|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:25 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| *By roughly the same set of executive officials, no less. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Don't forget his two buzzwords, 'resolve' and 'freedom'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
9/11 -> Afghanistan
You reject the war against the Taliban?
Why are you on their side? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sincinnatislink wrote: |
Nope.
I believe it was first used in the early eighties when we were dealing with Iranian hostages, Sandanistas and the like. |
This was yesterday's lecture, yes? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nope. I believe that's knowing your twentieth century history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sincinnatislink wrote: |
| Nope. I believe that's knowing your twentieth century history. |
But you already showed us you dont know that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sincinnatislink
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Location: Top secret.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe that there was a war on terror declared in the early eighties.
I'm comfortable being told that's not the case.
So please, was there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
There is a war in Iraq, and another in Afghanistan. The two aren't really related, other than both are endless and Bush's fault.
There is a real "war" of sorts, or at least a massive intelligence operation, to prevent mulims from blowing people up indiscriminately on the streets of Western nations. This is (or should be) an operation that is fought with police work and sensible immigration/border controls and not Marines (though both are effectively prevented from being useful due to the cult of victimhood the muslims have been able to create in the UK). This operation is against islam, or 'radical islam' (though, i would assert that bin laden is a muslim more true to the koran than most) but to say the operation or 'war' is against muslims isn't PC.
So, because Afghanistan and Iraq need to be sold to a jittery public, and the conflict that really is simmering is too "intolerant" of the "new Canadians/Americans/British" who have made our cities "vibrant" we get the "War on Terrorism".
Americans and their war lingo. War on drugs, war on terrorism, war on poverty. |
Afghanistan isnt Bush's fault. Its Osamas for attacking. Then the Talibans, for refusing to hand him over. So we had little choice.. go in and take away from Al Qaeda its main base. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
There is a war in Iraq, and another in Afghanistan. The two aren't really related, other than both are endless and Bush's fault.
There is a real "war" of sorts, or at least a massive intelligence operation, to prevent mulims from blowing people up indiscriminately on the streets of Western nations. This is (or should be) an operation that is fought with police work and sensible immigration/border controls and not Marines (though both are effectively prevented from being useful due to the cult of victimhood the muslims have been able to create in the UK). This operation is against islam, or 'radical islam' (though, i would assert that bin laden is a muslim more true to the koran than most) but to say the operation or 'war' is against muslims isn't PC.
So, because Afghanistan and Iraq need to be sold to a jittery public, and the conflict that really is simmering is too "intolerant" of the "new Canadians/Americans/British" who have made our cities "vibrant" we get the "War on Terrorism".
Americans and their war lingo. War on drugs, war on terrorism, war on poverty. |
Afghanistan isnt Bush's fault. Its Osamas for attacking. Then the Talibans, for refusing to hand him over. So we had little choice.. go in and take away from Al Qaeda its main base. |
In fact, the Taliban did start dialogue about handing him over. As soon as they did that, the corporate press (which was pushing for the war) did its best to ignore that. Bush and Blair hurried things up, probably quite worried they might lose an important pretext for the invasion. This war was probably going to happen 911 or not. In the British press (but perhaps not the US media) it had been reported pre-911 that the US had alerted Europe that they were likely to militarily intervene in Afghanistan in the future. Why? They'd supported the Taliban, expecting them to assist them installing a pipeline for caspian oil. However, the Taliban hadn't kept to their end of the bargain, and the US was getting impatient. This was in those nasty papers like The Guardian a month or so before 911. 911 opened up a fantastic pretext. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A good article in the last issue of N.Y times review of books. Mostly about the deplorable actions of the U.S. (and I don't say just the administration because it seems so little of the whole government is doing little to correct the atrocity) regarding illegal detention in Guantanamo and elsewhere in the world.
But he also touches upon the illegality of this "war" for it is the most important point when looking at detaining war combatants in a war that has no end, even no possible end.
The author sees it as highly illegal to give such sweeping powers to a president, as did the congress post 9/11 and that those powers should be forthwith recinded. The forefathers of America had the foresight to envision how the president could misuse power and thus witheld the right to go to war unless Congress was agreed.
Please read if at all interested in how the administration is continuing to hold innocent people, now for years. And how this is the biggest atrocity of this whole, "non war" . He writes.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19853
| Quote: |
If the "customary law of war" permits their continued imprisonment until the end of hostilities, their prospects seem exceedingly dim. Two questions bear on the legitimacy of their confinement: whether they have been rightly estimated to be part of a hostile enemy force or network and how it can be ascertained when hostilities have ended in this largely clandestine conflict. "Global War on Terror" may have had a certain ring as a battle cry, or at least some utility from a marketing standpoint as a brand name, but it muddies the detention issue, for it seems to imply that the US must remain at war, transforming itself into a permanent national security state, until terrorism�not any particular organized force but a diffuse phenomenon that has existed for more than a century�has been thoroughly banished from the world. In fact, Congress did not authorize a war on "terror" but granted the President authority
to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
The administration sometimes acknowledges as much. "When administration officials refer to the war on terror," John Bellinger, the State Department's legal adviser, recently said, "we are not stating that we are in a legal state of armed conflict with every terrorist organization, everywhere in the world, at all times.... We do think we are in a legal state of armed conflict with al-Qaeda." |
Food for though.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulunitarian
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 5:46 pm Post subject: re: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
9/11 -> Afghanistan
You reject the war against the Taliban?
