This thread would have been so much cooler if it was called
"the arms trade is getting out of hand"


haha, arms, hands...you see what I did there?

7/27/2006 4:51:44 PM

Geez...

A full-auto AR-15 sear? Somewhere north of $4000.

A full-auto AK-47? Somewhere north of $4000.

A semi-auto AR-15? Around $800.

A semi-auto AK-47? Around $400.

7/27/2006 4:52:20 PM

Quote :

"that's why i took my job (well, not terrorists originally. i wanted to kill warlords and genocidal shitheads...)"

Umm, kind of like the warlords and genocidal shitheads that the US is in bed with in Afghanistan?

Everybody knows people such as Dostum et al have committed major human rights violations and have killed tens of thousands.

But these are the same people that the US courted after the invasion to help them finish off the Taliban, and then gave them huge provinces to govern. That's why Karzai only controls Kabul, the rest of the country is in the grips of these ex-"Mujahideen" warlords, who were rewarded with power and American friendship after killing countless civilians and raping countless women from 1990 to 2000 in their fight against the Taleban.

I would pay you all my bank account to go to Afghanistan and gun them down. Serious.

7/27/2006 10:50:31 PM

Quote :

"well for one thing, one of the complaints with the Iraq War was that we didn't have enough allies or international support...and many people are proponents of the viewpoint that "most of the world doesnt like America"...so if those things are true, it would seem important to keep the few allies we still have "

Well, by my opinion, we might win over more allies by not invading other countries for what the rest of the world (in general) percieves as no good reason. This, coupled with not blindly supporting Israel, should win us even more allies. However, I'm afraid this is one of those "agree to disagree" things, as I doubt you're going to see it my way and I certainly won't see it your way.

Quote :

" However, if it were as simple as "dont be an ally to Israel and the terrorists will stop hating and attacking you" maybe we would consider it "

Wow. I mean, WOW. As long as neo-cons are in office, this will NEVER NEVER happen. NEVER. That will NEVER be considered. And even if the neo-cons magically disappear, you'll have to purge most of the government of Christians and Jews to get the proposal to be SERIOUSLY considered.

Quote :

" But the fact is its not that simple...some of the islamic extremists that hate us are going to hate us and try to attack us regardless...some of them dont like our freedoms...some of them dont like any non-Muslims...if we said fuck Israel, some of them are still going to hate a country they perceive to be predominantly Christian...I mean these guys have people of all ages willing to blow themselves up to take out anyone they dont agree with...hell they kill other different Muslims...it would be kind of similar in the US to Catholics, for example, killing any non Catholics, including Methodists, Baptists, Lutherans, etc"

Perhaps we will still have some attacks, but on the whole, I think that we will be able to eliminate a very large portion of the hatred and desire to attack America by ceasing support for Israel. And getting out of Iraq will probably help too.

As I said before, though, this is one of those "agree to disagree" things. I mean, I'll continue to debate you if you want, but neiter of us are going to see eye to eye, probably. So, it would be pretty pointless.

7/28/2006 1:46:36 PM

And I disagree too. Best I can see we don't support Israel that much. Sure, we veto a few UN resolutions, fail to verbally abuse them on national TV, but it's not like our military is standing guard over Israel. It's not like the UN could do anything to Israel even if we abstained. There are countries all over the world that abuse and terrorize minority (even majority) groups, the UN doesn't intervene in all these countries, why should it in Israel? Best I can figure UN intervention requires genocide, and even then it doesn't act if the victims are dark skinned.

And it isn't like there is really that much of a double standard here. The U.S. freely sells arms to Israel, we also freely sell arms to numerous dictatorships around the world, same-o same-o.

[Edited on July 28, 2006 at 3:42 PM. Reason : .,.]

7/28/2006 3:41:45 PM

Quote :

"I think that we will be able to eliminate a very large portion of the hatred and desire to attack America by ceasing support for Israel"

so you think we should be completely neutral and let the middle east tear itself apart for all eternity?

or you think we should support the people whose only mission in life is to wipe israel off the map?



i mean your little argument began b/c you asked why we think hezbollah should be disarmed...MAYBE B/C THEY ARE A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION WHO ATTACK SOVERIEGN NATIONS W/OUT ANY OFFICAL SOVEREIGN BACKING OF THEIR OWN?

they attack the US, they attack Israel, they place their own countrymen in harms way b/c they think they represent the entire country.

7/28/2006 4:14:54 PM

Quote :

" it's not like our military is standing guard over Israel."

I actually laughed out loud at that. Like totally IRL.

Quote :

"so you think we should be completely neutral and let the middle east tear itself apart for all eternity?"

Double barreled question, friend.

And even if it weren't double barreled and you were just asking me if I think the middle east should tear itself apart for all eternity, I would say to you that it's none of our business if they tear themselves apart for all eternity. And, that's assuming that will be what happens. No way to verify it besides living for eternity and reporting back when time ends.

