|
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 |
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:02 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Often results are more important that principles , rules and laws. |
Well see, here's the problem. If we win by throwing out our principles and laws, what exactly have we won?
Another quote seems appropriate here:
| Quote: |
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? |
(from A Man for All Seasons) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| wannago wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| Wannago seems to think that I'd have no problem with this if the people being "disappeared" and shipped to Gitmo were Klansmen. He's wrong about that, of course. This has nothing at all to do with who the detainees are or what they did. It has to do with the rule of law and the official actions of the United States government. |
And if Clinton were still the President, I have no doubt that you would care very little about rule of law and official actions of the US government. A lefty administration would be justified, Bush and Co. are not. |
You know, it's very easy to assume that your political opponents lack all principle, and I've been guilty of it at times myself -- but if you think I'd be OK with Clinton doing this kind of thing, you're just dead wrong. You can believe that or not as you wish.
My actual opinion of our esteemed forty-second President might surprise you. |
Well I would have been okay with Clinton doing such a thing. and in fact Sandy Burger wanted to capture Bin Laden and have him sent to Saudi Arabia where he would have been killed in bascially a show trail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Often results are more important that principles , rules and laws. |
Well see, here's the problem. If we win by throwing out our principles and laws, what exactly have we won?
Another quote seems appropriate here:
| Quote: |
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? |
(from A Man for All Seasons) |
The is what the US wins
the US kills Al Qaeda which deserves to die
The US has stopped their war against the US.
Then Americans live better.
Other people around the world live better cause Al Qaeda other Klansman give up their war.
That is an ok result . The US can go back to peace time and discuss whether the US went to far.
As I have said war to steal oil or to force your religion or your economic system on someone is wrong.
War to force the otherside to quit their war is justified. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
The is what the US wins
the US kills Al Qaeda which deserves to die
The US has stopped their war against the US. |
Talk about your Freudian slips.
| Quote: |
Then Americans live better.
Other people around the world live better cause Al Qaeda other Klansman give up their war.
That is an ok result . The US can go back to peace time and discuss whether the US went to far.
As I have said war to steal oil or to force your religion or your economic system on someone is wrong.
War to force the otherside to quit their war is justified. |
OK, so we can get back to all that silly rule-of-law bullsh*t just as soon as there are no more international terrorist organizations and no more threats to our interests. Got it.
The most amusing thing about all this is that liberals are the ones constantly being chastised about naivete on the exercise of government power. If you give the government the right to do whatever it wants in prosecuting a "war" (whether the war on drugs, terror, poverty, whatever), I absolutely guarantee you that that war will never be won. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="stillnotking"]
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
The is what the US wins
the US kills Al Qaeda which deserves to die
The US has stopped their war against the US. |
| Quote: |
| Talk about your Freudian slips. |
funny my mistake but it
It wasn't that.
| Quote: |
| OK, so we can get back to all that silly rule-of-law bullsh*t just as soon as there are no more international terrorist organizations and no more threats to our interests. Got it. |
that is better than allowing a war against the US. That is an easy one.
There are always going to be some international terror goups. but the US ought give first priority to inflicting horrific damage to the enemies it faces now.
The US still has the rule of law. But there is a war going on and the US needs to fix US laws to meet the challenge as it had to in every other war.
Winning is not the only thing but it is the most important item right now.
until the US regains the "strategic edge" until the US improves the situation.
| Quote: |
| The most amusing thing about all this is that liberals are the ones constantly being chastised about naivete on the exercise of government power. If you give the government the right to do whatever it wants in prosecuting a "war" (whether the war on drugs, terror, poverty, whatever), I absolutely guarantee you that that war will never be won. |
I don't care about liberal and conservative except on foreign policy.
Well I have said what I think the US ought to do .
Alternative energy. Advanced weapons.
The war might not be all won but the situation will be much better than it is now. If the US gets such stuff then the war will be awfully close to won.
