Turn on thread page Beta

US Policy - What is Americas next target watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    my analogy suggests that the US enters or operates on the back of a regime collapse, where the population requires assistance in overthrowing a dictatorship or oppressive regime, installs a leadership, in recent cases through democratic election and helps to rebuild/or manage such work on the infrastructure of said country. this is with the bonus that the new regime has working ties with the US and is willing to export and assure an oil supply.
    The US interfers in regieme change to assure that the nations remain freindly (the rigging of the Italian elections to prevent Communists from coming to power during the cold war) or to create a new puppit state.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments"
    Precisely. Killing innocent Palistinians is unlawful with the intent to intimidate terrorists, like Hamas. Basically, the message Israel is relaying is: "If you use your militia (read: NOT an official Palistinian form of military), we will come in with our army to blow up your houses, kill your people, destroy your farms and shops, take a few prisoners and, if we can, take shots at ambulences, oh people of Palistine."
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    incidentally, since when did assuring a natural resource supply become a crime?
    Since it involved the slaughter of thousands of innocent people and the occupation of a foreign country, whilst hiding behind false claims.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chubb)
    The US interfers in regieme change to assure that the nations remain freindly (the rigging of the Italian elections to prevent Communists from coming to power during the cold war) or to create a new puppit state.
    While the US were surely preparing for some kind of foul play in case of a Communist electoral victory in Italy (via the Gladio/Stay behind structure) I have never heard accusations of electoral rigging in italian elections in the fifties/sixties/seventies. Where did you find this information?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shift3)
    Precisely. Killing innocent Palistinians is unlawful
    killing Hamas leaders is unlawful? i think not. killing and destroying homes to prevent terrorism, all above board according to the Geneva Convention.

    with the intent to intimidate terrorists, like Hamas.
    no to wipe them out. either way, you must see the ridiculous logic of your argument.

    Basically, the message Israel is relaying is: "If you use your militia
    your militia? you mean Hamas, an internationally recognised terrorist group.

    (read: NOT an official Palistinian form of military), we will come in with our army to blow up your houses,
    demolish houses that provide access and resource for tunnels aiding terrorist attacks.

    kill your people,
    unintentional casualties, most often women and children organised by Hamas to stand in front of Palestinian gunmen, as we have seen in Iraq, in an attempt to take advantage of the morals of Israeli troops(kids). unfortunately there will be civilian dead in such a conflict. the intent is entirely different

    destroy your farms and shops, take a few prisoners and, if we can, take shots at ambulences, oh people of Palistine."
    im sorry? are these the same ambulances and Red Cross vehicles that Hamas uses to get close to Israeli territory and take advantage of their conflict training? thats right, gunmen driving ambulances so as to leave the IDF second-guessing. id like to see a source that can claim the IDF intentionally shot down a legitimate ambulance or red cross vehicle.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shift3)
    Since it involved the slaughter
    please restrain yourself.

    of thousands of innocent people and the occupation of a foreign country, whilst hiding behind false claims.
    hiding behind false claims? hiding from what? partially false in retrospect. the claims were genuine, at least from Bush, at the time.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    partially false in retrospect. the claims were genuine, at least from Bush, at the time.
    You're just playng with words there....you're sayng that at the time he thought that they were true and so that makes the claims themselves genuine...??? Just because somebody ardently believes something to be true is does not make it so...nor does it add any respectability to the claims it merely demonstrates that he was unable to seperate his own beliefs and aspirations from the evidence presented to him...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by giordano)
    While the US were surely preparing for some kind of foul play in case of a Communist electoral victory in Italy (via the Gladio/Stay behind structure) I have never heard accusations of electoral rigging in italian elections in the fifties/sixties/seventies. Where did you find this information?
    Saw that on a TV program (the funny thing is that the program was trying to show it as a good thing :rolleyes: ).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    killing Hamas leaders is unlawful? i think not. killing and destroying homes to prevent terrorism, all above board according to the Geneva Convention.
    I didn't say Hamas leaders. Defenseless people who have done nothing wrong aren't Hamas leaders.