Anyway, to actually answer the first part of your poorly worded question, yes, I think we should stay neutral. That’s the best that can be done, given the circumstances, by my opinion.

Quote :

" i mean your little argument began b/c you asked why we think hezbollah should be disarmed...MAYBE B/C THEY ARE A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION WHO ATTACK SOVERIEGN NATIONS W/OUT ANY OFFICAL SOVEREIGN BACKING OF THEIR OWN?"

If you are saying that the problem with them having arms is that they are “A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION WHO ATTACK SOVERIEGN NATIONS W/OUT ANY OFFICAL SOVEREIGN BACKING OF THEIR OWN,” I’m still asserting that I fail to see how that is a problem. Further, if they do it for long enough, then perhaps they’ll become their own sovereign nation. Will you still consider them a “terrorist organization” if they become their own sovereign nation? Will you still have a problem with them arming themselves if they become their own sovereign nation?

Quote :

" they attack the US, they attack Israel, they place their own countrymen in harms way b/c they think they represent the entire country."

Yeah some of those things are pretty shitty, but I still fail to see why they should be disarmed. Analogy: the USA attacked Iraq while putting their own countrymen in harms way (not only soldiers, but also civilians who will have to bear the wrath of the retaliatory efforts put forth by whoever wishes to resist the occupation). Should the US also be disarmed? Or perhaps it's ok for the US because they’re fighting the good fight, so to speak?

7/28/2006 6:25:06 PM

Quote :

"Umm, kind of like the warlords and genocidal shitheads that the US is in bed with in Afghanistan? ...I would pay you all my bank account to go to Afghanistan and gun them down. Serious."

I'll be perfectly honest here--I don't know as much about the Afghan political situation as of right now as I should.

I will say this, though: if I'm ever in a position to do some freelance warlord and genocidal shithead slaughtering, I don't need your whole bank account. I'll do it for cost. No charge for labor.


and when I signed up, oppression and genocides in Africa and the Balkans were the only things on the scope. that's what I was referring to.

7/28/2006 7:23:05 PM

"Anyway, to actually answer the first part of your poorly worded question, yes, I think we should stay neutral. That’s the best that can be done, given the circumstances, by my opinion"

Yeah, we should stay neutral. Pull out of everywhere and become isolationist. Give the agressors just enough to appease them, and we can have peace in our time...until they invade Poland then France and Belgium. That method sure worked well in the 30's, didn't it? Thanks Neville!

7/28/2006 7:37:30 PM

Quote :

"Yeah, we should stay neutral. Pull out of everywhere and become isolationist. Give the agressors just enough to appease them, and we can have peace in our time...until they invade Poland then France and Belgium. That method sure worked well in the 30's, didn't it? Thanks Neville!"

Wow, that’s a strawman if I ever saw one. First off, I never said that we should pull out of everywhere. That is a distortion of what I said. I SAID that I think that we should stay neutral in the context of the Middle East situation that we are here discussing. I said that GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, that was the best that can be done. I didn’t explain those circumstances, fair enough, so I’ll do that now…

Israel is a state formed by western powers against the will of the Arabs who resided on the land prior to its inception. This, to me, was an inexcusable action, but it has been done. Now there are tons of people living there, and many of them feel that a book written thousands of years ago gives them the right to it. To me, this is absolutely retarded reasoning for taking a group’s land, against their will. Strike two. Now, strike three is the fact that the USA is continuing to enable the people of Israel to terrorize the native inhabitants of the land. What’s done is done with regards to the establishment of the state of Israel. The things that have happened to the Palestinians will not be easily forgotten. However, to continue to feed this whole fucked up affair only furthers the complications. I say the USA should remain neutral in Israel so that it can sort itself out. And in the meantime, the US should most certainly not involve itself with any more creation of states against the will of the inhabitants.

Further, aiding and abetting Israel is NOT helping our national security. There are probably places where our presence *is* helping our national security. I haven’t looked into that, but they probably exist. Israel is not one of them.

Now then, please apologize for being a strawman-spouting asstard.

7/28/2006 9:49:22 PM

"Wow, that’s a strawman if I ever saw one. First off, I never said that we
should pull out of everywhere. That is a distortion of what I said. I SAID
that I think that we should stay neutral in the context of the Middle East
situation that we are here discussing. I said that GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES,
that was the best that can be done. I didn’t explain those circumstances,
fair enough, so I’ll do that now…"

You're absolutley right. I'm an asstard, and I'll be the first to admit it. I was just saying that your logic is what got the allies into WWII. I was using what is called "slippery slope logic." If we let the Qutb-esqe Jihadists do whatever the hell they want we will end up in a world only slightly better than Pol Pot's Cambodia. Hezbollah isn't exactly a Jihadist organization in the Al Qaeda sense but they're close. Their platform refers to the fight against "western imperialism," but doesn't say that harming
innocents is ok. I guess they don't abide by that any more. They also want to implement an islamic state in Lebanon just like Iran. Yeah! Iran!

7/31/2006 12:45:26 AM