Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

Frazzled wrote:
As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

De facto diplomatic bans have away of cramping the trading style.

Note Britain vis a vis Libya.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

De facto diplomatic bans have away of cramping the trading style.

Note Britain vis a vis Libya.

Britain doesn't export to Libya? Ok. So?

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

De facto diplomatic bans have away of cramping the trading style.

Note Britain vis a vis Libya.

Britain doesn't export to Libya? Ok. So?

We do, we recently exported the expertise to formulate a coup against a despotic regime. Before that we exported arms to prop up a despotic regime.

dæl wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

De facto diplomatic bans have away of cramping the trading style.

Note Britain vis a vis Libya.

Britain doesn't export to Libya? Ok. So?

We do, we recently exported the expertise to formulate a coup against a despotic regime. Before that we exported arms to prop up a despotic regime.

SOunds like a positive balance of payments plan to me. Why did you guys wack a good customer like that?

Frazzled wrote:

dæl wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

De facto diplomatic bans have away of cramping the trading style.

Note Britain vis a vis Libya.

Britain doesn't export to Libya? Ok. So?

We do, we recently exported the expertise to formulate a coup against a despotic regime. Before that we exported arms to prop up a despotic regime.

SOunds like a positive balance of payments plan to me. Why did you guys wack a good customer like that?

Possibly had something to do with him wanting to return his economy to the gold standard, having zero sovereign debt, and not needing any infrastructure. Now they need all that stuff rebuilt, who cares that their 99% literacy rate might drop a bit for a few years or that the flag of al qaeda flies from their masts these days, we can make some cash.

And of course he murdered thousands of civilians. We tend to look on that sort of thing badly. Just not cricket using helicopters on the populous.

Frazzled wrote:
Britain doesn't export to Libya? Ok. So?

Well, they do, but the real issue stems from imports.

Still waiting for Malaysia to do something about its best buddy and close ally Indonesia, whose government has done things that makes Bush look like a kitten.

Harriticus wrote:Still waiting for Malaysia to do something about its best buddy and close ally Indonesia, whose government has done things that makes Bush look like a kitten.

One time a kitten jumped on the back of my head and bite and clawed me at the same time. It was hardcore man. My scalp was covered in blood. Now days, on the very top of my head, is a very scarred up bald spot. Every time when I look in the mirror I'm reminded of the horrible thing that the kitten did to me.

Essentially what I'm saying is, looking like a kitten can still be a bad thing.

But I actually agree with what you're saying. So don't think I'm disagreeing with you. Because I'm not.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

Be fair dogma, nobody really cares now.

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

China could stop exporting those little bits of plastic which make the big machines work to your country.

No, they really can't. Not without unacceptable consequences.

dogma wrote:No, they really can't. Not without unacceptable consequences.

Yeah. Think of China has a hotdog stand and think of America as the fat guy who eats there for seventeen meals a day. Though China is certainly more powerful in their relationship, he is oddly dependent on America for the vast majority of his revenue.

Also how would China get their monies owed back

The largest foreign holder of U.S. debt is China, which owns more about $1.2 trillion in bills, notes and bonds, according to the Treasury

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

China could stop exporting those little bits of plastic which make the big machines work to your country.

Oh Noes! Then we would have to make all our own little bits of plastic and employ millions to do so. Oh Noes!

Frazzled wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

China could stop exporting those little bits of plastic which make the big machines work to your country.

Oh Noes! Then we would have to make all our own little bits of plastic and employ millions to do so. Oh Noes!

And have to pay the workers the US minimum wage?! Won't somebody please think of the profits?! Those poor profits....

Frazzled wrote:
Oh Noes! Then we would have to make all our own little bits of plastic and employ millions to do so. Oh Noes!

And pay 5 times as much for them.

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Not much. We will still tell whatever little country with its mickey mouse ruling to go feth itself.

Sure we will, doesn't mean anyone else will care.

As no "anyone else" will be able to do anything about it, so what?

China could stop exporting those little bits of plastic which make the big machines work to your country.

Oh Noes! Then we would have to make all our own little bits of plastic and employ millions to do so. Oh Noes!

And have to pay the workers the US minimum wage?! Won't somebody please think of the profits?! Those poor profits....

No no, thats why we have an open border. Who needs minimum wage-piffle!

Frazzled wrote:Oh Noes! Then we would have to make all our own little bits of plastic and employ millions to do so. Oh Noes!

I suspect we'd start making those little bits of plastic in India and Africa. Possibly Eastern Europe.

CptJake wrote:Point being that to give up sovereignty to an institution that feths up the trial of an actual war criminal like Ratko Mladic, has crap rules for evidence, and would allow 'Bush is a War Criminal' type trials is an asinine concept.

Again, I point out that the US has investigated and prosecuted our own troops within an existing system that is one of the better on the planet. You don't have to like the results. and I freely admit the system isn't perfect, but at least it isn't the political circus that the Hague ends up being.

Apart from the fact that Bush IS a war criminal, I agree with you on everything else, the Haya Tribunal is just another example of how deep we western societies have sunk into the molasse of PC crap...

Humans are the worst kind of animals and war is messy, innocents die, sometimes by accident, other times on purpose. To claim that some countries are above and have the right to judge other nations based solely on this, is both ridiculous and a lie.

The winners make the rules, the losers die / get sent to jail / whatever, don't try and make up appearances by instituting an International Crimes Tribunal that only trials cases depending on their political merits!

