Where did i say this??? I said there was nothing wrong before Pearl Harbor. I was thinking they may have continued to sell to Nazi germany because they didn't attack us at Pearl Harbor. I don't recall saying it was right of them to do it. They easily could have been Nazi sympathists.
Saddam Arrested
- Thread starter V3
- Start date
Where did i say this??? I said there was nothing wrong before Pearl Harbor. I was thinking they may have continued to sell to Nazi germany because they didn't attack us at Pearl Harbor. I don't recall saying it was right of them to do it. They easily could have been Nazi sympathists.
And don't forget Clashman that the only reason we went to war with Iraq in 1991 was not some overarching set of ideals about removing a madman who gassed his own people and his enemies.
It was because he attacked one of our oil suppliers.
Where were our high ideals when he was attacking Iran and using chemical weapons? Oh that's right. We backed him on that one.
Where were our high ideals when we left Iraq in 1991 instead of going all the way into baghdad and removing that slime when we had the chance, and he sent his armies into the north and south and slaughtered hundreds of thousands? Oh yea, nowhere to be found. We only went in to get his armies out of Kuwait so our oil supplies could keep coming.
Btw speaking of oil, I wrote this earlier in this thread regarding a question nelg asked me, and my opinions on North Korea.
A year ago, NK seemed to be the far more imminent threat, yet we ignored them and went to Iraq. Again, the only difference I can perceive, unless someone here can enlighten me, is that Iraq is sitting on possibly the world's largest oil reserve. But of course, this wasn't about oil at all.
It was because he attacked one of our oil suppliers.
Where were our high ideals when he was attacking Iran and using chemical weapons? Oh that's right. We backed him on that one.
Where were our high ideals when we left Iraq in 1991 instead of going all the way into baghdad and removing that slime when we had the chance, and he sent his armies into the north and south and slaughtered hundreds of thousands? Oh yea, nowhere to be found. We only went in to get his armies out of Kuwait so our oil supplies could keep coming.
Btw speaking of oil, I wrote this earlier in this thread regarding a question nelg asked me, and my opinions on North Korea.
Natoma said:
A year ago, NK seemed to be the far more imminent threat, yet we ignored them and went to Iraq. Again, the only difference I can perceive, unless someone here can enlighten me, is that Iraq is sitting on possibly the world's largest oil reserve. But of course, this wasn't about oil at all.
Legion said:
You have implied this several times in this thread through justifications for what happened. One such instance:
Legion said:
Frankly there is absolutely no justification for selling to a country that is allied with an entity that attacked us. And even before we got attacked, Germany was fighting our allies Britain and France. How in any way shape or form can this be justified?
The Palestinians and Israelis are fighting one another. Could it be justified for our country to do business with the Palestinians even though Israel is our ally, merely because we aren't being attacked directly?
One more thing regarding the North Korea vs Iraq situation.
Are Kim Jong Il's crimes against his people any better somehow than Saddam's? Wouldn't the North Koreans be better off without Kim's tyranny? How many have been "disappeared" over the years between Kim and his father? Is there really any less chance of North Korea selling one of the nukes they now possess to Al-Qaeda than Saddam selling a nuke that he never possessed in the first place?
Does Al-Qaeda really care *where* they get their nuke from? Or is it all the same to them, as long as it goes boom?
Again, a tremendous disconnect between our Iraq policy and our North Korea policy. I said it a year ago and I'll say it again. North Korea scares me shitless. And all we've done is ignore them.
I see no reason to have done this over the past year, save for one. North Korea possesses no vast reserve of oil. Save the morality speech regarding Saddam's evils. They mean bubkis when it comes to WMD and our true security.
Howard Dean was right. Getting Saddam hasn't made our country safer. We've still got a country that has at least 2-3 nukes now that has made it very vocal that they will sell to the highest bidder to get money. And Al-Qaeda's highest officials are still at large because we didn't send enough troops into Afghanistan to trap them all when we had the chance.
Saddam's supporters still lay in wait in Iraq for our troops, and *if* WMD do indeed exist in Iraq, a prospect that grows more and more dubious with each passing day, there are hundreds of people who could ferry them out to terrorist hands anyways. It's not like Saddam was the only one who knew the password to the secret location of the WMD.
