- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 12/10/24 at 12:46 pm to SirWinston
What happened with your neighbor's little girl and her attraction to you? I don't remember hearing the outcome of all that.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 12:52 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
Not that I necessarily disagree with your premise as a whole, but at a point a country has to stand on its own feet. If our installed Afghan government fell literally as we were leaving, it probably was never going to be successful to begin with no matter what we did.
There was a "People's Revolution" in Afghanistan in the mid-70s that overthrew the military coup government that had overthrown the internally very popular King of Afghanistan. As you can tell by the name of the Revolution, it was Socialist/Communist and sought to join a lot of its neighboring -Stans in becoming part of the USSR (because nobody else gave a flying frick about the place and its options were severely limited). We did not dig that turn... so the CIA armed and trained Saudi Mujaheideen to go wage guerilla warfare on the "Atheistic" People's Government, knowing that they'd turn to the Soviets for help, and knowing that would lure them into "their own Vietnam, as payback." Hey, it worked!
But in the vacuum that happened when the Soviets pulled out and the actual government did collapse amid Civil War it just became kind of like Libya or Somalia... a failed state run by feuding warlords/opium cartels. And those people sucked so much the public grudgingly accepted The Taliban taking over... because at least they weren't murderous lunatics (though certainly a bit of each term).
Our installed government didn't work because we didn't realize the entrenched tribalism in the population... but with no clear majority group, so it's so splintered and they're so uncooperative that The Taliban forms a powerful majority group.
Of course, Trump negotiated our withdrawal WITH THE TALIBAN!!! Something you guys seem to pretend didn't happen unless you're claiming he's a tough guy for threatening to kill their leader if he killed any Americans. Fact is Trump handed Afghanistan back to The Taliban, which was dying out before that...
The Trump White House agreed to a May 1 troop withdrawal. New Yorker writer Dexter Filkins says Biden must now decide whether to honor a deal that included the Taliban but not the Afghan government.
NPR: Trump's Deal To End War In Afghanistan Leaves Biden With 'A Terrible Situation'
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:59 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 12:57 pm to No Colors
I don't really mean it as personally as it sounds. I'm mostly laughing when I call you all "monsters" if that helps. More of a troll in that regard.
I can stop doing that if it's upsetting and makes yall dislike me.
I can stop doing that if it's upsetting and makes yall dislike me.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 12:58 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:01 pm to No Colors
quote:
My children's pediatrician is from Syria, is Addad's second cousin, and was in medical school with him. Said he was a great guy. And that when his brother was killed drag racing through the streets of Damascus, the secret service came to him (in London) and said: You have two choices, either come back to Syria and begin to assume power. Or, the person who does take power after your dad dies is going to have you and your family killed in order to eliminate you as a threat.
So he shut down his medical practice and goes back to Syria.
I've never had a problem with Assad. I never had a problem with Sadaam Hussein. He ran Iraq with an iron fist which is how you have to run the place. Iraq was a clean, functioning country that kept Iran in check. All before W blew the place up and destabilized the ME.
I'm wondering why you attack people on here personally, when you don't even know us? You call us monsters, and disgusting, and evil. Because we don't like Putin?
We all know way more about you personally than you know about us. And your admitted personal behavioral issues are for more monstrous than anyone else here in this thread.
There's the rub. Do we support regimes that make things easier for us but are kept in power through absolute brutality? Because eventually those regimes collapse... at a certain point people live in fear of being killed if they speak up so much that it stops becoming a fear... you're dead either way, might as well die on your feet instead of your knees.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:06 pm to doubleb
quote:
Saddam blew up the Middle East when he invaded Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia. He got what he deserved.
WTF was he thinking?
He was also protected, ultimately, by the Saudi government, who stopped the US from going into Iraq after him after we'd driven him out of Kuwait, because they knew that would turn majority Shiite Iraq into an instant ally of Iran.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:12 pm to SirWinston
quote:
I can stop doing that if it's upsetting and makes yall dislike
It doesn’t bother me at all, and if you don’t mind playing the role of a nut job then keep it up.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:15 pm to Lee B
Again, the reason the middle east is a mess is because of France and the UK.