    no to wipe them out. either way, you must see the ridiculous logic of your argument.
    Well, by your logic, Hamas shouldn't be considered unlawful then. They're doing the same thing. They're killing and destroying to prevent Israel from occuping their land, and ultimately protecting themselves. Just because Israel operates using an official army to perform these duties does not make them better.

    your militia? you mean Hamas, an internationally recognised terrorist group.
    In the same way Israel is internationally recognized (at least by many sane people) as an abuser of human rights, and to some extent a terrorist. And believe it or not, Hamas are viewed by MANY Palistinians as a militia of freedom fighters.

    demolish houses that provide access and resource for tunnels aiding terrorist attacks.
    Yes, I suppose taking random shots at random houses is the best way to achieve that.

    unintentional casualties, most often women and children organised by Hamas to stand in front of Palestinian gunmen, as we have seen in Iraq, in an attempt to take advantage of the morals of Israeli troops(kids). unfortunately there will be civilian dead in such a conflict. the intent is entirely different
    You've seen women and children stand in front of Iraqi gunmen? Assuming what you're saying is true, then the alleged morals of the Israeli troops must be unique, since they kill them anyway. Unintentional casualties my ass.

    im sorry? are these the same ambulances and Red Cross vehicles that Hamas uses to get close to Israeli territory and take advantage of their conflict training? thats right, gunmen driving ambulances so as to leave the IDF second-guessing. id like to see a source that can claim the IDF intentionally shot down a legitimate ambulance or red cross vehicle.
    http://www.palestinemonitor.org/upda...%20wounded.htm
    http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/04/3087.php
    http://www.hrea.org/lists/hr-headlin.../msg00251.html
    http://www.btselem.org/English/Press...002/020314.asp
    http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=1261
    http://www.amnesty.org.il/israel/pr_64.html
    You should also know that Israel sometimes prevents ambulances from collecting the wounded, and this is considered a war crime.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    please restrain yourself.
    Yes, slaughtered. That's the word that describes the killing of HUNDREDS of people. I don't think I need to restrain myself.

    hiding behind false claims? hiding from what? partially false in retrospect. the claims were genuine, at least from Bush, at the time.
    Unless you read his mind, you cannot make such claims. Just because he can put on a serious face and back all his accusations with "intelligence reports", that could have most likely been fake, does not make his claims genuine.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cossack)
    You're just playng with words there....you're sayng that at the time he thought that they were true and so that makes the claims themselves genuine...??? Just because somebody ardently believes something to be true is does not make it so...nor does it add any respectability to the claims it merely demonstrates that he was unable to seperate his own beliefs and aspirations from the evidence presented to him...
    his claim was a genuine one. a claim. that claim turned out to not equate to the reality we have now. i was putting it in some context, or rather defining exactly my view on it. that being, he was claiming his genuine belief and conviction. both based on assessment of material, expertise and intelligence available to him.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shift3)
    I didn't say Hamas leaders. Defenseless people who have done nothing wrong aren't Hamas leaders.
    killing innocent Palestinians caught up in a legitimate conflict with terrorists or militants is unfortunate, but not considered murder. at least according to most social codes. terrorists target and seek to murder innocent civilians. a clear difference.

    Well, by your logic, Hamas shouldn't be considered unlawful then. They're doing the same thing.
    my logic is stated above. seeking to kill as many innocent men, women and children is murder. targeting militants and terrorists who target your own population is not. innocent civilians of both sides, killed in such conflict does not carry the same moral or legal weight.

    They're killing and destroying to prevent Israel from occuping their land, and ultimately protecting themselves.
    youre possibly the only person to believe that, even Hamas admits that its goal is to wipe Israeli out, indeed a rather basic Encyclopaedia entry defines Hamas as a "group dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Palestinian Islamic state". Yassin preached the destruction of Israel, they called for all Jews to be pushed into the sea. indeed, it has nothing to do with Israel, its "to wage war, war, war on the sons of Zion"

    Just because Israel operates using an official army to perform these duties does not make them better.
    Hamas targets men,women and children seeking to end a race of people. the IDF is the defence force of a legitimate and democratic nation state who operate and take action to defend their people, as is their responsiblity and right. all operations are carried with the prevention of terrorism and the defence of the Israeli people as the primary and only goal. just my 2 cents but i believe they have the moral ground, the political ground is indisputable.