The US doesn't need to give the government everything it wants just certain things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Please cite for me one modern case of a terrorist group being defeated by militaristic means.
Now, which ever tiny group you could come with that was wiped out by military action, compare that to the possible number of potential combatants which could be drawn from the ENTIRE muslim world. Still think your military solution would work. Get real.
Simply inflicting terror on the enemy is not the only goal of a terrorist organization. Many would argue that it is infact the secondary goal. Terrorist WANT the big bad power to come in and use overwhelming force for the simple fact that, by it's very nature, it is indiscriminate. Terrorists know that innocent/non-aligned members of their ethnic/political/religious background will be targeted and killed, thus uniting them against a common foe. There is a reason terrorism exists and there is a reason it is effective. Terrorism thrives on the countermeasures it's enemy uses in retaliation.
Joo, your solution of relying on military might is centuries outdated. We no longer live in a world where you can slaughter 100% of an ethnic/religious group. It simply can't be done. The kind of damage that would have to be done to the muslim world, militarily, to end terrorism in no longer possible. Are you proposing that kind of slaughter? How can you possibly believe, after witnessing events with your own eyes, that a military solution is the right soloution?
We invaded IRAQ- A country brutally for at least the last 25 years. We liberated them, freed them from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. You couldn't be dealt a better starting hand in the muslim world and look how pathetically the current administration has handled it. Look how wonderful things are going in Iraq.
We invaded AFGHANISTAN- With mimimal boots on the ground and the backing of a fairly large percentage of the population we booted out the Taliban. Oh wait a second. Not really.
Are you now proposing that we go after countries like Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia militarily. You are in a dream world my friend.
Terrorism is a tactic an ideology. How do you defeat an Ideology Joo? With your hard on for weapon systems, military confrontation and secret prisons you fail to see that this is EXACTLY what al-qaeda and militant islam are counting on.
Spend your war billions (sorry trillions) on better security, police actions, diplomatic initiatives, education, select pinpoint military strikes, intelligence gathering and diplomacy.
Recall Joo the reaction of most of the world to the attacks of 9/11. Candlelight vigils, inter-governmental cooperation a world for the most part standing in solidarity with the United States of America. Take a look at the situation you are in now and ask your self. Just how well has this administrations policies served your country over the past 7 years? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
="yawarakaijin"]
| Quote: |
Please cite for me one modern case of a terrorist group being defeated by militaristic means.
|
Mideast nations have put down guerrilla wars with ease. time in and time out.
See what Egypt did to Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
Ever see that no group opposes a mideast regime and lives to talk about it?
why is that?
| Quote: |
Now, which ever tiny group you could come with that was wiped out by military action, compare that to the possible number of potential combatants which could be drawn from the ENTIRE muslim world. Still think your military solution would work. Get real. |
See my answer
| Quote: |
Simply inflicting terror on the enemy is not the only goal of a terrorist organization. Many would argue that it is infact the secondary goal. Terrorist WANT the big bad power to come in and use overwhelming force for the simple fact that, by it's very nature, it is indiscriminate. Terrorists know that innocent/non-aligned members of their ethnic/political/religious background will be targeted and killed, thus uniting them against a common foe. There is a reason terrorism exists and there is a reason it is effective. Terrorism thrives on the countermeasures it's enemy uses in retaliation. |
They don't want government intel services of mideast regimes going after them.
| Quote: |
Joo, your solution of relying on military might is centuries outdated. We no longer live in a world where you can slaughter 100% of an ethnic/religious group. It simply can't be done. The kind of damage that would have to be done to the muslim world, militarily, to end terrorism in no longer possible. Are you proposing that kind of slaughter? How can you possibly believe, after witnessing events with your own eyes, that a military solution is the right soloution? |
would like to see the US try these things.
1) Bring back the Clinton mideast plan. ( In fact make Bill Clinton US envoy to the middle east. That way he won't make trouble back home. )
2) Don't attack Iran- not now anyway.
