UK Politics (7 Viewers)

[enzo]

How is pacifism extremely harmful?

He is a weapons dealer.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Juliano13]

ok... that is disregarding everything that came before ISIS popped out.

- - - Updated - - -



Well most of the current problems are because of west interventions be it military or any other covert ones...

Some of the current problems are because of west interventions. Most of the current problems are because of a disgusting religious doctrine that has spread in the last 30 or 40 years.

 

[enzo]

Certainly not every. Its not like things were so great before. Blaming all the problems in the region on our interventions is either lazy thinking or blind anti-americanism and anti-capitalism.

However, the "interventions" in Afghanistan and Iraq have destabilized these regions. Especially the "liberation" of Iraq.

 

[Raz]

Some of the current problems are because of west interventions. Most of the current problems are because of a disgusting religious doctrine that has spread in the last 30 or 40 years.

All this extremism, I just wonder if it has anything to do with west politics and interventions with the region in the last gazilion years or so...

 

[Ocelot]

Some of the current problems are because of west interventions. Most of the current problems are because of a disgusting religious doctrine that has spread in the last 30 or 40 years.

It's a mixture of different factors for sure, but to blame most of the problems on Islam is short sighted imo, it's incredibly difficult to make out the single most important contribution to the whole mess in general.

If we're talking about ISIS specifically, the US invasion of Iraq 2003 simply is the number one direct cause though.

 

[Juliano13]

However, the "interventions" in Afghanistan and Iraq have destabilized these regions. Especially the "liberation" of Iraq.

I realise that the quotes are supposed to mean sarcasm or something but it's a very poor attempt. Iraq was liberated from a sadistic tyrant who was murdering his own people, hiding known terrorists and trying to get weapons of mass destruction. Yes, despite all the crap in the media about the Nazis Bush and Cheney, lying and trying to frame the poor innocent guy, all the reports show that Saddam was playing with the investigators and just waiting for the sanctions to be lifted (which btw killed a lot more people than the war) to continue building WMDs. I can give you many instances where the Americans fucked up the war and the post-war reconstruction, but that doesn't mean the Iraq war was a mistake. The situation in Iraq between 2008-2011 was a lot better than during Saddam. The real mistake was supporting the Syrian rebels. That, combined with the early withdrawal from Iraq is what made ISIS possible.

As to Afghanistan, I don't see the point of explaining to anyone why a country controlled by jihadists should be attacked. There is really no argument against it.

 

[Raz]

I realise that the quotes are supposed to mean sarcasm or something but it's a very poor attempt. Iraq was liberated from a sadistic tyrant who was murdering his own people, hiding known terrorists and trying to get weapons of mass destruction. Yes, despite all the crap in the media about the Nazis Bush and Cheney, lying and trying to frame the poor innocent guy, all the reports show that Saddam was playing with the investigators and just waiting for the sanctions to be lifted (which btw killed a lot more people than the war) to continue building WMDs. I can give you many instances where the Americans fucked up the war and the post-war reconstruction, but that doesn't mean the Iraq war was a mistake. The situation in Iraq between 2008-2011 was a lot better than during Saddam. The real mistake was supporting the Syrian rebels. That, combined with the early withdrawal from Iraq is what made ISIS possible.

As to Afghanistan, I don't see the point of explaining to anyone why a country controlled by jihadists should be attacked. There is really no argument against it.

Stroll along, troll.

 

[Juliano13]

All this extremism, I just wonder if it has anything to do with west politics and interventions with the region in the last gazilion years or so...

Not much. USA has intervened in other places as well, sometimes supporting disgusting tyrants like in Central America, but for some reason they don't react the same way. I wonder what that reason is..

- - - Updated - - -

Stroll along, troll.

As I suspected, hoping you'd actually turn your brain on, is like hoping a gorilla would solve a differential equation.

