Those crazy French and Germans!!

[Konigballer]

So Bush is just "sitting on it, waiting for the right moment" to unleash his evidence of WMD, as a booster for his re-election campaign? So while our guys are getting shot or blown up in that hell whole everyday, with all the religious sects in it ready to kill each other and blow the country even further down the crapper than Sadam and us already sent it, Bush is just sitting on the supposed "evidence of WMD" .......just so he can defeat the lame azz democrats in the election. Albinonewt, even a republican has to think that seems pretty retarded, I doubt he's doing this. His cronies would keep him from doing anything this poltically suicidal. If he EVER had any conclusive proof of our main reason for going to war, WMD, he would unleash it imedietly. That way, he could smush it in most of NATO's faces, aka france n germany, and they would all have to admit we were justified for going to war and back us up in the reconstruction of Iraq to save face. Of course, I DONT think Bush has any, and I dont think the war was really justified.

The moral argument for going is just lame. All our allies in the middle east, cept Israel..and thats a matter of opinion, are all run by tyranical or opressive regimes. Hello, Sauidi Arabia..Egypt, ring any bells. Our foreign policy over the past fifty years has shown , numerous times, that we will support, and arm any regime or movement that is in line with our policy, no matter how brutal they may be in enforcing their rule over their own people or others. For us to play the moral card is hillarious.

As for Russia, well.. I grudgingly respect them for basically defeating nazi germany but I still dont really trust them. However, I cant blame them for selling arms to any one who will buy, even their enemies. We've done the same thing, Iran contra anyone, but they do it for different reasons. THEIR POOR!! Thats what poor countries do, they sell drugs or guns. If you've ever met any russian people or have been their, you would find out that that country's so delapidated that many of them remember the communist days with sympathy. They may have had no rights, but the country had power, order and was feared on the national level.
Definetley not the case today, the only reason Russia's voice even matters on the political scene is cause they still have a stockpile of dorment nukes that make everyone nervous.

I dislike Bush and most republicans but at least you guys have organization, direction, and drive. I think I dislike the democrats and liberals even more cause their weak and their parties' so fractured with no real idea or plan of were they want the country to go. Since their the only two parties that matter, I'm kind of out of luck. I guess I'll just sit on the sidelines and watch the Albinonewts and Collegeboys of the country slug it out

[beam]

Originally posted by Albinonewt
And about the WMD

I really think we have stuff that we're holding onto. I can remember dozens of reports about things we found that may or may not be illegal weapons, but I really don't remember a lot of follow up stories. I really think we have a rack of evidence that we've been compiling and will unleash in the near future.

I could be wrong, but we'll see soon enough.

Newt, I really hope you are right. Not because I want Bush to be able to justify his actions or because I want him to win the next election. No, I hope you are right because THEN we will finally know where the WMD are.

You see, many people want to jump on Bush and say "AHA! there are no WMD in Iraq! So there! You were WRONG!" But what they fail to realize is, if they aren't in Iraq, where in the heck ARE they?

There is no denying that Iraq HAD WMD. Also, there are no provable reliable sources to show that they destroyed them. So where are they? I really hope we either have them or just haven't found them. A likely scenario could be that they are in the hands of people we don't want to have them. That....would be bad.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Konigballer
So Bush is just "sitting on it, waiting for the right moment" to unleash his evidence of WMD, as a booster for his re-election campaign? So while our guys are getting shot or blown up in that hell whole everyday, with all the religious sects in it ready to kill each other and blow the country even further down the crapper than Sadam and us already sent it, Bush is just sitting on the supposed "evidence of WMD" .......just so he can defeat the lame azz democrats in the election. Albinonewt, even a republican has to think that seems pretty retarded, I doubt he's doing this. His cronies would keep him from doing anything this poltically suicidal. If he EVER had any conclusive proof of our main reason for going to war, WMD, he would unleash it imedietly. That way, he could smush it in most of NATO's faces, aka france n germany, and they would all have to admit we were justified for going to war and back us up in the reconstruction of Iraq to save face. Of course, I DONT think Bush has any, and I dont think the war was really justified.

Learn to spell?

As for Russia, well.. I grudgingly respect them for basically defeating nazi germany but I still dont really trust them.

Please don't start up with that crap again. It has been beaten to death. The Russians mopped up. If the Allies(read as Americans/Brits) had not destroyed the German War Industry, would the Soviets have been able to finish them off? Had the Allies not stopped the German nuclear program, could the Soviets have withstood the Nazi nukes?