As the dust settled from WWI, at Versailles to settle the treaties and divide up the loser's empires and colonies, the US was the new "country kid on the block." We had not really come to terms with our power, or our place at the top of the global system... we were still isolationist and naive... and The French and UK delegations proceeded to get everybody there drunk and then pull out maps and started dividing the Ottoman Empire up into countries... and when experts would speak up like "Wait... you can't put those two groups of people in the same national boundary... they have a blood feud as long as history itself!" or "You just can't put that tiny minority group in power over the rest of the people in that area you've mapped out... it will be an instant long running revolution!" they just brushed them off and kept going. But they knew EXACTLY what they were doing. WWI was about the end of Empires and colonies, really... the world was changing... so they rigged a way to have unofficial colonies... colonies by choice because otherwise the people they put in power would be overrun and overthrown by the populations they ruled over, and in return for the arms and advisors and even interventions to be used internally to keep those regimes in power they could dictate favorable deals on the resources those countries had.
So the region was made into a timebomb on purpose.
How do you dismantle a bunch of timebombs without some explosions?
As the dust settled from WWI, at Versailles to settle the treaties and divide up the loser's empires and colonies, the US was the new "country kid on the block." We had not really come to terms with our power, or our place at the top of the global system... we were still isolationist and naive... and The French and UK delegations proceeded to get everybody there drunk and then pull out maps and started dividing the Ottoman Empire up into countries... and when experts would speak up like "Wait... you can't put those two groups of people in the same national boundary... they have a blood feud as long as history itself!" or "You just can't put that tiny minority group in power over the rest of the people in that area you've mapped out... it will be an instant long running revolution!" they just brushed them off and kept going. But they knew EXACTLY what they were doing. WWI was about the end of Empires and colonies, really... the world was changing... so they rigged a way to have unofficial colonies... colonies by choice because otherwise the people they put in power would be overrun and overthrown by the populations they ruled over, and in return for the arms and advisors and even interventions to be used internally to keep those regimes in power they could dictate favorable deals on the resources those countries had.
So the region was made into a timebomb on purpose.
How do you dismantle a bunch of timebombs without some explosions?
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:17 pm to doubleb
quote:
Saddam blew up the Middle East when he invaded Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia. He got what he deserved.
Kuwait was quite literally stealing billions of dollars' worth of oil from Iraq. Unfortunately for Saddam, he found out Kuwait had a big brother willing to stick up for their wrongdoings.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:24 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:18 pm to SirWinston
quote:
I don't really mean it as personally as it sounds. I'm mostly laughing when I call you all "monsters" if that helps. More of a troll in that regard.
I can stop doing that if it's upsetting and makes yall dislike me.
dowhatyawannado... but trolls are not taken seriously...
"In the end, we are what we pretend to be... so we must be very careful about what we pretend to be."
- Kurt Vonnegut, "Mother Night"
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:27 pm to HYDRebs
quote:
Kuwait was quite literally stealing billions of dollars worth of oil from Kuwait. Unfortunately, Saddam found out Kuwait had a big brother willing to stick up for their wrongdoings.
Hmmm... I've never heard that. Kuwait is a tiny and very oil-rich country that was created out of part of Iraq at the end of WWI and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. "Modern-day Iraq" has always thought it should have it back since it represented wealth arbitrarily stolen from it by the Allied powers when they reconstituted the country. The same dynamic with any breakaway territory and a larger state.
But there was more to Hussein's actions than just grabbing oil...
The Origins of the Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait Reconsidered
For over 30 years, policymakers and scholars have taken for granted that Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait simply to seize its oil. That narrative misleadingly suggests that the Iraqi invasion happened to coincide with, but was unrelated to, the dawn of the post-Cold War era. In fact, Saddam’s decision-making was inextricable from his interpretation of the end of the Cold War. In late 1989 and early 1990, he posited that Soviet retrenchment portended a five-year period of American unipolarity, after which Japan and Germany would restore a global balance of power. Until that new equilibrium emerged, Saddam genuinely feared that the United States and Israel would use their unchecked power to destabilize his regime in pursuit of their hegemony over the Middle East. In the summer of 1990, Kuwait’s oil overproduction persuaded the Iraqi leadership that the Kuwaiti royal family was complicit in the U.S.-led plot that they believed was already in full swing.
So they weren't "stealing" oil from Iraq, but they were overproducing and deflating prices and that hurt Iraq...
And Hussein was angry and bitter at US... after waging war on Iran pretty much on our behalf, it was exposed that the US was arming Iran (Iran-Contra) in the same war...