 

[enzo]

I realise that the quotes are supposed to mean sarcasm or something but it's a very poor attempt. Iraq was liberated from a sadistic tyrant who was murdering his own people, hiding known terrorists and trying to get weapons of mass destruction. Yes, despite all the crap in the media about the Nazis Bush and Cheney, lying and trying to frame the poor innocent guy, all the reports show that Saddam was playing with the investigators and just waiting for the sanctions to be lifted (which btw killed a lot more people than the war) to continue building WMDs. I can give you many instances where the Americans fucked up the war and the post-war reconstruction, but that doesn't mean the Iraq war was a mistake. The situation in Iraq between 2008-2011 was a lot better than during Saddam. The real mistake was supporting the Syrian rebels. That, combined with the early withdrawal from Iraq is what made ISIS possible.

As to Afghanistan, I don't see the point of explaining to anyone why a country controlled by jihadists should be attacked. There is really no argument against it.

I think it wasn't only the early withdrawal, rather how the whole, let's call it "post-war" situation, was handled. During the war the objective is to win and defeat Saddam. This objective has been shared by the US and the majority of Iraq's people. After the war, the situation is completely different. The people need be able to live their lifes in freedom from then on. They need new goals, they want to achieve in their lifes. There most likely are new paradigms that the society needs to adopt and obey. That's a fucking hard job, and the US were never able to fulfill this.

 

[Juliano13]

It's a mixture of different factors for sure, but to blame most of the problems on Islam is short sighted imo, it's incredibly difficult to make out the single most important contribution to the whole mess in general.

If we're talking about ISIS specifically, the US invasion of Iraq 2003 simply is the number one direct cause though.

I'm no fan of Islam, but the ideology I was referring to is Islamism.

The second point is clearly wrong. Read my response to enzo about the war in Iraq.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it wasn't only the early withdrawal, rather how the whole, let's call it "post-war" situation, was handled. During the war the objective is to win and defeat Saddam. This objective has been shared by the US and the majority of Iraq's people. After the war, the situation is completely different. The people need be able to live their lifes in freedom from then on. They need new goals, they want to achieve in their lifes. There most likely are new paradigms that the society needs to adopt and obey. That's a fucking hard job, and the US were never able to fulfill this.

I don't disagree with any of that. In fact, the war against Saddam was won in 3 weeks.

 

[Raz]

As I suspected, hoping you'd actually turn your brain on, is like hoping a gorilla would solve a differential equation.

Yeah, ok Mr. Brains.

 

[Red]

The end result is just about the same (whether he is pro-terrorists or anti-war). Pacifism is in many cases extremely harmful and its simply the result of people saying "war sucks" and being unable or unwilling to move their though process further.

Doesn't mean you shouldn't make every effort to negotiate a peaceful solution before moving to more aggressive tactics.

I wasn't in favour of the UK going and bombing Syria, for instance, because I didn't think they had made enough of an effort to negotiate with key parties.

Instead they took the easy option and succumbed to macho posturing and being seen to do something, rather than doing what may actually result in some sort of lasting peace.

 

[Juliano13]

Doesn't mean you shouldn't make every effort to negotiate a peaceful solution before moving to more aggressive tactics.

I wasn't in favour of the UK going and bombing Syria, for instance, because I didn't think they had made enough of an effort to negotiate with key parties.

Instead they took the easy option and succumbed to macho posturing and being seen to do something, rather than doing what may actually result in some sort of lasting peace.

Syria was a mistake, but right now ground forces is the only way to deal with ISIS. And people thinking that a Sunni army defeating ISIS is a realistic scenario are completely clueless.

The important thing is to know that usually you can only get a peaceful solution if there's a credible threat of war.

 

[Martin]

London has a new mayor. Anyone know him?

 

[JuveJay]

Not personally.

 

[swag]

I thought all Pakistanis in the UK were alike. :rndh:

 

[Martin]

He's not Pakistani, the parents are. I was a little disappointed when I found this out.

 

[swag]

Immaculate conception has been known to happen from time-to-time.

 

[JuveJay]

I thought all Pakistanis in the UK were alike. :rndh:

Some of them like white girls more than others?

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

Oh, he is a Socialist rip London