If not for the Allies bombing the Germans relentlessly it is debateable if the Soviets could have beaten the Nazis. Especially if the Nazi's were fighting a one front war against the Soviets instead of a 2 front war.

However, I cant blame them for selling arms to any one who will buy, even their enemies. We've done the same thing, Iran contra anyone, but they do it for different reasons. THEIR POOR!! Thats what poor countries do, they sell drugs or guns. If you've ever met any russian people or have been their, you would find out that that country's so delapidated that many of them remember the communist days with sympathy. They may have had no rights, but the country had power, order and was feared on the national level.
Definetley not the case today, the only reason Russia's voice even matters on the political scene is cause they still have a stockpile of dorment nukes that make everyone nervous.

The lot of the average Soviet was not much better then the average Russian today. There were still breadlines, etc.. Russia is a world player still because of their military might, while not a superpower anymore, anyone who dismisses them out of hat is a fool. They sell weapons to make $$$. Everyone does it, eh? Whatever.

[Albinonewt]

College boy

Until you learn how to quote correctly I'm not answering you anymore. It's a pain in my rear to do so.

[beam]

QUICK! Somebody go get Star_Base_CGI!!!!!!! He'll have a field day with this LOL:

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by beam
QUICK! Somebody go get Star_Base_CGI!!!!!!! He'll have a field day with this LOL:

LOL!!

CGI says," I do not approve!"

Courtesy of J Dub!

[Konigballer]

First of all, I know I cant spell. I'm at art school to draw not develope propper gramatical spelling

Second, you didnt discount my point about your WMD Bush arguement being retarded, just made the spelling point. It doesnt surprise me, not admitting your wrong or even mistaken in an arguement is a "warrior code" here on AO friendly corner.

Third, I didnt mean my russian WW2 complement to get you riled up. It was just me giving some respect to a fromer tough as nails fightin' allie of the past, not a jibe at you or the US.

However, I'm going to respond to your comments just for the hell of it and I'll try, if in vain, to spell better.

The Soviet Union bore the brunt of the war againtst Germany, from the invasion of June 1941 to May 1945. Many have argued that Germany lost the war in 1941 when they invaded Russia, and there is evidence to back that up. Eighty percent of Germany's WW2 casualties were incurred on the "Ostfront". By the time the anglo american bombing raids picked up in '43, most of the most crucial battles in the war had been fought. Whole armies and the creme of the crop of German troops were already dead, wounded or captured. The collapse of the german advance at the gates of Moscow, the failed seige of Leningrad, the disastrous loss at Stalingrad and finally the crushing defeat at Kursk in the summer of '43 put the Soviet army in the drivers seat for the rest of the war. The effectiveness of the American daylight bombing campaign against germany's industrial might and its effectiveness in crippling Germany's war machine and helping shorten the war cannot be denied. However, even when production was uneffected by bombing earlier in the war, Germany never matched the production of the russians alone, let alone with us combined with them. Your arguement about Germany's nuclear program are just flat out WRONG. I have read a couple books on the subject and although they did have a nuclear program, it was found out after the war that it was nowhere near our's in developement and would never have been able to come close to producing nuclear weapons. Hell, even the History Channel had a show on this. The krauts main reason for failure was that they never found the formula for "critical mass": the amount of plutonium needed to enable a bomb to be made. The Germans expelled or frightened away the leading scientist who developed that formula before the war and the remaining scientist in germany never figured the correct amount. So Russia had nothing to fear from nazi nukes.

I agree with you that it is "debatable if the Soviets could have beaten the nazis" without our efforts. However, its CERTAIN the we could not have defeated nazi Germany without the Soviets considerable contribution to the fighting from 1941-1945. Read less Ambrose.

Finally, modern day Russia is NOT respected for her military might. Her military has been bankrupt for years and her army, navy, airforce have been cut down to a fraction of their cold war size. They cant even afford to re-equip their military with new weapons, cept on a pitifully small scale like the T-90 tank, that they have already developed. Their poor performance in Chechnya is just the most obvious example of their militaries weakened and demoralized state. Her sizable aging nuclear stockpile and fragile economic state is the sole reason for her importance in NATO and major world matters.

[Konigballer]

sorry Albinonewt, my last post is directed at 1st deadeye, not you. I thought you wrote his last post. my mistake.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Konigballer
First of all, I know I cant spell. I'm at art school to draw not develope propper gramatical spelling

I hope that the above was meant as a joke!