So the prospect of the US being unchecked in the region pissed him off... he calculated he could pull off grabbing other states... boy, was he wrong
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:32 pm to Lee B
quote:
Of course, Trump negotiated our withdrawal WITH THE TALIBAN!!! Something you guys seem to pretend didn't happen unless you're claiming he's a tough guy for threatening to kill their leader if he killed any Americans. Fact is Trump handed Afghanistan back to The Taliban, which was dying out before that...
Who else is he going to negotiate with there? There was no negotiating between us and our installed government, it was us telling them what was going to happen and what wasn't.
So that leaves the Taliban. If you're going to withdraw anyway, you either just do it without talking to them....or you try to get some assurances. IDK why you wouldn't at least try to go to the table with them beforehand.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:34 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
quote:
Of course, Trump negotiated our withdrawal WITH THE TALIBAN!!! Something you guys seem to pretend didn't happen unless you're claiming he's a tough guy for threatening to kill their leader if he killed any Americans. Fact is Trump handed Afghanistan back to The Taliban, which was dying out before that...
Who else is he going to negotiate with there? There was no negotiating between us and our installed government, it was us telling them what was going to happen and what wasn't.
So that leaves the Taliban. If you're going to withdraw anyway, you either just do it without talking to them....or you try to get some assurances. IDK why you wouldn't at least try to go to the table with them beforehand.
Because frick them... they get no cooperation.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:37 pm to Lee B
quote:
So they weren't "stealing" oil from Iraq, but they were overproducing and deflating prices and that hurt Iraq...
From my understanding they were slant drilling into Rumaila field in iraq borders. which would be "stealing"
However, not everything in politics is as black and white as history makes it out to be. I'm sure there are a variety of reasons, but this is the one that to me always stood out as why.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:38 pm to Lee B
"Hey, just want to give you guys a heads up that we'll be abandoning the government and military here on a certain date... you know, so you can get ready to seize power again. Okay... if you hurt any Americans while I'm still in office I'll bomb your house, got it! Great!"
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:43 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 1:41 pm to HYDRebs
quote:
quote:
So they weren't "stealing" oil from Iraq, but they were overproducing and deflating prices and that hurt Iraq...
From my understanding they were slant drilling into Rumaila field in iraq borders. which would be "stealing"
However, not everything in politics is as black and white as history makes it out to be. I'm sure there are a variety of reasons, but this is the one that to me always stood out as why.
"I drink your milkshake!!!"
Okay, I could see that... especially, as I said, since it was a case of taking the richest-in-oil section of the traditional national territory and saying "we'll make this a new independent country," knowing the only chance it stood of surviving was giving good deals on that oil in return for military protection against the country it was taken from...
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 1:42 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:16 pm to HYDRebs
quote:
From my understanding they were slant drilling into Rumaila field in iraq borders. which would be "stealing"
I've only heard this claim made by John Kiriakou former CIA agent/analyst. He is an admitted leftist and his claims have him being in multiple locations at the same time when you actually pay attention to his stories.
John Kerry wasn't lefty enough for him, it seems.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:40 pm to CitizenK
I mean this claim has been made by far more than one person 
.
There were numerous articles in the Times and Washington post in the 90's and early 2000s about it as well as some evidence with American workers that were captured adjacent to the Iraqi and Kuwait border.
Alot of circumstantial evidence although no one has ever come and said 100% sure it was happening. The technology for it was available and there at the time.
. There were numerous articles in the Times and Washington post in the 90's and early 2000s about it as well as some evidence with American workers that were captured adjacent to the Iraqi and Kuwait border.
Alot of circumstantial evidence although no one has ever come and said 100% sure it was happening. The technology for it was available and there at the time.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:40 pm to CitizenK
DP
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 12/10/24 at 3:52 pm to HYDRebs
quote:
Times and Washington
Meh, this smacks of James Baker telling Gorbie that no NATO expansion, yet Gorbie has stated that never happened, he only asked that no US bases in former East Germany which Baker said okay.
Evidence that there was no slant drilling into Iraq. Americans were still who worked on oil rigs in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, etc.. in the 1980's, Lots of oil fields baws in Houston made bank as oil rig hands, Work there for 18 months and pay was tax free or something like that. No different that the US divers working in the North Sea made serious bank in the 1970's Brother of a friend went to a diving school in Houston to make that money overseas The divers weren't SEALS, but all of his instructors were. Same type of setup and what that liar Sy Hersh claimed was a secret special ops training center in FL. It's nothing but a commercial diving school
Lots of claims made daily which have zero basis in reality.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 4:00 pm
Page 4334 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News