    In the same way Israel is internationally recognized (at least by many sane people) as an abuser of human rights, and to some extent a terrorist.
    name one respected international institution that outlaws Israel as a terrorist group. Human Rights are obviously important. State defence is more important. every head of state recognises and understands this.

    And believe it or not, Hamas are viewed by MANY Palistinians as a militia of freedom fighters.
    i can understand that. freedom is not what they are fighting for, they admit that much themselves. the palestinians havent had freedom in centuries, yet it was only when the 'Sons of Zion' emerged that any substantial 'resistance' grew.

    Yes, I suppose taking random shots at random houses is the best way to achieve that.
    perhaps youd be good enough to provide me with some material so i can grasp your claims.

    You've seen women and children stand in front of Iraqi gunmen? Assuming what you're saying is true, then the alleged morals of the Israeli troops must be unique, since they kill them anyway. Unintentional casualties my ass.
    those aiding terrorists or militants are considered as such. the US didnt shoot the Iraqi women and children, and then 2 civilians ended up mutilated, burnt and hung from a bridge 20mins later.

    the same ambulances that have explosives and used to ram IDF positions or the ones used as portable turrets?

    the IDF has a less than cheery track record, i dont agree with some of their measures, i dont find some stories particuarly agreeable, but by the very fact that they are constantly monitored and criticised for not respecting, by any ones standards, ridiculous and unfeasible restrictions on their actions should tell you something about the difference between the two sides.

    war crimes become relevant when you fight an enemy who has equal respect for the same terms of engagement. im sure the Palestinians are very much open to justice - http://www.israelnewsagency.com/pale...warcrimes.html
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chubb)
    OK people. I was wondering where is likely to be the next target of the "War On Terrorism", where do you guys think is or do you think there won't be another war?

    I saw a while ago a list of Americas targets (drawn up by the US government), on it the following were included (there were others but I forgot about them):

    Iraq (pre Gulf War take 2)
    Iran (I think)
    North Korea
    Cuba (This has gone too far)

    and a few others (think there were some in africa and central america).

    So the question is - will America attack again and if so who?

    Personaly I think it will be Iran (it would link up Afghanistan and Iraq - plus since President Bush should have been able to locate Iraq on the map by now he should be able to find Iran easily )

    Note - Cuba is still protected by an old cold war agreement with Russia

    Your chin will be attacked next
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This is why I try to avoid internet debates. They just go on and on, with both parties refuting each other's last posts. It's an endless cycle. And for what? Nothing. I can assure you my point of view won't change, and I doubt anyone else's would either. I suppose you can learn what other people think, but that gets boring after a while.

    I say we call it quits, eh vienna95?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Investmentboy)
    Your chin will be attacked next
    Don't worry - my chin has good defences.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chubb)
    Don't worry - my chin has good defences.
    Oh my god, you have a beard...you're a communist!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Squishy)
    Oh my god, you have a beard...you're a communist!
    No - I was talking about my fists.
    Though I do have a few communist beleifs.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    killing innocent Palestinians caught up in a legitimate conflict with terrorists or militants is unfortunate, but not considered murder. at least according to most social codes. terrorists target and seek to murder innocent civilians. a clear difference.


    my logic is stated above. seeking to kill as many innocent men, women and children is murder. targeting militants and terrorists who target your own population is not. innocent civilians of both sides, killed in such conflict does not carry the same moral or legal weight.


    youre possibly the only person to believe that, even Hamas admits that its goal is to wipe Israeli out, indeed a rather basic Encyclopaedia entry defines Hamas as a "group dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Palestinian Islamic state". Yassin preached the destruction of Israel, they called for all Jews to be pushed into the sea. indeed, it has nothing to do with Israel, its "to wage war, war, war on the sons of Zion"