3) Talk to Iran and Syria.
4) Tax imported oil , raise the gas tax
5) Invest in alternative energy , clean coal , nuclear power, better exploration methods with the same effort that the US put in to winning WW II.
6) Pressure the Europeans to , in fact apply horrible pressure to Europe to list Hezzbollah as a terror group.
7) Make the Patriot act permanent.
8 ) Introduce a national ID card like Korea has
9) Set up permanent US military bases in the Kurdish areas.
10) End the CIA ban on assassinations. From now on anyone of note who calls for holy war against the US is legitmate target for assassination. Anyone of note who funds Al Qaeda is a legitmate target for assassination.
11) announce that the US will withdraw from the NPT treaty if Iran tests a nuclear bomb.
12) Do NOT agree to any treaty that limits the deployment of space weapons.
13 ) Fully invest in the next generation of weapon systems.
If the US were to do the above what would the results be? I would bet you all that the US would be in a much better strategic situation than now.
Maybe more would need to be done later - in the end it has to be whatever it takes - but the above would be a start.
I will get you the thread.
| Quote: |
We invaded IRAQ- A country brutally for at least the last 25 years. We liberated them, freed them from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. You couldn't be dealt a better starting hand in the muslim world and look how pathetically the current administration has handled it. Look how wonderful things are going in Iraq. |
Ok
| Quote: |
We invaded AFGHANISTAN- With mimimal boots on the ground and the backing of a fairly large percentage of the population we booted out the Taliban. Oh wait a second. Not really. |
OK
| Quote: |
Are you now proposing that we go after countries like Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia militarily. You are in a dream world my friend. |
Each of those nations requires a different military strategy
Saudi requires threats of invasion and assassinations of those eltes who back Al Qaeda if the government doesn't do something about them.
Pakistan requires assassinations of Al Qaeda and those who support them in Wazeristan. It requires going into Pakistan which the US already does.
Dealing with Iran requires the deployment of advanced and more powerful weapons. PROJECT THOR (RODS FROM GOD) is the answer for Iran's nuclear program.
If Iran behaves themselves then they won't have a problem. If they do any kind of terror attack like at Kobar then they will loose their nuclear program. Iran's nuclear program is not longer an asset but rather a hostage. Most everything Iran wanted to gain from having nuclear weapons is now gone.
| Quote: |
Terrorism is a tactic an ideology. How do you defeat an Ideology Joo? With your hard on for weapon systems, military confrontation and secret prisons you fail to see that this is EXACTLY what al-qaeda and militant islam are counting on. |
they don't like it when Mideast regimes go after them. They don't like it when they get assassinated.
It is not what they are counting on. Especially if the US hits them with sufficient force
| Quote: |
Spend your war billions (sorry trillions) on better security, police actions, diplomatic initiatives, education, select pinpoint military strikes, intelligence gathering and diplomacy. |
The US is doing much of that now. It did such in the 90's . Such is necessary but it is not sufficient.
| Quote: |
Recall Joo the reaction of most of the world to the attacks of 9/11. Candlelight vigils, inter-governmental cooperation a world for the most part standing in solidarity with the United States of America. Take a look at the situation you are in now and ask your self. Just how well has this administrations policies served your country over the past 7 years?[ |
That the US had the sympathy of the world after 9-11 is a myth.
Anti US feelings:
check out this Video (it is really short just the part with the host. You don't need to watch it all. )
Anti americanism on Danish TV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeHF8UBLi68
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=98865&start=0
| Quote: |
Chelsea: Oxford life difficult
By CNN's Dylan Reynolds
LONDON, England (CNN) --Chelsea Clinton has admitted she is finding it hard to cope at Oxford University because of anti-American feeling.
In a frank article for Talk magazine, the University College student says the attacks on the United States left her feeling confused and scared, and she finds it "difficult" to deal with those who question America's actions.
