Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kondar)
    Cop out!
    I noticed your primary source was this. You expect me to believe the citations used by the Iranians?

    Did Iraq use anthrax against either the Kurds or the Iranians by the way?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    Neither of these sources are credible.
    One was from the US Senate? Would you consider that credible?http://www.gulfweb.org/bigdoc/report/riegle1.html
    http://www.chronicillnet.org/PGWS/tuite/chembio.html
    And FYI, the Iran-Iraq war ended in August '88. Why would America send Iraq weapons after the war was over?
    Well, since you asked....

    Most historians say that it was to lure Iraq into invading Kuwait.. and thus giving the US reason to invade.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    I noticed your primary source was this. You expect me to believe the citations used by the Iranians?
    They provided credible sources. The information is nothing that I have not read before. Go to any of the following websites.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Iraq_War
    http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/researc...heet-1984.html
    http://www.photius.com/rogue_nations/020818_nyt.html
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    With the exceptions, maybe, of the last two of these different categories of putative Iraqi agent, sources of supply might as well be indigenous as external to Iraq, given the technology implied. Involvement of the last three categories would, in some circles, implicate the USSR as supplier, for the reason that the USSR is said, on evidence that has yet to be solidly substantiated but which has nonetheless attracted some firm believers, to have weaponized all three of them in recent years.
    It seems that the Soviet Union was the one who supplied Iraq its WMD.

    Originally Posted by Kondar
    One was from the US Senate? Would you consider that credible?
    Show me the primary source. And once again, did Iraq use the anthrax against anyone?

    Most historians say that it was to lure Iraq into invading Kuwait.. and thus giving the US reason to invade.
    Are these historians all named Chomsky? :rolleyes: Unless you want to discredit yourself, don't bring up conspiracy theories in the future.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well, they werent the only ones.
    Show me the primary source. And once again, did Iraq use the anthrax against anyone?
    No, they didnt, but they did have it.
    Are these historians all named Chomsky? :rolleyes: Unless you want to discredit yourself, don't bring up conspiracy theories in the future.
    This is actually a pretty common theory. Iraq was considered an ally one day and an enemy the next. There is evidence that Iraq consulted the US before invading Kuwait and we said something like .."its not our problem".
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kondar)
    Well, they werent the only ones.
    Proof?

    No, they didnt, but they did have it.
    Weren't you blaming the US for selling Iraq weapons which it used against the Kurds and/or Iranians?

    This is actually a pretty common theory. Iraq was considered an ally one day and an enemy the next. There is evidence that Iraq consulted the US before invading Kuwait and we said something like .."its not our problem".
    It'a a theory not backed by any facts. Even a tiny amount of research on the topic will show that the US never thought that Iraq planned to occupy Kuwait (it thought that Iraq wanted to take some disputed land from Kuwait), that Iraq was no longer an American ally as soon as the Iraq-Iran war ended (in '88), that Bush was pressured into starting the war by our Arab allies (which is why Saudi Arabia paid for half of our expenses), that Iraq violated the principle of national sovereignty which was supported by almost every nation in the world including the Soviet Union, that the US economy went into a recession due to the war, and that the US did not gain a thing from the war, especially due to the unwillingness of its allies to march into Baghdad.

    Any political scientist who would make the claim you just did would lose his reputation, unless he said it in a country like China of course.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    Proof?
    Weren't you blaming the US for selling Iraq weapons which it used against the Kurds and/or Iranians?
    Is going around in circles a new debate technique? This has already been established.
    It'a a theory not backed by any facts.
    Iraq consulted the US prior to the war and was given the go ahead to invade Kuwait. Do you dispute this?
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    You said that you expected people to defend their own country
    Yes, I would expect people to defend their own country if it's worth defending....no, I would not expect people to defend an odious despot.

    therefore...Do you support the Iraqi resistance towards the american army...YES OR NO?
    NO, there is no Iraq resistance, it's syrian, algerian, afghan, indonesian, lebonese etc.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    You mean whites have one culture? Or that Jews or Muslims base their loyalty on the color of their skin?
    If I mean that I'll say that. Please answer my questions about whether you feel White communities/nations should be treated differently?

    Here is a link to a 2001 essay by Stephen Steinlight, former Director of National Affairs at the American Jewish Committee, arguing that Jews should try to influence Immigration to the US to suit Jewish interests, not least because he fears the growing Islamic community. A few extracts...

    Like thousands of other typical Jewish kids of my generation, I was reared as a Jewish nationalist, even a quasi-separatist… More tacitly and subconsciously, I was taught the superiority of my people to the gentiles who had oppressed us. We were taught to view non-Jews as untrustworthy outsiders, people from whom sudden gusts of hatred might be anticipated, people less sensitive, intelligent, and moral than ourselves… my nationalist training was to inculcate the belief that the primary division in the world was between "us" and "them."

