Hall of Fame Member
Posts: 10,505 
Location: The Evil Empire
Location: The Evil Empire
May 12th, 2008, 08:34 PM
Quoting EagleSmack
What you didn't know that? We're just ITCHING for a reason!
The US always wanted to drop or launch nukes at Canada?!
NHL Hockey Insider
Posts: 3,581
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
May 12th, 2008, 11:24 PM
successful president. B ut, yes, it is to do with war, and that is mcCain.
The word evil has been tossed all over the place by the bush government, it is kind
of common now, so, sure, we will change it to 'crumby', that better?
It is stale now to keep hearing people talk about obama as ?????, I remember when
John Kennedy ran for president, got the same silly stuff as Obama is getting from republicans, but he was a fine president, very young, not so seasoned, the young people
loved him, he was very intelligent and new. The tired ole boys got left behind, as should
be done now, including clinton. The country needs to be respected again across the
world, neither McCain or Clinton can do that, it has to be a fresh start, with a diplomatic
broad minded intelligent approach, in a country which is so strong, that doesn't need to
shout war all the time, should guide and lead the world in a peaceful way, and with
the strength they have they can do that.
Quoting Colpy
Lots of military personnel were tortured, and it doesn't have anything to do with being a
Oh Bull****.
Should Obama lose (hillary is out of it), John McCain will be President.
McCain is a man that withstood several years of torture and severe beatings simply because he would not undercut his fellow prisoners.
Disagree with him if you like.....that's fine. To call him "evil" is an underserved insult of monumental proportion......
McCain has been tested, and passed.....Obama??????
Should Obama lose (hillary is out of it), John McCain will be President.
McCain is a man that withstood several years of torture and severe beatings simply because he would not undercut his fellow prisoners.
Disagree with him if you like.....that's fine. To call him "evil" is an underserved insult of monumental proportion......
McCain has been tested, and passed.....Obama??????
successful president. B ut, yes, it is to do with war, and that is mcCain.
The word evil has been tossed all over the place by the bush government, it is kind
of common now, so, sure, we will change it to 'crumby', that better?
It is stale now to keep hearing people talk about obama as ?????, I remember when
John Kennedy ran for president, got the same silly stuff as Obama is getting from republicans, but he was a fine president, very young, not so seasoned, the young people
loved him, he was very intelligent and new. The tired ole boys got left behind, as should
be done now, including clinton. The country needs to be respected again across the
world, neither McCain or Clinton can do that, it has to be a fresh start, with a diplomatic
broad minded intelligent approach, in a country which is so strong, that doesn't need to
shout war all the time, should guide and lead the world in a peaceful way, and with
the strength they have they can do that.
Electoral Member
Posts: 106
Location: Enjoying a coffee in sunny Jenin
Location: Enjoying a coffee in sunny Jenin
May 13th, 2008, 05:25 AM
The real question is who cares about the US anymore, China is already the worlds most powerful nation in all but name. If China suddenly banned all exports to the US I wonder how many days it would survive. The US/Israel/Iran conflict is far from being the world ending event its hyped up to be.
The real question is who cares about the US anymore, China is already the worlds most powerful nation in all but name. If China suddenly banned all exports to the US I wonder how many days it would survive. The US/Israel/Iran conflict is far from being the world ending event its hyped up to be.
jimmoyer
Posts: 5,038
Location: Winchester Virginia
Location: Winchester Virginia
May 13th, 2008, 06:46 AM
I'm concerned about it too. Can you look me in the eye and tell me you trust Bush or any of his henchmen? Is there a limit as to how far Bush will go? Does anybody know? I grew up with the idea that the Americans were the good guys. Are they still?
-------------------------------------------#juan----------------------------------------------------------
You're certainly right to wonder, juan.
That's why I like McCain staying steadfast about what is torture and what is not. Most of us in our 50s grew up on WWII movies showing how bad the Nazis and Japs were.
Our nation has reacted to 9/11 with a kind of management that wants results at no matter what cost. That appeals to people. But....we all know the circle of arguments like a dog chasing its tail about how America reacted to 9/11.
As McCain also said, Bush missed a great opportunity for Americans to pick some measure of self sacrifice. This would have done several things:
1. Make Americans less imperial
2. Cause a psychology of connectedness to the world
3. Not be like Roman Empire citizens dancing and playing while a war is going on
4. By some self-sacrifice a humility naturally entails
5. By some self-sacrifice a nobility entails, taking away our national image of being a bully, a brat, a fat slob consumer.
McCain has stood taller than any other politician on those 2 points.
I just have misgivings on this famed temper.
And so I lean towards Obama. I just wonder if he has as deep seated beliefs as McCain.
I'm concerned about it too. Can you look me in the eye and tell me you trust Bush or any of his henchmen? Is there a limit as to how far Bush will go? Does anybody know? I grew up with the idea that the Americans were the good guys. Are they still?
