of course Isreal and Palestine need i say more. Saudi Arabia has some of the most strict laws that oppress women. Its not just Iraq, Iraq isnt the only evil in the Middle East, many would agree. One thing is for sure throwing money and troops in the desert (or dessert either one really) wont help the situation.
 
-.-;; Will someone shut this thread up.
 
Another one will just pop up in its place. Might as well let this go turn into one of those massive record-holding threads that'll be some 100odd pages long...=/
 
Sabia said:
Hey Tyrion, I don't mind being on top :twisted:
Click to expand...
Was just looking through this tread to get my daily dose of signatures/avatars to be nerfed, and came across the above, which is pretty much the only line that makes this thread worth reading.
 
... and on the topic of war; war is good for business, doesn't really matter if some low income family lives are lost as long as they are huge profits to be made.
 
Mattaru said:
One point that i want to hit mainly is that the second a nation decides to send in troops for some altruistic crusade to save an oppressed people is the same second a government acknowledges that the lives of their citizenry are less than equal or even equal to the citizens of another nation. It is a governemnts first responsiblity to protect there own citizens, then such idealistic endeavours are at least somewhat justifiable.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. Aren't all people created equal??? Should not others have the same rights or opertunities as you???

Lest we forget, it was pure CHANCE that you were born in this country and not there.

Sculli- Yes war is, unfortunately, good for business. War does help the economy. But remember a good economy, is good for us. (Unless you are communist :twisted: :twisted: )

K guys. This thread is rather tireing...... I think I'm finished.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top