    ...We are, after all, standing on the edge of what is arguably the most profound social transformation in the nation's history. It is a demographic transformation that, most experts believe, will result in a majority non-white population sometime before the end of the new century. A new American nation is coming into being before our very eyes, and many in the Jewish world are worried about it; some are even terrified.

    ...The white "Christian" supremacists who have historically opposed either all immigration or all non-European immigration (Europeans being defined as Nordic or Anglo-Saxon), a position re-asserted by Peter Brimelow, must not be permitted to play a prominent role in the debate over the way America responds to unprecedented demographic change.

    ...is the emerging new multicultural American nation good for the Jews?...In an America in which people of color form the plurality, as has already happened in California, most with little or no historical experience with or knowledge of Jews, will Jewish sensitivities continue to enjoy extraordinarily high levels of deference and will Jewish interests continue to receive special protection?...how long do we actually believe that nearly 80 percent of the entire foreign aid budget of the United States will go to Israel?


    You'll have spotted Bizzy that he insists White "Christian" supremacists should have no right to influence the way their country handles 'arguably the most profound social transformation in the nation's history', yet insists that Jewish supremacists have not only the right, but the duty. [Only White nationalists are ever labelled supremacists, even non-White supremacists avoid being so tagged :confused: ]

    Why can't America's Gentile Whites express legitimate group interests while Blacks, Hispanics, Arabs, Jews and other groups do? The transformation of America surely affects them as a group, just as much as any other.

    The same question applies for British Whites, and French, German and Italians and so on? Why are citizens of historically White Nations, who seek only the same rights as people in non-White nations, to preserve their unique cultural/racial/ethnic heritage denied this basic right?

    Will Whites always submit meekly to this oppression which if continued unchallenged will see them become minorities in their historic homelands?

    Will it be Jews who save Whites from minority status because Jews fear non-Whites even more than they do Whites. Irony eh?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    It was disastrous because the policies weren't maintained.
    Do you really think that the Soviet Union would have lasted even as long as it did if Stalinist methods had continued to be used?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by halloweenjack)
    The problem with your idea of 'using criminal methods to fight criminals propogates more criminal activity' is only conclusive to a democratic state. For example, it is widely accepted by academics that authoritarian regimes are able to deal with terrorism far easier than democratic regimes. Using things such as torture, executions and other unsavoury tactics actually works and works well.These methods however would not be acceptable to western democratic audience.



    It would not be a crime if it was sanctioned by the state within its own borders, in authoritarian regimes for example.
    In other words, a terrorist state doesn't tolerate rivals. Even then, though, there is the question of how well it works in the long term. Terrorists ststes tend not to last long enough for us to find out- an interesting fact in itself.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    And how many of them from people other than Chomsky? Do you understand the difference between selling someone weapons and selling them materials that can be made into weapons but also have civilian purposes?
    There is a difference between selling an axe to a lumberjack and selling an axe to someone with blood-stained clothes and a set ofr human scalps at his belt, though.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Why can't America's Gentile Whites express legitimate group interests while Blacks, Hispanics, Arabs, Jews and other groups do? The transformation of America surely affects them as a group, just as much as any other.
    There are a great many "gentile white" groups in the USA. they often have conflicting interests.
    The same question applies for British Whites, and French, German and Italians and so on? Why are citizens of historically White Nations, who seek only the same rights as people in non-White nations, to preserve their unique cultural/racial/ethnic heritage denied this basic right?
    You are perfectly entitled to "preserve your cultural/racial/ethnic heritage": you are entitled to engage in whatever cultural activities you wish, you may marry and have children with who you please. Those rights are defining elements of British culture and many of us choose to exercise our rights to pursue cultures not ours by birth- just as many unwhite unBritish people choose to write in the English language- and raise children that would not meet your standards.
    Will Whites always submit meekly to this oppression which if continued unchallenged will see them become minorities in their historic homelands?
    Which whites? There are a great many white cultural and ethnic and racial subgroups: do you, like John Aubrey, consider the aboriginals of Witshire hoplelessly inferior to others, or should their culture somehow be preserved?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    There are a great many "gentile white" groups in the USA. they often have conflicting interests.
    If you can name me a White Gentile organisation which is permitted to express White Gentile group interests as distinct from other groups without being labelled Nazi, racist, bigot, hater, supremacist please tell.
    You are perfectly entitled to "preserve your cultural/racial/ethnic heritage": you are entitled to engage in whatever cultural activities you wish, you may marry and have children with who you please. Those rights are defining elements of British culture and many of us choose to exercise our rights to pursue cultures not ours by birth- just as many unwhite unBritish people choose to write in the English language- and raise children that would not meet your standards.
    Britain is historically White, until a few decades ago, over 99%. Can we preserve that racial heritage and the cultural and ethnic traditions that accompany it? What if we just want to preserve the ethnic/racial balance that exists today?
    Which whites? There are a great many white cultural and ethnic and racial subgroups: do you, like John Aubrey, consider the aboriginals of Witshire hoplelessly inferior to others, or should their culture somehow be preserved?
    All. As far as I'm aware African's or Asians are not asked to select a few of their peoples who shall be permitted to retain their homelands and unique heritage. Double standards again for Whites?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    If you can name me a White Gentile organisation which is permitted to express White Gentile group interests as distinct from other groups without being labelled Nazi, racist, bigot, hater, supremacist please tell.
    Hmm, there's probably a reason that they're labelled in that manner.