"It's hard to be abroad right now. Every day I encounter some sort of anti-American feeling. Sometimes it's from other students, sometimes it's from a newspaper columnist, sometimes it's from 'peace' demonstrators," she said.
"Over the summer I thought that I would seek out non-Americans as friends, just for diversity's sake. Now I find that I want to be around Americans -- people who I know are thinking about our country as much as I am |
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/11/09/clinton.oxford/index.html
| Quote: |
WE WERE ALL AMERICANS
The introduction of the Pew report sets the tone for the entire study. The war in Iraq, it argues,"has widened the rift between Americans and Western Europeans" and "further inflamed the Muslim world." The implications are clear: The United States was better off before Bush's "unilateralism." The United States, in its hubris, summoned up this anti-Americanism. Those are the political usages of this new survey.
But these sentiments have long prevailed in Jordan, Egypt, and France. During the 1990s, no one said good things about the United States in Egypt. It was then that the Islamist children of Egypt took to the road, to Hamburg and Kandahar, to hatch a horrific conspiracy against the United States. And it was in the 1990s, during the fabled stock market run, when the prophets of globalization preached the triumph of the U.S. economic model over the protected versions of the market in places such as France, when anti-Americanism became the uncontested ideology of French public life. Americans were barbarous, a threat to French cuisine and their beloved language. U.S. pension funds were acquiring their assets and Wall Street speculators were raiding their savings. The United States incarcerated far too many people and executed too many criminals. All these views thrived during a decade when Americans are now told they were loved and uncontested on foreign shores.
Much has been made of the sympathy that the French expressed for the United States immediately after the September 11 attacks, as embodied by the famous editorial of Le Monde's publisher Jean-Marie Colombani, "Nous Sommes Tous Am�ricains" ("We are all Americans"). And much has been made of the speed with which the United States presumably squandered that sympathy in the months that followed. But even Colombani's column, written on so searing a day, was not the unalloyed message of sympathy suggested by the title. Even on that very day, Colombani wrote of the United States reaping the whirlwind of its "cynicism"; he recycled the hackneyed charge that Osama bin Laden had been created and nurtured by U.S. intelligence agencies.
Colombani quickly retracted what little sympathy he had expressed when, in December of 2001, he was back with an open letter to "our American friends" and soon thereafter with a short book, Tous Am�ricains? le monde apr�s le 11 septembre 2001 (All Americans? The World After September 11, 2001). By now the sympathy had drained, and the tone was one of belligerent judgment and disapproval. There was nothing to admire in Colombani's United States, which had run roughshod in the world and had been indifferent to the rule of law. Colombani described the U.S. republic as a fundamentalist Christian enterprise, its magistrates too deeply attached to the death penalty, its police cruel to its black population. A republic of this sort could not in good conscience undertake a campaign against Islamism. One can't, Colombani writes, battle the Taliban while trying to introduce prayers in one's own schools; one can't strive to reform Saudi Arabia while refusing to teach Darwinism in the schools of the Bible Belt; and one can't denounce the demands of the sharia (Islamic law) while refusing to outlaw the death penalty. Doubtless, he adds, the United States can't do battle with the Taliban before doing battle against the bigotry that ravages the depths of the United States itself. The United States had not squandered Colombani's sympathy; he never had that sympathy in the first place. |
http://www.travelbrochuregraphics.com/extra/the_falseness_of_antiamericanism.htm
| Quote: |
Germans: U.S. More Dangerous than Iran
According to this poll, more Germans consider the U.S. to be a danger for world peace than Iran.
45 % of Germans call the U.S. a "greater threat to world peace" than Iran. 28 % think that Iran is a greater threat. For 16 %, the U.S. and Iran pose identical threats. |
http://medienkritik.typepad.com/blog/2006/04/germans_us_more.html
3-01-04
Why South Koreans Think of the United States as a Global Bully
By James I. Matray
http://hnn.us/articles/3740.html#
. |
|
| 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