You've already declared Pres Bush a war criminal. See, don't even need a trial or court, all we need are folks like you to take the initiative. feth evidence, or process, we have PhantomViper and a slew of other internet detective/prosecutor/judge/jurors.

Starts war on falsified evidence, without UN mandate, kills over 100,000 civilians, abducts and tortures people without due process. Seems like the evidence speaks for itself.

Is America safer from extremist terrorism now? Quite the opposite I would say.

dæl wrote:Starts war on falsified evidence, without UN mandate, kills over 100,000 civilians, abducts and tortures people without due process. Seems like the evidence speaks for itself.

Is America safer from extremist terrorism now? Quite the opposite I would say.

I'm not going to address your other claims with this post, but I'd like to note that the vast majority of civilian casualties in both Iraq and Afghanistan have not been caused by US or coalition forces, but rather insurgents, terrorists, and sectarian militias.

dæl wrote:without UN mandate

Leaving the rest aside, the UN has no authority over the United States. Their opinion is irrelevant.

dæl wrote:Starts war on falsified evidence, without UN mandate, kills over 100,000 civilians, abducts and tortures people without due process. Seems like the evidence speaks for itself.

Is America safer from extremist terrorism now? Quite the opposite I would say.

Your number of dead civilians is a complete joke unless you are including civilians killed by insurgents (in which case your attributing the crime to the wrong side).

The rest is a joke as welll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But, like I said....

CptJake wrote: You've already declared Pres Bush a war criminal. See, don't even need a trial or court, all we need are folks like you to take the initiative. feth evidence, or process, we have PhantomViper and a slew of other internet detective/prosecutor/judge/jurors.

Hordini wrote:

dæl wrote:Starts war on falsified evidence, without UN mandate, kills over 100,000 civilians, abducts and tortures people without due process. Seems like the evidence speaks for itself.

Is America safer from extremist terrorism now? Quite the opposite I would say.

I'm not going to address your other claims with this post, but I'd like to note that the vast majority of civilian casualties in both Iraq and Afghanistan have not been caused by US or coalition forces, but rather insurgents, terrorists, and sectarian militias.

The IBC project released a report detailing the deaths it recorded between March 2003 and March 2005[71] in which it recorded 24,865 civilian deaths. The report says the U.S. and its allies were responsible for the largest share (37%) of the 24,865 deaths. The remaining deaths were attributed to anti-occupations forces (9%), crime (36%) and unknown agents (11%). It also lists the primary sources used by the media — mortuaries, medics, Iraqi officials, eyewitnesses, police, relatives, U.S.-coalition, journalists, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), friends/associates and other. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

biccat wrote:Leaving the rest aside, the UN has no authority over the United States. Their opinion is irrelevant.

But Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria must follow their resolutions? It's funny how Israel doesn't bother either. Roosevelt would be turning in his grave if he could see how toothless the organisation he created to keep the peace had become. Their opinion isn't irrelevant, their role is to protect peace, impose sanctions and authorise military action.

dæl wrote:But Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria must follow their resolutions? It's funny how Israel doesn't bother either.

Yup. Authority is the ability to make people do what you want them to do when they don't want to do it.

Whoever isn't on the side of the United States doesn't have the military might to back up their opinions. No authority means your opinion is just that, an opinion.

CptJake wrote:

dæl wrote:Starts war on falsified evidence, without UN mandate, kills over 100,000 civilians, abducts and tortures people without due process. Seems like the evidence speaks for itself.

Is America safer from extremist terrorism now? Quite the opposite I would say.

Your number of dead civilians is a complete joke unless you are including civilians killed by insurgents (in which case your attributing the crime to the wrong side).

The rest is a joke as welll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But, like I said....

CptJake wrote: You've already declared Pres Bush a war criminal. See, don't even need a trial or court, all we need are folks like you to take the initiative. feth evidence, or process, we have PhantomViper and a slew of other internet detective/prosecutor/judge/jurors.

Falsified evidence - testemony of a taxi driver, then "sexed up"
UN mandate - where was that then?
100,000 - conservative by some estimates which claim upwards of 150,000. I picked 100,000 because it will be at least that, maybe not all had the trigger pulled by a coalition soldier, but there is direct responsibility from Bush and Blair.
Gitmo was dicussed the other day, and its ambiguous regarding legality, but certainly not morality.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:

dæl wrote:But Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria must follow their resolutions? It's funny how Israel doesn't bother either.

Yup. Bullying is the ability to make people do what you want them to do when they don't want to do it. Under threat of violence

Whoever isn't on the side of the United States doesn't have the military might to back up their opinions. No authority means your opinion is just that, an opinion.

How would Roosevelt feel about this?

PhantomViper wrote:Humans are the worst kind of animals

Incorrect. I'd proffer mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas are the worst kind of animals. No redeeming values at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dæl wrote:Starts war on falsified evidence, without UN mandate, kills over 100,000 civilians, abducts and tortures people without due process. Seems like the evidence speaks for itself.

Is America safer from extremist terrorism now? Quite the opposite I would say.

-Evidence that everyone including your fair country both submitted and believed. Why do you hate your own country so?
-The US doesn't recognize the soveriegnty of the UN over the US. Occasionally we'll permit a treaty but thats it.
-You mean captures enemy combatants? You betcha. Again this is not something exactly new to GB. Under your standard Queen ELizabeth is a war criminal too. Don't think so! Why do you hate the Queenie you meenie!