posted 05-22- 12:17 PM            

...and they'll wear yellow, no less.

Werner

posted 05-22- 02:03 PM            

As for this whole thing... Geesh, if history repeats itself we'll be seeing concentration camps in just under a decade from now. Of course with India so close it may come to a war soon after. Hmm, I wonder which side Pakistan would take, since they joined other nations in condamnation of the Taliban's destruction of the Bamiyan statues yet they remain an islamic nation. Oooh this could get very ugly indeed.

Werner

posted 05-22- 06:25 PM            

It is never good when a religios group takes over day to day government - never in history has that meant that good things would follow.

posted 05-23- 03:07 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Burkey:
The Western nations should get behind India and stamp the Taliban out once and for all. the connotations of what they are doing should be obvious to everybody the world over. If it turns even uglier the whole world will be 100% culpable.

---

If the Western Nations should step in and stop this particular religious conflict why not step in and stop the Jewish/Palestinian conflict, or the Catholic/Protestant conflict in Northern Ireland? Where do you draw the line? What gives the "Western" nations the right to "step into" a religous conflict, especially one not involving "Western" religions?

Reminds me of the joke about telling the Jews and Arabs to act more "Christian" towards each other. Or the Crusaders telling the Arabs to "become a Christian or I'll kill you".

Why would "Separation of Church and State" apply to Americans but not to the US government imposing it's will on some other country's religion?

I'm not necessarily taking a position one way or the other, just asking what you guys think.

posted 05-23- 03:59 PM               

Fucking all bullshit I say.

Anyways, a good thing, is both of Canadas national papers have this as a front page story today, At least people see whats happening.

The national post even mentions nazis in the headline.

posted 05-23- 05:03 PM               

The only time the U.S. helps is if we're threatened, or our money is threatened. I think you will find most countries are the same way... Why couldn't Great Britain help out after all? Or China? They are world super powers after all just like the U.S....

Seems like every fucking time something goes wrong, everyone starts going "Oh save them/us U.S.! Save us!" or "Go help them! Why wont you go help them?!?" But seems like every fucking time we try to do some good, or butt into other countries buisness everyone goes "Get your nose out of our buisness!" Well Im fucking tired of hearing it!

posted 05-23- 05:09 PM               

Like I said, why didn't we leave it up to kuwait to protect itself?

Greed thats why.

I agree with burkey, but standing by and watching this happen, we will be indirectly responsible.

Fact is the US set them selves up as the worlds police force, its too bad they only choose to help people when its convient to them.

If they are going to stay out of stuff, then STAY OUT of ALL of it.

posted 05-23- 05:15 PM            

Werner

posted 05-23- 05:19 PM               

quote:

---

why can't other countries deal with their own affairs?

---

That's what France and Great Britain said of Spain in 1936. And of Poland in 1939. That's what the US said of France and Great Britain in 1940.

Besides, the western nations, and especially the US, got involved in Afghanistan in the 1980's, when USSR was trying to invade the country. So it's not only "their problem".

posted 05-23- 05:22 PM               

Pachy, who do you think supplies the UN mostly? The U.S. and its money...

posted 05-23- 05:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ArgonV:
[B]Well maybe Canada and Great Britain should set themselves up as the "Worlds Police Force" and see how long they can last...

Pachy, who do you think supplies the UN mostly? The U.S. and its money...
[B]

---

Yeah, if the US decided to paid its dues... Dammit Argon, the US should either a) Accept the responsibility of being "the world's police force" and behave accordingly or b) get the hell out of these kinds of conflicts.