And Joseph Lieberman. I watched the guy on Hardball with Chris Matthews a few days ago and it was pathetic. Matthews asked him how has Saddam's capture made us any safer. He answered, "Saddam gassed his own people, his neighbors, and tortured thousands." Matthews again said, "How does it make us safer?" and he answered yet again, "Saddam gassed his own people, his neighbors, and tortured thousands." Sad thing is, that's the same thing coming out of the white house. Gah November 2004 can't come soon enough. Here's hoping President Dean can solve this mess.
Are Kim Jong Il's crimes against his people any better somehow than Saddam's? Wouldn't the North Koreans be better off without Kim's tyranny? How many have been "disappeared" over the years between Kim and his father? Is there really any less chance of North Korea selling one of the nukes they now possess to Al-Qaeda than Saddam selling a nuke that he never possessed in the first place?
Does Al-Qaeda really care *where* they get their nuke from? Or is it all the same to them, as long as it goes boom?
Again, a tremendous disconnect between our Iraq policy and our North Korea policy. I said it a year ago and I'll say it again. North Korea scares me shitless. And all we've done is ignore them.
I see no reason to have done this over the past year, save for one. North Korea possesses no vast reserve of oil. Save the morality speech regarding Saddam's evils. They mean bubkis when it comes to WMD and our true security.
Howard Dean was right. Getting Saddam hasn't made our country safer. We've still got a country that has at least 2-3 nukes now that has made it very vocal that they will sell to the highest bidder to get money. And Al-Qaeda's highest officials are still at large because we didn't send enough troops into Afghanistan to trap them all when we had the chance.
Saddam's supporters still lay in wait in Iraq for our troops, and *if* WMD do indeed exist in Iraq, a prospect that grows more and more dubious with each passing day, there are hundreds of people who could ferry them out to terrorist hands anyways. It's not like Saddam was the only one who knew the password to the secret location of the WMD.
And Joseph Lieberman. I watched the guy on Hardball with Chris Matthews a few days ago and it was pathetic. Matthews asked him how has Saddam's capture made us any safer. He answered, "Saddam gassed his own people, his neighbors, and tortured thousands." Matthews again said, "How does it make us safer?" and he answered yet again, "Saddam gassed his own people, his neighbors, and tortured thousands." Sad thing is, that's the same thing coming out of the white house. Gah November 2004 can't come soon enough. Here's hoping President Dean can solve this mess.
I have and none of them were aware of the links as far as i could tell. Futhermore the jewish population hardly accounted for the vast majority of the american populus.
Its rather obvious as i said before Germany has a long racist history. However not even my grandfather knew of what was happening though he had his suspicions.
This doesn't support your notion the majority of americans or for that matter any one else in the world outside of germany and europe really knew what was going on within Germany at the time. You have provided a small minority of americans may have known, or rather had suspicions but you have provided for how the rest of america could have known any of this.
To what ends and for what purpose? I surely hope you don't blame America for the choices of those who were involved.
This is a rather dubious accussation based on purely philosphical and moralistic position. I wouldn't say it was our war unless we were infact attacked. Until Pearl Harbor we hadn't a reason to become militarily involved.
Before Pearl Harbor i could see how any one invididual could sell to the Nazis. Not much was known about them nor had they attacked us. You make it out to be something wicked to conduct business with fascists yet you probably buy products which are "Made in China."
Did you by chance read this information from the same source that suggested Michael Moore creates mockumentaries he convey's represents fact while mainly ficticious?
I repeat, i haven't heard that many people outside of Germany and Europe knew about what was going on. I have heard rumors, speculations so on and so forth over the years while reading about the issue. I haven't read anything that convinced me the majority of the people in the US knew of Hitler's intentions. However, i can not say the same for many Europeans who did nothing but try to appease Hitler until he invaded France...Had the many European powers gotten involved from the begining, or rather hadn't condoned such harsh treatment of Germany after WWI, much of this might never have happened. Its rather apparent France and England were playing the appease game with Hitler.
Not really. The first setence was incorrect. I meant to say: perhaps they view assertions wrt Hiltlerian fascim as anti german propaganda.
I was trying to concey to you a jewish holocaust or the tyranny of hitler were probably the last things people would have considered before the 1960s when most of this information became readily available. Certainly after the war we were aware of the fact Hitler was rather "evil" but it took a decade or two for the jewish position to reach the forefront of culture.