    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    Britain is historically White, until a few decades ago, over 99%. Can we preserve that racial heritage and the cultural and ethnic traditions that accompany it? What if we just want to preserve the ethnic/racial balance that exists today?
    Preserving your heritage/culture/tradition is a matter of your own concern; I fail to see how coexisting with people whose culture differs from yours erodes it.

    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    All. As far as I'm aware African's or Asians are not asked to select a few of their peoples who shall be permitted to retain their homelands and unique heritage. Double standards again for Whites?
    Neither are white people; there are no double standards.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In other words, a terrorist state doesn't tolerate rivals. Even then, though, there is the question of how well it works in the long term. Terrorists ststes tend not to last long enough for us to find out- an interesting fact in itself.
    I'd say Stalinist Russia was an example and so was Saddam's Iraq, both used repressive and over the top methods to defeat civil problems.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Oh Felicity...
    What is the reason Whites are tagged with labels like haters, bigots, supremacists for expressing the same views and sentiments as other racial and ethnic groups, who are not so tagged? You say there are no double standards.

    Stephen Steinlight is a respected spokesman for the Jewish community and his views considered acceptable. Would a gentile White with equivalent views escape accusations of White supremacism or racism? Seriously? No double standards?

    Preserving our heritage/culture/tradition is a matter of national or group concern, just as it is for non-Whites, all other groups talk about this issue of preserving distinct and cherished traditions. Why must Whites not articulate this problem at group or national level? No double standards remember.

    I didn't come easy to White Nationalism, but as soon as you decide to treat all peoples the same, that's what you become. There's no supremacism or hate involved.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArthurOliver)
    If you can name me a White Gentile organisation which is permitted to express White Gentile group interests as distinct from other groups without being labelled Nazi, racist, bigot, hater, supremacist please tell.
    What are "White Gentile group" interests? There are a lot of WWhite Gentile groups" with nothing at all in common with each other.
    Britain is historically White, until a few decades ago, over 99%. Can we preserve that racial heritage and the cultural and ethnic traditions that accompany it?
    Britain isn''t human historically. We- humans- have only been here for a very short time. As most of the historical whites turned up and bashed the occupying bunch of historical whites that isn't exactly evidence that they have anything in common: you have more in common culturally with an English speaking nigerian that a monoglot gaelic speaker.
    What if we just want to preserve the ethnic/racial balance that exists today?All.
    Cultures cannot be preserved in asppic: they evolve and change from what surrounds them. Do you propose to ban guitars because they are descended from Arab instruments? Is tea to be banned as decadent and oriental? Will that recent immigrant the potato be retuned to the Americas with the tomato and maize? Are you going to ban microchips unless they are proudly stamped "Made in England"? You are perfectly entitled to cling onto what you imagine is your own unique culture/race/ethnic background, but the rest of us will continue the great British traditions of cultural impoerialism and racial pollution.
    As far as I'm aware African's or Asians are not asked to select a few of their peoples who shall be permitted to retain their homelands and unique heritage. Double standards again for Whites?
    Check up on actual policy in many African and asian countries. There are a great many countries very eager to suppress the cultures which aren't properly "national". i suspect that you and Mr Mugabe a might not agree on what should be enforced, but you'd come out with very similar sounding rhetoric. The terms might differ but the phrases would be similar.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    (I cant use the analogy of guns since apparently in the US they are considered to be legal and like personal toys nowadays, hence the highest number of deaths)
    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir

    Never let the statistics get in the way of knee-jerk anti-Americanism.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    i suspect that you and Mr Mugabe a might not agree on what should be enforced, but you'd come out with very similar sounding rhetoric. The terms might differ but the phrases would be similar.
    OWN3D!!!
 
 
 

2,869

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.