Why are you on their side? |
9/11 -> 19 hijackers, some of whom were Afghani, and some of whom are still alive.
Hardly necessitates the invasion of a soverign nation.
Peace |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bixlerscott
Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Location: Near Wonju, South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
BigBird is right
| Quote: |
| whittle away some of our rights and freedoms |
They would use fear to control the people as to make the rich, richer.
Saying that America is the freest nation on Earth is like saying money grows on trees as she is the police state of fear. A blatant lie. It's only about wealthy ones achieving unprecidented wealth out of greed and pride, not about it being the land of the free. (actually it's a miserable police state of fear) If all Americans knew the truth (they do suspect a great conspiracy is playing out), then they would walk off thier jobs, unite for reformation, shut it all down, crash the stock market, and tell all the executives (including Bush) that they failed em' and it's high time for a change that actually works in the lines of, "We The People, By the People, For The People". (way overdue)
They cover up the real cultural failures with all this Equal Opportunity Employer stuff when it's all just nepotism, rather than merit based. (you have to be related to or really know someone well to land a good job) The government is the worst offender for this when it comes to its job market through the OPM. Total lies and deceptions to cover up the truth.
The day the government shuts down, financial systems fail, and the infrastructure fails is the day America walks off its' jobs and fights for what is right. (it can and will happen due to unservicable national and personal debts as well as cultural melt down) Americans should demand nothing less than actually having rights, not a controlled police state for the purpose of using its' people as pawns to make the rich, richer.
Pretty sick shit if you ask me, but thats all America is about in modern times due to enormous greed on part of politicians and executives who are colluding. When someone is charged with a white collar crime such as Martha Stewart or Enron executives, it is cover up of a larger conspiracy to make the the American people believe justice is being served and all is well and fair. A big lie. I would not doubt if Martha was paid a large sum of money or other favors to go to jail for a few months to make an example for political reasons.. Serious. It's all bull shit lies supported by the government to allow the rich corrupt upper class to get richer.... Don't trust em' for a second unless you got big money and your in with em'
Put down? Thought so. I know I sure am.
This is not the first time in history this sad story has played out, though its' Americas round at this point in history...Unfortunately I can not say I am proud of her current condition and where she is headed, but she sure did make a lasting impression of really awesome achievement during the 20th century just as all other nations did before their falls from super power influential status... It's just more dicey in an age where technology and finance are much more powerful than ever which could spell great disaster.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bixlerscott, there's still some foam dribbling down your jawls.
| Big_Bird wrote: |
In fact, the Taliban did start dialogue about handing him over. As soon as they did that, the corporate press (which was pushing for the war) did its best to ignore that. Bush and Blair hurried things up, probably quite worried they might lose an important pretext for the invasion. This war was probably going to happen 911 or not. In the British press (but perhaps not the US media) it had been reported pre-911 that the US had alerted Europe that they were likely to militarily intervene in Afghanistan in the future. Why? They'd supported the Taliban, expecting them to assist them installing a pipeline for caspian oil. However, the Taliban hadn't kept to their end of the bargain, and the US was getting impatient. This was in those nasty papers like The Guardian a month or so before 911. 911 opened up a fantastic pretext. |
I'm noticing a theme of yours, Big Bird. 'Well, actually, [Insert Western Power here] was already planning to go to war with [Insert Middle Eastern Nation/Organization], when [Said Middle Eastern Nation/Organization] gave [Said Western Power] a pretext. [Said Western Power] already had plans, so whatever [Said Middle Eastern Nation/Organization] did just gave [Said Western Power] the pretext they already wanted.'
Perhaps the Taliban did open up 'negotiations.' Hell, perhaps they were even seriously intending to hunt down Bin Laden, once they bribed all the hill people. But the fact was, they had been harboring Bin Laden after being warned about it for years. The damage had already been done.
Meanwhile, the US had been working assets with the Northern Alliance for a long time. There was a system set up, a terrorist to apprehend, and a loathsome government who had housed him while he masterminded more than one successful plot against the American people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| it had been reported pre-911 that the US had alerted Europe that they were likely to militarily intervene in Afghanistan in the future. Why? They'd supported the Taliban, expecting them to assist them installing a pipeline for caspian oil. However, the Taliban hadn't kept to their end of the bargain, and the US was getting impatient. This was in those nasty papers like The Guardian a month or so before 911. 911 opened up a fantastic pretext. |
Oh my God! well if it was reported pre-9/11 then it must be true....The US was sooooo impatient to install that pipeline that they still haven't done it yet... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bixlerscott
Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Location: Near Wonju, South Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I got rabies due to all this foam dribbling down my mouth. LMAO! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