And Ford subscribbed to aryan nation news papers/magazines. Where are we going with this?
Of course not, but how many people outside of Europe were aware of the full extent of the Nazis tyranny.
I would certainly agree that power has been shifting but more so during the 8 years of Clinton's regime. I feel the Judicial branch has been over stepping its grounds for a very long time now dating back to the Roe V Wade decision.
I can certianly show you have we are becoming more socialistic. Quite frankly, it bothers me. Perhaps this accounts for the loss of democratic ideals in america?
We have China today and who is doing anything about that?
You haven't pointed this out Clashman. You pointed out they may have known of Hitler and Italy's dictatorships but you haven't provided for people knowing exactly what they stood for or how its America's fault that certain business elites were involved in trading with them
What about China?
Depending on the reasoning, yes. If we sold him anthrax in 1980 and he used it to create a biological weapon in 1988 by what means other than fortune telling could we have assumed would have made bio weapons out of the cultures while others we provided them to would not?
If we sold him anthrax it was for medical reasons. We sold to many nations biological samples to be used to make antibio drugs.
Aside from this i'd like to know if it were ever proven Anthrax was among Hitler's biological weapons arsenal or for that matter if a strain we provided him was used to creat biological weapons.
We've had a dicussion over this in the past where you failed to demonstrate to me America had any intent in aiding the generation of biological weapons.
After Halabja it was certainly obvious he already had cultured strains to be used as weapons and would require ours for that purpose.
You to this date haven't provided what biological/chemical agents we sold to him after 1988 (or even before then), how they were used in the creation of his biological arsenal, or for that matter why we should have stopped providing him said agents unrelated to his chemical arsenal we knew of which were primarly being supplied to him for medical reason to provide for his people.
Legion said:
Duly noted.
Legion said:
This is where we seriously disagree. Germany was allied with Japan and Italy in WWII against our allies. Under those circumstances, we should NOT have sold anything to any one of them.
They should have stopped once the first bullets began flying. Again, would you support us doing business directly with the Palestinians?
Legion said:
What???? Ok this is *completely* revisionist as far as the English are concerned. The english fought their tails off while we sat back and watched. Do you remember The Blitz in your history classes for instance? They didn't roll over.
The French on the other hand are a different story. But don't slime the English when history tells a 100% different story.
Legion said:
We can't control where our money goes after we make a sale. If I purchase something from Greece and that money somehow ends up in the hands of the Palestinians, have I done something wrong? No. But if I buy something directly from the Palestinians when they are attacking our ally Israel, have I done something wrong? I wholeheartedly believe so.
Otherwise, what is the point of alliances?
Glad to hear that.
Why are you disagreeing with the fact we agree? I any other case i'd agree with and even now here i do. But have this nagging frustration concerning England and France among other for allowing Germany to take much of Europe and some of Russia.
Depends on what we are selling them and its purposes. Remember, not all palestinians are terrorist mongrels.
Um, no. England was well aware of Nazi Germany's intentions and their actions as far as military expansion was concerned. Infact England didn't get involved untill some time after Polland was invaded.
History does not tell a different story about the English. They were indeed playing the appeasement game with Hitler before their engagement in war with Germany.
What an obvious observations. I was refering to having direct knowledge our products are being sold to palestinians or being used by them. This of course being the direct intent of the transaction.
DOn't blame all the palestinians for what the terrorist are doing.
CorwinB said:
On the ABM treaty you may or may not have a point, and I don't know enough to argue one way or the other whether this was good or bad. But the other two examples above don't justify your position at all. Those treaties were never ratified by the Senate, so to say they're "not being honored" is absolutely, categorically false. Also, your belief that the US violates (ratified) treaties on average more than other nation states doesn't square up with reality. France and the Rainbow Warrior? Turkey and the Rape of Cyprus? Germany and the EU Stability Pact? China, Cuba, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and every human rights treaty they've ever signed?
The vast majority of people in the U.S. did in fact know what Hitler's regime was about. Below here is an article on the 1936 Olympics, but it highlights alot of the things going on in Germany at the time, (as well as the world's response to such events).
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/olympics.html
Notice how this is hardly a left wing website.
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/olympics.html
Notice how this is hardly a left wing website.
