If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#591
|
|||
|
|||
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message ... In article , S Green wrote: less and less. Cannot get used to commercials every 5 minutes When I first went to the States, I was surprised the Simpsons took a whole half hour slot. BBC2 gets two episodes into half an hour by not having ads. So they cram in twice the crap. Hell, our commercials are better then BBC TV. Anyway, who needs TV when you have the Internet. Who needs TV when you have BOOKS!! |
#592
|
|||
|
|||
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message ... In article ed39c.101758$_w.1314500@attbi_s53, Jay Honeck wrote: Of course, NPR mentioned this only in passing, with great reluctance. It was almost like they were apologizing to their listeners for reporting something good from Iraq. (They, of course, ended with reports of more sabotage in the oil fields, just to placate the faithful...) The BBC quite happily reports the improvements, as well as the bad stuff. Absolute Bull****!!! |
#593
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug Carter" wrote in message ... Tom Sixkiller wrote: How much have our proposed solutions in many areas been conditioned by Hollyweird? More importantly, how has the perception of the U.S. by the rest of the world been formed? Their local media (often state sponsored) for one; their academia for two. |
#594
|
|||
|
|||
Tom Sixkiller wrote: Who needs TV when you have BOOKS!! Amen. George Patterson Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would not yield to the tongue. |
#595
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sixkiller" wrote: How long did we occupy Germany, Japan, South Korea? And only SK had conflicts afterward? Not analogous. It is a gross oversimplification to compare the defeated Axis powers with Iraq. That would be half the world outside the US. You're just making stuff up, now. but in Germany there was. Nothing significant or persistent; Correct, many went to the eastern bloc and rasied hell from the other side of the Iron Curtain. Whom are you talking about, SS fanatics? Raised hell? Are you trying to say they (whoever "they" are) supported guerilla warfare in West Germany to overthrow the government? certainly not as much as there still is in Afghanistan. Did we wage war in Afghanistan in the same manner we did in WW2? Mmm, let's see: we dropped a bunch of ordnance on the bad guys and then invaded, so I guess the answer would be "yes." In Iraq, the Iraqi's will have take on the opposition. Indeed. But Iraqis ARE the opposition, too, with the help of all sorts of foreign scoundrels that have flocked to Iraq since the war. Nice lumping them all together. I thought that's what conservatives are supposed to do? What? You're the one that lumped them all together. I pointed out that there are Iraqis on both sides. And what does "I thought that's what conservatives are supposed to do?" mean? -- Dan C172RG at BFM (remove pants to reply by email) |
#596
|
|||
|
|||
Tom Sixkiller wrote: Their local media (often state sponsored) for one; their academia for two. And in the Middle East at least, their priests. George Patterson Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would not yield to the tongue. |
#597
|
|||
|
|||
In neither Germany and Japan were there
multiple, imbedded groups of armed, organized opponents to the installed regimes, with worldwide networks of financial and logistical support. The Germans still managed to run a very efficient and effective underground, smuggling ex-Nazi officials to South America, and the Japanese managed to retain their system of economic favoritism, which amounted to an economic underground. German and Japanese acquiescence was due partly to the fact that they were so thoroughly and utterly defeated that there was simply no "fight" left in them. Maybe that's what will be necessary in this war, too? That is our intent in Iraq. My prediction is that it will not work. I fear you may be right, but it is our duty to try. The alternatives are simply not acceptable. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#598
|
|||
|
|||
So because we don't perceive a simple answer, we should pursue a policy
that history has already proven to be a failure? Have we forgotten the Soviet experience in Afghanistan? Don's simplistic scenario belongs in a Tom Clancy novel; it's fantasy. In Afghanistan the Soviets couldn't accomplish in a decade what we accomplished in a few months, so this may not be the best comparison. Occupying a country and setting up a friendly (or "puppet") government is not something to be taken lightly, nor should "success" necessarily be measured by simply measuring the longevity of that particular government. Often "success" is something far less measurable, and may not be discernible for decades. For example, Viet Nam, broadly seen as a failure of foreign policy in its time, is more and more seen as a long, painful -- but necessary -- chapter in the eventual defeat of Communism. And, with even longer perspective, Viet Nam can be viewed as simply a continuation of the Korean Conflict -- another proxy war between America, the Soviet Union, and China. Heck, I imagine in 200 years Korea and Viet Nam will be simply noted as being "after-shocks" of World War II -- which itself is now being seen as a HUGE "after-shock" of World War I. Even our "failed" puppet governments in South America during the 70s and 80s are now being viewed as battle-fronts of the Cold War. Installing a corrupt leader in Guatemala may have appeared awful at the time, but in the titanic struggle against the Soviet Union, even these "defeats" may have contributed decisively to our ultimate victory. History is fluid, and we are only in the earliest stages of what will be a very long and nasty war. Don't be too hasty to declare our defeat. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#599
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan Luke" wrote in message ... "Tom Sixkiller" wrote: How long did we occupy Germany, Japan, South Korea? And only SK had conflicts afterward? Not analogous. It is a gross oversimplification to compare the defeated Axis powers with Iraq. That would be half the world outside the US. You're just making stuff up, now. but in Germany there was. Nothing significant or persistent; Correct, many went to the eastern bloc and rasied hell from the other side of the Iron Curtain. Whom are you talking about, SS fanatics? Raised hell? Are you trying to say they (whoever "they" are) supported guerilla warfare in West Germany to overthrow the government? Not guerilla warfare, but guess who was behind groups like Badder-Meinhof, and others all over the world. certainly not as much as there still is in Afghanistan. Did we wage war in Afghanistan in the same manner we did in WW2? Mmm, let's see: we dropped a bunch of ordnance on the bad guys and then invaded, so I guess the answer would be "yes." Limited vs total war. Now YOU'RE making stuff up (or spinning). In Iraq, the Iraqi's will have take on the opposition. Indeed. But Iraqis ARE the opposition, too, with the help of all sorts of foreign scoundrels that have flocked to Iraq since the war. Nice lumping them all together. I thought that's what conservatives are supposed to do? What? You're the one that lumped them all together. I pointed out that there are Iraqis on both sides. And what does "I thought that's what conservatives are supposed to do?" mean? You said, and I quote "But Iraqis ARE the opposition, too, with the help of all sorts of foreign scoundrels that have flocked to Iraq since the war." Sounds like your lumping ALL Iraqi's together (or did you snip too much?). I see our present situation more like South Korea from 1953 onward. |
#600
|
|||
|
|||
Not until we get over our hang-ups over nuclear energy will we have any
chance of kicking our oil habit, and we have to make a lot of big improvements in nuclear energy first as well. Sort of hard since with every passing year, society gets even more anti-nuclear power. I don't worry too much about this. For the moment, the anti-nuke crowd controls the dialogue, simply because there is no compelling reason to adapt nuclear energy. For 95% of the population, the energy debate is a non-starter, and totally off of their radar screens, because energy is cheap and plentiful. Just wait until their lights and air conditioners start clicking off, one by one, however. THEN you will see how truly weak the anti-nuclear crowd is -- and nuclear power plants will start popping up all over the planet once again. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|