    Hamas targets men,women and children seeking to end a race of people. the IDF is the defence force of a legitimate and democratic nation state who operate and take action to defend their people, as is their responsiblity and right. all operations are carried with the prevention of terrorism and the defence of the Israeli people as the primary and only goal. just my 2 cents but i believe they have the moral ground, the political ground is indisputable.


    name one respected international institution that outlaws Israel as a terrorist group. Human Rights are obviously important. State defence is more important. every head of state recognises and understands this.


    i can understand that. freedom is not what they are fighting for, they admit that much themselves. the palestinians havent had freedom in centuries, yet it was only when the 'Sons of Zion' emerged that any substantial 'resistance' grew.


    perhaps youd be good enough to provide me with some material so i can grasp your claims.


    those aiding terrorists or militants are considered as such. the US didnt shoot the Iraqi women and children, and then 2 civilians ended up mutilated, burnt and hung from a bridge 20mins later.



    the same ambulances that have explosives and used to ram IDF positions or the ones used as portable turrets?

    the IDF has a less than cheery track record, i dont agree with some of their measures, i dont find some stories particuarly agreeable, but by the very fact that they are constantly monitored and criticised for not respecting, by any ones standards, ridiculous and unfeasible restrictions on their actions should tell you something about the difference between the two sides.

    war crimes become relevant when you fight an enemy who has equal respect for the same terms of engagement. im sure the Palestinians are very much open to justice - http://www.israelnewsagency.com/pale...warcrimes.html
    This is not pink - irrelevant! :mad:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shiny)
    This is not pink - irrelevant! :mad:
    Pink?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shiny)
    This is not pink - irrelevant! :mad:
    killing innocent Palestinians caught up in a legitimate conflict with terrorists or militants is unfortunate, but not considered murder. at least according to most social codes. terrorists target and seek to murder innocent civilians. a clear difference.


    my logic is stated above. seeking to kill as many innocent men, women and children is murder. targeting militants and terrorists who target your own population is not. innocent civilians of both sides, killed in such conflict does not carry the same moral or legal weight.


    youre possibly the only person to believe that, even Hamas admits that its goal is to wipe Israeli out, indeed a rather basic Encyclopaedia entry defines Hamas as a "group dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Palestinian Islamic state". Yassin preached the destruction of Israel, they called for all Jews to be pushed into the sea. indeed, it has nothing to do with Israel, its "to wage war, war, war on the sons of Zion"


    Hamas targets men,women and children seeking to end a race of people. the IDF is the defence force of a legitimate and democratic nation state who operate and take action to defend their people, as is their responsiblity and right. all operations are carried with the prevention of terrorism and the defence of the Israeli people as the primary and only goal. just my 2 cents but i believe they have the moral ground, the political ground is indisputable.


    name one respected international institution that outlaws Israel as a terrorist group. Human Rights are obviously important. State defence is more important. every head of state recognises and understands this.


    i can understand that. freedom is not what they are fighting for, they admit that much themselves. the palestinians havent had freedom in centuries, yet it was only when the 'Sons of Zion' emerged that any substantial 'resistance' grew.


    perhaps youd be good enough to provide me with some material so i can grasp your claims.


    those aiding terrorists or militants are considered as such. the US didnt shoot the Iraqi women and children, and then 2 civilians ended up mutilated, burnt and hung from a bridge 20mins later.



    the same ambulances that have explosives and used to ram IDF positions or the ones used as portable turrets?

    the IDF has a less than cheery track record, i dont agree with some of their measures, i dont find some stories particuarly agreeable, but by the very fact that they are constantly monitored and criticised for not respecting, by any ones standards, ridiculous and unfeasible restrictions on their actions should tell you something about the difference between the two sides.

    war crimes become relevant when you fight an enemy who has equal respect for the same terms of engagement. im sure the Palestinians are very much open to justice - http://www.israelnewsagency.com/pale...warcrimes.html
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

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.