-------------------------------------------#juan----------------------------------------------------------
You're certainly right to wonder, juan.
That's why I like McCain staying steadfast about what is torture and what is not. Most of us in our 50s grew up on WWII movies showing how bad the Nazis and Japs were.
Our nation has reacted to 9/11 with a kind of management that wants results at no matter what cost. That appeals to people. But....we all know the circle of arguments like a dog chasing its tail about how America reacted to 9/11.
As McCain also said, Bush missed a great opportunity for Americans to pick some measure of self sacrifice. This would have done several things:
1. Make Americans less imperial
2. Cause a psychology of connectedness to the world
3. Not be like Roman Empire citizens dancing and playing while a war is going on
4. By some self-sacrifice a humility naturally entails
5. By some self-sacrifice a nobility entails, taking away our national image of being a bully, a brat, a fat slob consumer.
McCain has stood taller than any other politician on those 2 points.
I just have misgivings on this famed temper.
And so I lean towards Obama. I just wonder if he has as deep seated beliefs as McCain.
Executive Member
Posts: 9,531
May 13th, 2008, 09:18 AM
Quoting Colpy
Time to put McCain in perspective. American bombers killed close to three million civilians in VietNam, and another million in Laos and Cambodia. McCain was just one of those bomber pilots. He flew 23 bombing missions over VietNam. On his twenty third mission he was shot down and captured. Much has been made of his heroism while in captivity. I wonder if the VietNamese thought he was a hero? Does McCain feel any guilt over the millions of civilians his bombing missions killed? What McCain has done is make political hay out of his years as a captive and his handlers have reaped every ounce of political pathos available from it. It's not as if Mcain was flying a B-52 and dropping bombs from forty thousand feet on map coordinates, not really knowing what he was bombing. McCain was flying an A-4 attack fighter/bomber and he saw every target he hit.
Oh Bull****.
Should Obama lose (hillary is out of it), John McCain will be President.
McCain is a man that withstood several years of torture and severe beatings simply because he would not undercut his fellow prisoners.
Disagree with him if you like.....that's fine. To call him "evil" is an underserved insult of monumental proportion......
McCain has been tested, and passed.....Obama??????
Should Obama lose (hillary is out of it), John McCain will be President.
McCain is a man that withstood several years of torture and severe beatings simply because he would not undercut his fellow prisoners.
Disagree with him if you like.....that's fine. To call him "evil" is an underserved insult of monumental proportion......
McCain has been tested, and passed.....Obama??????
Quote:
.
Certainly McCain could not have been unaware of the havoc unleashed by his bombing missions over Vietnam. Though Pentagon war planners and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara preferred to emphasize the antiseptic nature of aerial bombardment against carefully chosen targets, a highly publicized series of articles in late 1966 by Harrison Salisbury in the New York Times described the widespread devastation of civilian neighborhoods around Hanoi by American bombs. "Bomb damage...extends over an area of probably a mile or so on both sides of the highway" near one target, he wrote, noting that "small villages and hamlets along the route [were] almost obliterated." Several years ago, a chastened McNamara acknowledged that Operation Rolling Thunder, which unloaded 800 tons of bombs a day over North Vietnam, caused more than a million deaths and injuries in Vietnam each year of the three years it was in operation.
jimmoyer
Posts: 5,038
Location: Winchester Virginia
Location: Winchester Virginia
May 13th, 2008, 10:14 AM
Whew...
That blasted me out of my bubble.
Ho Chi Minh could have been one of America's best allies. Of course President Woodrow Wilson ignored the 17 yr old Ho in Paris asking for his country and of course we little knew how much Ho Chi Minh read of our country, and on his death, a book lay open on John Brown.
Vietnam was one of the beginnings of the ugly American story. Little did we learn from Algieria and the French and the French Indochina war ending in Dien Bien Phu.
Whew...
That blasted me out of my bubble.
Ho Chi Minh could have been one of America's best allies. Of course President Woodrow Wilson ignored the 17 yr old Ho in Paris asking for his country and of course we little knew how much Ho Chi Minh read of our country, and on his death, a book lay open on John Brown.
Vietnam was one of the beginnings of the ugly American story. Little did we learn from Algieria and the French and the French Indochina war ending in Dien Bien Phu.
House Member
Posts: 3,306
May 13th, 2008, 10:36 AM
I think Juan, you have a funny ideal there...
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
Other than the North in the Tet Offensive, Vietnam was actually pretty restrained when it came to killing civilians (comparatively). It gets blurred alot due to the nature of vietnamese warfare (with a traditionally heavy reliance on militias) to if someone killed is civilian (not currently holding a gun) or military (was using it 2 weeks ago and will next week).