It pisses me off how they act like they're friggen saviours every time they go in and bomb the shit out of some "aggressor" nation when they're just serving their own interests. Serving ones own interests is to be expected, but for chris'sakes lets call a spade a spade here. Remember Manuel Noriega? Well before he was an "evil narco-dictator" he was George Bush Sr. (CIA chief at the time)'s main man for info in Central America. Too bad Noriega decided not to dance to Bush's tune and his country gets flattened. The evil Saddam Hussein? Good friend of the US and Bush Sr. in particular (again CIA chief) when it was Iran that was the biggest threat in the Middle East. The US even encouraged Saddam's plans to invade Iran, which set off that whole Iran-Iraq war. You do remember that, don't you? How about something more recent. Remember the KLA? That poor little band of resistance fighters getting shit-kicked by the Serbian Army? Well a year before the NATO bombing campaign the CIA classified them as a Terrorist Organisation. What's next, we'll be fighting alongside Osama Bin Laden?

The US wants it both ways (power to police, but only when and where they choose) and increasingly the world is saying NO. Now that the Soviet Union is gone, European countries aren't taking it any more and I'm glad. Yes in some cases American action is justified and is "right", but their justification is pure bullshit when you look at the situations they choose to ignore or "understaff". Like I said - either do the job right or get out. I'm fine with the US not intervening because frankly having the biggest stick doesn't mean you're obliged to whack the neighbourhood bully. It's convenient to, but you're not obliged.

/rant

Werner

posted 05-23- 05:49 PM               

I think ALL nations must become involved,and yes whe can remember the30s.

posted 05-23- 06:40 PM            

I think one difference between this situation and the Nazis is that this is a religion instead of a political party. The average Afgahni is probably much more willing to die for the Taliban than the average German was to die for National Socialism.

posted 05-24- 11:17 AM            

I'm getting fairly tired of the world media screaming that the US should do something because it is the global police force - we are NOT the global police, that job is the UN's and was a big part of why they were created in the first place. As for the US not paying it's dues to the UN - maybe someone could explain why the US pays proportinately higher dues than any other member? Especially seeing as how fully 60% of UN troops deployed around the world happen to be US soldiers with US equipment who are not being paid for out of UN coffers but instead the tab is being directly footed by the US. Congress sees this as a bit odd, us being charged more and yet providing more services to the UN than any other member, and frankly they are begining to wonder what the deal is.

My other pet peeve is that the US bears the blame for any action in which their troops are used - even if it is a UN action. You never hear people say "UN go Home!" it's always "Down with the US" and people here are getting tired of it. Congress is beginning to think that maybe we should let the rest of the world try dealing with these "hot-spots" without us and see how they like the heat - and frankly, I agree.

Do I think that what the Taliban are doing is right? No. Do I think an armed invasion of their country that would result in hundreds of thousands of casualties (the Taliban have a very loyal and large following) on both sides is a good idea? Hell no. If the rest of the world is so damned outraged at this then let them take the brunt of dealing with it - the US should operate in support of any action the international community might decide to take but by no means should we be the lions share of the forces used (if it comes to that). It's real easy to say that the US only operates in their own interest and then spit at us... but whens the last time your country did something truly philanthropic with no alterior motives?............. Nope, didn't think you could find one. BTW - the Gulf War was definatley about oil.... but you know what? I noticed that just about every western country participated and I guarantee you that none of those countires main motives was to help the average Kuwaiti citizen or to protect the Kurds. So perhaps the rest of the world ought to remember that it's not a good idea to throw stones when you live in a glass house.

-Stark

posted 05-24- 11:44 AM               

Werner? Do you honestly think the U.S. WANTS to be the worlds police force? HELL NO! You think we really give a rats ass that the world is starting to say "NO"? Well good for the world! The only reason we started doing this is because the rest of the world cant seem to get their act together. Im truely sorry there are poor excuses for countries out there that need to be baby sitted by the U.S. so they dont go blow the world to bits with nuclear weapons...

posted 05-24- 11:51 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Burkey:
No, its not the job of the US to sort these things out, who said it was?

---

Spanky did,

posted 05-24- 01:08 PM               

Actually, India and that one other country (My mind is blank as to what the name is right now) threatened to blow each other up with Nuclear weapons. China has done so aswell...