IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Oh, quit whining...
We are largely a society with a very short attention span. None of our leaders since Eisenhower (and I have my doubts about him) has thought much beyond the next election.
We supported a number of political/religous intolerant thugs... we supported Israel... but I repeat myself...
The Taliban was aiding and abetting terrorists, so they were targeted. We have no particular duty to Afghanistan. Our actions in Afghanistan and the ME in general are to further our intrests. Handwashing is a matter of personal hygiene.

-H
New Then don't be surprised that the world hates you
You can't take that attitude and then expect the world to march to your beat.
New Let's assume, for the moment, that you are serious....
The world is not united against the US. The Mid East has elements who are pissed off at virtually anything. Until we get free of oil dependency, we have to deal with it.

The various societies that make up the population of this planet ALL work toward their self-interest. They support our policies when it is in their interests. They don't "march to our beat" because we're such nice guys. They want something.

We have an oil dependency. The ME has oil. The ME is working solely toward their own self-interest. There is absolutely no altruism involved.

Why should we be expected to be altruistic? Why should we be expected to work against our self-interest? You wouldn't be proposing something culturally insensitive, like perhaps daytime TV has turned us collectively into mush-brained retards, or something similar?

You have a problem with us buying corrupt politicians in other countries? What, we're supposed to have a monopoly on corrupt politicians? Like we were told in the 80's and 90's when we whined that the Japs were buying America(ignoring the fact that the English already owned far more than the Japs ever could): No sellers, no buyers.

No matter what we do, somebody will be displeased. We may as well try to please ourselves; we have a shot at that.

-Hugh
New Incorrect.
"Until we get free of oil dependency, we have to deal with it. "

Wrong.

The oil dependency is the reason we KEEP interfering in their affairs.

Getting off the oil would only mean we wouldn't have a reason to interfer (aside from treaties and alliances and such) (or moral issues).

The question is whether we're working towards our short term interests or long term interests.

New I was unclear
Until we get free of oil dependency, we have to deal with oil dependency. Not anybody in particular. There are a number of ways to deal with it. While we are dependent, deal with it we must.

I am not advocating any particular means of dealing with it.

The powers that be, who laid the foundations for this mess do not consult me for my opinions, nor have they ever.

The only reason I got in this thread was irritation at bluke's presumption that we should somehow, without the benifit of sainthood, please everybody in the ME, and support some mythical brotherhood of man ahead of our own interests.

I think I'm done with this thread; please yourselves...

     The law according to the Northern Alliance - (bluke) - (77)
         I've asked this question before and I ask it again. - (marlowe)
         Have you read the whole thing? - (Steven A S) - (75)
             Need information on the range. - (Brandioch) - (19)
                 Couldn't say - (Steven A S) - (18)
                     Personal Observation - (screamer) - (17)
                         Clarification - (Steven A S)
                         Sinop? -NT - (jbrabeck) - (15)
                             Yep... Was geographically significant... - (screamer) - (14)
                                 Cool. - (Brandioch) - (9)
                                     Duty trains rocked... - (screamer) - (8)
                                         Yep. - (Brandioch) - (3)
                                             Kewl... - (screamer) - (2)
                                                 I'd never recommend it. - (Brandioch) - (1)
                                                     But I would... - (jbrabeck)
                                         Strolled around Magdeburg at age 12 or 13; no hassles then.. - (CRConrad) - (3)
                                             Thank you for the info... - (screamer) - (2)
                                                 You're welcome. - (CRConrad) - (1)
                                                     My condolences... - (screamer)
                                 I was there - (jbrabeck) - (3)
                                     Fond memories here too... - (screamer) - (2)
                                         When were you in Wurzburg? - (jbrabeck) - (1)
                                             From '81 to '84.... - (screamer)
             Double standard - (bluke) - (53)
                 I believe the phrase is "well DUH!" - (Brandioch) - (2)
                     Not a surprise at all - (bluke) - (1)
                         Some do. - (Brandioch)
                 I may not have stated myself correctly - (Steven A S) - (5)
                     Perhaps you are all forgetting Japan and the end of W-II ? - (Ashton) - (4)
                         Nit: W. Edwards Deming. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                             Thanks - bookmarked. Neat guy all around. -NT - (Ashton)
                         Um, hate to be the one to break it to you, Ashton... - (inthane-chan) - (1)
                             Sorry if I gave the impression that *Anyone* - (Ashton)
                 I must disagree with you. - (Simon_Jester) - (1)
                     The problem is not... - (bluke)
                 Gee, we just can't win. - (marlowe) - (41)
                     Did someone miss our CIA operatives? - (Brandioch) - (34)
                         Evidence, please. - (Another Scott) - (33)
                             IIRC... - (inthane-chan)
                             Evidence of a black op? - (Simon_Jester) - (4)
                                 Evidence and logic. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                     Re: Evidence and logic - smoking gun evidence !!! - (dmarker2) - (1)
                                         'Frank & Ernest' (US comic strip) reprise. Again! - (Ashton)
                                     Heh..and the definition of "is" is... - (Simon_Jester)
                             Your government at work. - (Brandioch) - (24)
                                 I don't find the evidence to be very good. - (Another Scott) - (23)
                                     Thank you thank you thank you... - (bepatient) - (1)
                                         You're quite welcome. :-) -NT - (Another Scott)
                                     More - (Brandioch) - (17)
                                         He says it, but presents no evidence for it.... -NT - (Another Scott) - (15)
                                             At this point, you're going to concede the other statements? - (Brandioch) - (14)
                                                 Keep me out of it. :-) - (Another Scott) - (13)
                                                     Proof? what I see inferred from this mass of circumstantial - (Ashton) - (11)
                                                         Does it make sense that the CIA would have trained him? - (Another Scott) - (10)
                                                             My take, then. - (Ashton)
                                                             *sigh* - (Brandioch) - (8)
                                                                 Nice strawman there, Brandy. :-) - (Another Scott) - (7)
                                                                     How literally do you want to take it? - (Silverlock) - (1)
                                                                         Thanks. Some of this already discussed. - (Another Scott)
                                                                     You use terms you don't understand. - (Brandioch) - (4)
                                                                         Rather than edit that. - (Brandioch)
                                                                         Nit? - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                                             One step at a time. - (Brandioch)
                                                                         Straight to the point. - (TTC)
                                                     I didn't put you in it. - (Brandioch)
                                         Please Edit ASAP! - (ben_tilly)
                                     Well, at least he's trying. Sort of. - (marlowe) - (2)
                                         WTF? - (Brandioch)
                                         And I notice you didn't answer my question. - (Brandioch)
                             The specific case of Bin Laden is irrelevant - (bluke) - (1)
                                 While I agree for the most part... - (inthane-chan)
                     Their affairs are our affairs - (bluke) - (5)
                         Oh, quit whining... - (hnick) - (4)
                             Then don't be surprised that the world hates you - (bluke) - (3)
                                 Let's assume, for the moment, that you are serious.... - (hnick) - (2)
                                     Incorrect. - (Brandioch) - (1)
                                         I was unclear - (hnick)
             Three strikes and you're maimed? - (marlowe)

Completely free of Microsoft Smart Tags!
174 ms