I think Juan, you have a funny ideal there...
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
Other than the North in the Tet Offensive, Vietnam was actually pretty restrained when it came to killing civilians (comparatively). It gets blurred alot due to the nature of vietnamese warfare (with a traditionally heavy reliance on militias) to if someone killed is civilian (not currently holding a gun) or military (was using it 2 weeks ago and will next week).
Grossly Underrated
Posts: 6,160
Location: In the bush somewhere near Sudbury
Location: In the bush somewhere near Sudbury
May 13th, 2008, 10:51 AM
Migawd, Zorch! Somewhere has got to be a bottom to your propagandic nonsense. Did you ever hear of My Lai, or the US Christmas bombing campaign in Hanoi? Pretty restrained when it comes to killing civillians? Explosive Palestininans are pretty restrained when it comes to killing civillians. Both sides in Vietnam killed without compassion.
Quoting Zzarchov
Whaaa?
I think Juan, you have a funny ideal there...
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
Other than the North in the Tet Offensive, Vietnam was actually pretty restrained when it came to killing civilians (comparatively). It gets blurred alot due to the nature of vietnamese warfare (with a traditionally heavy reliance on militias) to if someone killed is civilian (not currently holding a gun) or military (was using it 2 weeks ago and will next week).
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
Other than the North in the Tet Offensive, Vietnam was actually pretty restrained when it came to killing civilians (comparatively). It gets blurred alot due to the nature of vietnamese warfare (with a traditionally heavy reliance on militias) to if someone killed is civilian (not currently holding a gun) or military (was using it 2 weeks ago and will next week).
Migawd, Zorch! Somewhere has got to be a bottom to your propagandic nonsense. Did you ever hear of My Lai, or the US Christmas bombing campaign in Hanoi? Pretty restrained when it comes to killing civillians? Explosive Palestininans are pretty restrained when it comes to killing civillians. Both sides in Vietnam killed without compassion.
Hawkings former plumber
Posts: 10,195
Videos: 3
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
Videos: 3
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
May 13th, 2008, 11:20 AM
Quoting Zzarchov
You are an alien aren't you? You mimic the human but not very well.Only an idiot would believe the nature of vietnamese warfare differed from any other human war. Any Israeli killed by rockets can be considered an off duty combatant. Let's not hear anymore moaning about dead Israeli civilians/militias from you. Most of your posts are blurred by bull****.
I think Juan, you have a funny ideal there...
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
Other than the North in the Tet Offensive, Vietnam was actually pretty restrained when it came to killing civilians (comparatively). It gets blurred alot due to the nature of vietnamese warfare (with a traditionally heavy reliance on militias) to if someone killed is civilian (not currently holding a gun) or military (was using it 2 weeks ago and will next week).
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
Other than the North in the Tet Offensive, Vietnam was actually pretty restrained when it came to killing civilians (comparatively). It gets blurred alot due to the nature of vietnamese warfare (with a traditionally heavy reliance on militias) to if someone killed is civilian (not currently holding a gun) or military (was using it 2 weeks ago and will next week).
Executive Member
Posts: 9,531
May 13th, 2008, 12:34 PM
It is generally acknowledged that around 3 million civilians were killed in VietNam and another million in Cambodia and Laos. The following is a list of casualties among other things on all sides. Though the numbers are different from my figures in the previous sentence, when we consider that at the end of hostilities, not one inch of ground was gained, and not one concession was given, this had to be the most catastrophic cock-up of a war ever fought.
Quote:
Catastrophe of killing civilians?
quoting Zzarchov
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
If you disagree with war heroes in general thats one thing, but you seem to be implying there are such things as heroes in wars, but that somehow Vietnam was some horrible catastrophe of killing civilians.
It is generally acknowledged that around 3 million civilians were killed in VietNam and another million in Cambodia and Laos. The following is a list of casualties among other things on all sides. Though the numbers are different from my figures in the previous sentence, when we consider that at the end of hostilities, not one inch of ground was gained, and not one concession was given, this had to be the most catastrophic cock-up of a war ever fought.
- 58, 169 Americans killed (11, 465 were teenagers).
- 304,000 Americans wounded.
- 444, 000 North Vietnamese killed.
- 220, 557 South Vietnamese (this is not precise as the Vietnamese took away their dead.
- 2,587, 000 civilians killed.
- 2, 590, 000 Americans served
- 59, 520 Australians served
- 6,72,084 ton of bombs dropped (3x the amount of the WW1 and WW2 combined)
- 3,750 fixed wing aircraft and 4,865 helicopters were lost.
- Australia lost 2 fixed wing aircraft and 10 helicopters
- 3,500,000 acres of Vietnam were sprayed with defoliant, the effect lasts more than 100 years.
- Agent orange caused cancer in the people affected and mutations in the third generation.