This doesn't demonstrate that Americans knew what he was all about. If anything it shows he had rascist and dictatorial practices. Certainly this wouldn't be an indication of a holocaust! The American people really aren't the issue. The businesses involved with the nazis were. If they were infact aware of what was going on being that they have a deeper connection then yes i'd say they were culpable as nazi sympathists.
I have often suspected FDR was a nazi sympathist. I wonder if much research has been done on this issue.
I have often suspected FDR was a nazi sympathist. I wonder if much research has been done on this issue.
I dont see why we need a holocaust or world war before we can start justifying to stop selling something to someone. Of course 'lefties' are the ones today oppposed to trade with the brute that is China and its worth mentionning that as GW did a silly thing a few days ago and said he would oppose Taiwan's referendum.
The kind of message seen before passed along wtih April Glassbie. Ring a bell?
The anti semitic brutality of the 30's was well known at the time and not considered normal at all. It hadnt beenseen in generations. German Jews who then boarded boats to try and hightail it out of there but often were stopped and returned to the cauldron that was becoming Germany knew iit wasnt normal and it was extensivley oppressive. They sure as hell knew. It was right out of the middle ages for them but in a weird new form that was rapidly adavncing thru society. And was rabid elsewhere as well. Even across the pond...
But I cant help but see that trade sanctions has to come up with a wall of gross oppression before you give it consideration legion. I cant help but see simplistic ideology at work there.
The kind of message seen before passed along wtih April Glassbie. Ring a bell?
The anti semitic brutality of the 30's was well known at the time and not considered normal at all. It hadnt beenseen in generations. German Jews who then boarded boats to try and hightail it out of there but often were stopped and returned to the cauldron that was becoming Germany knew iit wasnt normal and it was extensivley oppressive. They sure as hell knew. It was right out of the middle ages for them but in a weird new form that was rapidly adavncing thru society. And was rabid elsewhere as well. Even across the pond...
But I cant help but see that trade sanctions has to come up with a wall of gross oppression before you give it consideration legion. I cant help but see simplistic ideology at work there.
Legion said:
If you took the two paragraphs I wrote as one thought as to why I disagreed with you, you'd realize that I do infact disagree with your stance. Why? Your response with the "depends" part. I don't think there is any "depends" whatsoever.
Legion said:
Again, historical revisionism. Poland was invaded on September 1st, 1939. Britain and France declared war on Germany for that on September 3rd, 1939.
If you consider 2 days "some time after", then we've got another disagreement.
Legion said:
Everyone was appeasing, and that had to do more with the Rhineland situation. There was no appeasement wrt Poland.
Legion said:
I don't blame all palestinians. But the fact remains that the ruling power of the Palestinians, i.e. Arafat, has a policy that is threatening toward Israel. Now I do not support 100% blind devotion to Israel because of the fact that they have done many despicable things as well in this conflict, but as far as direct sales go, we should avoid those because of our alliance with Israel.
Legion, I really would like to hear your thoughts on the disconnect between our Iraq policy and our North Korea policy, since you supported the actions in Iraq. It's just up the page.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=204129#204129
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=204129#204129
Natoma:
The United States and Israel are not allies, and they have never been. If Israel is atacked, the United States has no obligation to come to its aid, like it would be if West Europe, Japan, Taiwan, or (unfortuntely due to their quite undeserving membership in NATO) Turkey were attacked.
The United States and Israel are not allies, and they have never been. If Israel is atacked, the United States has no obligation to come to its aid, like it would be if West Europe, Japan, Taiwan, or (unfortuntely due to their quite undeserving membership in NATO) Turkey were attacked.
CorwinB said:
There are NO current chapter 7 resolutions against Israel. Chapter 7 calls for military force if needed to enforce.
There are a number of Chapter 6 resolutions against Israel. Chapter 6 does not call for military force to be used to enforce it.
*cough*
I hope that helps some of ignorant ones.
Eh? That's not what you hear from our politicians. Every time one of them talks about Israel, they always say "Israel is our ally. The only democracy in the middle east."
So unless they're all wrong, what's up? Or is this a case where if it's repeated often enough it becomes true, sort of like the majority of americans believing Iraq sponsored 9/11? hehe.
So unless they're all wrong, what's up? Or is this a case where if it's repeated often enough it becomes true, sort of like the majority of americans believing Iraq sponsored 9/11? hehe.