Second, you didnt discount my point about your WMD Bush arguement being retarded, just made the spelling point. It doesnt surprise me, not admitting your wrong or even mistaken in an arguement is a "warrior code" here on AO friendly corner.

Not my point. However now that you mention it, I am reserving judgement until all the facts are in. You can't pick a winner half way through the fight. You must wait until it is over and see who is still standing!

Third, I didnt mean my russian WW2 complement to get you riled up. It was just me giving some respect to a fromer tough as nails fightin' allie of the past, not a jibe at you or the US.

I had enough of these arguements with Collegeboy this spring!

The Soviet Union bore the brunt of the war againtst Germany, from the invasion of June 1941 to May 1945. Many have argued that Germany lost the war in 1941 when they invaded Russia, and there is evidence to back that up. Eighty percent of Germany's WW2 casualties were incurred on the "Ostfront". By the time the anglo american bombing raids picked up in '43, most of the most crucial battles in the war had been fought. Whole armies and the creme of the crop of German troops were already dead, wounded or captured. The collapse of the german advance at the gates of Moscow, the failed seige of Leningrad, the disastrous loss at Stalingrad and finally the crushing defeat at Kursk in the summer of '43 put the Soviet army in the drivers seat for the rest of the war. The effectiveness of the American daylight bombing campaign against germany's industrial might and its effectiveness in crippling Germany's war machine and helping shorten the war cannot be denied. However, even when production was uneffected by bombing earlier in the war, Germany never matched the production of the russians alone, let alone with us combined with them.

I will begin here. Soviet production was crap until later in the war. THe Allies supplied them! THe American War Industry outproduced ALL of the fighting nations on both sides combined!!!!!!!

THe Allied Bombing of Germany began immediatly. It intensified in 1942 and slowed Germany's war machine considerably.

Your arguement about Germany's nuclear program are just flat out WRONG. I have read a couple books on the subject and although they did have a nuclear program, it was found out after the war that it was nowhere near our's in developement and would never have been able to come close to producing nuclear weapons. Hell, even the History Channel had a show on this. The krauts main reason for failure was that they never found the formula for "critical mass": the amount of plutonium needed to enable a bomb to be made. The Germans expelled or frightened away the leading scientist who developed that formula before the war and the remaining scientist in germany never figured the correct amount. So Russia had nothing to fear from nazi nukes.

Uhmm wrong. Read more. The Nazis were working on the Heavy Water bomb and had enough to create a bomb. Almost their entire supply of Heavy Water was destroyed by Scandanavian Resistence fighters who sunk it in a fiord in one of the Scandanavian countries. The Nazi's also could have easily made a large number of dirty bombs to kill massive amounts of Soviets.

I agree with you that it is "debatable if the Soviets could have beaten the nazis" without our efforts. However, its CERTAIN the we could not have defeated nazi Germany without the Soviets considerable contribution to the fighting from 1941-1945. Read less Ambrose.

Wrong!!!

The Nazi's lost the Battle of Britan. Without air power, they could never mount an invasion of Fortress Britan. THe Royal Navy and Airforce would have potected our launching point. The German Navy was a joke and no match for the Brits. With Britan safe, the bombing of Germany would have laid waste to the German War Machine still. The remaining Allies still would have won in Northern Africa. THus with two launching points, the Allies still could have forced the German's to fight on two fronts. The war would have dragged on far longer and cost many more American lives, but it still could have been won by the allies without the Soviets. Also what do you think the Nazi's would have done when Berlin was nuked off the face of the Earth? We had the nuke remember! So I say to you the Allies could still have won the war at a far greater cost though.

Finally, modern day Russia is NOT respected for her military might. Her military has been bankrupt for years and her army, navy, airforce have been cut down to a fraction of their cold war size. They cant even afford to re-equip their military with new weapons, cept on a pitifully small scale like the T-90 tank, that they have already developed. Their poor performance in Chechnya is just the most obvious example of their militaries weakened and demoralized state. Her sizable aging nuclear stockpile and fragile economic state is the sole reason for her importance in NATO and major world matters.

So the Russians are having trouble facing a guerrilla style insurgent war in Chechnya. Sound familiar? It is a very difficult war to fight. The Russian army is still more formidable then any army on earth save the US military.

[cphilip]

When will you people ever learn we do not allow this stuff?

CLOSED!