Article: Russia and China warn US that an Israeli attack on Iran means world war...

[VictorCharlie]

Kirk honestly can you name any nation who is a major player in the world and has a good history of foreign policy? You still jump at every opportunity to preach at the American's on the site about how bad our nation is and how you have all our answers. You don't really take it as well as you dish it out either. You went ape shit when I implied that much of Iraq's ethnic issues stem from the borders and government put in place by the British in 1921. I fully support your freedom to express anything your dear little heart wants. I don't think I ever said otherwise in my post, but in turn I am free to tell you to kiss my American ass when you run your trap.

[Kirkland Laing]

No, I can't name any nation in the world that falls into that category. I didn't go apeshit, I just pointed out that the area now known as Iraq was fucked and fraactious for at least one thousand years before the Brits got there, and that what the Brits did (created "Iraq") stabilised things there to the extent that for the first time taxes could be collected, a state apparatus could funnction, and most importantly the country was stable and peaceful enough to set up an oil infrastructure and pump oil out of the country. I never claimed Britain as some human rights champion or beacon of freedom, have always pointed out their imperial and slightly naughty history

But the fact is at the moment in the world you have one overwhelming power that preaches freedom and human rights in principle -- even publishing report cards every year on how every other country in the world is doing re. democratic institutions, human rights etc. -- setting itself up as the arbiter of how democratic ideals are progressing in the rest of the world, while behaving like an imperial power at the same time. Criticising the dictators it props up, starting illegal wars, that sort of thing.

Now I'm not desperate to criticise, it's just when there's a situation where America is involved and somebody starts a thread about it, like this one, I'm going to call it as I see it. I'm sorry if the truth hurts.

[VictorCharlie]

Illegal war? Only someone who has never heard a shot fired in anger can say that with a straight face. Legality his hardly an issue when bullets are flying. The term is an oxymoron at its finest. I am sure if you really wanted to you could find some "legal" issue with taking the beach at Normandy. I am sure the poor German shmuck manning the bunker probably had a issue with it. Only a select foolish few will argue we had a "good" reason to invade Iraq, but the whole "illegal" term is just some liberal jargon. For anyone that is interested here is the thread
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...s-baghdad.html

Yall can take a look for yourself and see the hypocrisy that is Kirk.

[Kirkland Laing]

Illegal war? Only someone who has never heard a shot fired in anger can say that with a straight face. Legality his hardly an issue when bullets are flying. The term is an oxymoron at its finest. I am sure if you really wanted to you could find some "legal" issue with taking the beach at Normandy. I am sure the poor German shmuck manning the bunker probably had a issue with it. Only a select foolish few will argue we had a "good" reason to invade Iraq, but the whole "illegal" term is just some liberal jargon. For anyone that is interested here is the thread
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...s-baghdad.html

Yall can take a look for yourself and see the hypocrisy that is Kirk.

The Iraq war was illegal according to the UN. On the eve of war even Bush admitted he didn't have the authority to invade, he just claimed he had the will, rather like a certain mid -twentieth century western European foreign country-invader who also used to spend a lot of time talking about the importance of will.


And as for hypocrisy, from the thread :

Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
You didn't point out anything to me b/c I never said otherwise. I have never agreed with or supported the invasion or the nation building strategy. My posts support this. Why you continue to harp on it when we discuss Iraq is beyond me. Rationalizing one nations actions in the middle east by pointing the finger else where is not arguing a point its just that rationalizing. I am willing to say that my nation has been wrong more often then not in how they deal with the middle east you on the other hand seem to possess to much pride and ego.

So you agree that America didn't invade Iraq to bring them freedom and democracy. That just leaves the same reason the Brits originally went there. It looks like we both agree we went there to further control over the world's oil supply.

And I've already said that what Britain did was bad. What we're doing there now is also bad. I think Blair and other top British officials should be facing war crimes charges for invading. But letting the various groups war it out till they eventually stop fighting each other and come to some sort of settlement wasn't and isn't an option for any imperial power (which I think Britain and America effectively still are.) Certainly various American administrations including Bush 41 weren't in favour of letting Iraq split into constituent parts or even have a change of regime. So while it was and is the correct business/geopolitical/strategic decision, and while I've benefitted as a member of an imperial country from the policy, it isn't the moral or correct one.
.................................................. .................................................. ...........

[VictorCharlie]

Hypocrisy?? Looks like you are losing your touch...Another swing and a miss Kirk. Maybe you should read a little Websters. I am not having this argument again. I already made you look like the joke that you are.

[Kirkland Laing]

OK, then.

[generalbulldog]

And let the fun begin if the article is true!