Quote:


Yeah I hear there's college kids all over the country getting beaten to death and subjected to months of torture and summary executions. No wonder they don't have a frat system here.




Oh, brother. Kindly post proof of "months of torture" and "summary executions", where the proof does not come from a leftist source or a Jihadi with a vested interest in getting "useful idiots" to advocate his cause.

Quote:


I'm one of those ppl who aren't America who get a bit annoyed with yee-hah elements of America who are directly helping send America down the tubes.




America..."down the tubes"? Wanna compare GDP's? How about birth rates? Unemployment rates? If you want to see countries that are shrinking demographically and economically, hold your nose and visit continental Europe. Ignore the "chicken little" hype that comes from our leftwing mass media.

Quote:


Michael Moore is self-serving. I never mentioned him. The CIA themselves have documentary evidence of their dealings with the mujahadeen and Osama. Its no secret. But to you apparently it is. I thought it was pretty commonly accepted fact.




I do believe it was the most prominent Brit of the 20th century who said something like "there are no permanent alliances, only temporary interests". (Churchill, to be specific.) In the late seventies/early eighties, the interests of virtually all the world were served by bleeding the USSR dry and limiting their ability to expand their territory. Don't take any US-Mujahedeen involvement outside of that context or as "proof" of other conspiracies. (Not accusing you, but this is a common thing I have seen others on the left do.)

Quote:


Iraq was pretty much a no-go zone for Osama and friends. In fact they hated each other. You would have been better off invading Saudi Arabia.




Would you have supported an invasion of Saudi Arabia? Or would we be listening to the familiar left-wing tropes like "no war for oil" or "Bush's oil buddies" as we hear now? That would most certainly be the case, hence why the left should be ignored domestically and globally. If they want to be listened to, they can actually start winning elections. (Which hasn't really happened, outside of Zapatero's Al-Qaeda endorsement in Spain on 3/11.)

Quote:


Haha. It does not. Remember the time they took out a city block because Saddam might! have been at a cafe? That's one incident out of hundreds. Just in Iraq.

Ask any non-US soldier, and they'll tell you the safest place to be when fighting with the US is as far away as possible. Their use of ordinance has a reputation amongst soldiers as being overused and misplaced. They kill more of themselves than the enemy. Shoot first, shoot second, shoot third, maybe ask some questions when we get back to base.

And that's again from your allies. Your bossom buddies.




I've heard this from many Euro-leftists, but never seen any poll data or anything else. I suspect this is something of a stereotype based on hysterical news reports. Friendly fire is probably as old as warfare itself, and when the US does the heavy lifting in virtually all military endeavors, one would expect most incidents to be attributed to the US rather than the non-American tokens.

Quote:


The taliban was the military of Afghanistan. And I'm not expert on international law, but again I'm pretty sure torture is outlawed. In agreements the US is party to.




I suggest you check to see who is represented under the Geneva Conventions and therefore gets such protections. I think you'll find it only applies to lawful combatants between warring signatory nations. The Taliban were never signatories and Al-Qaeda definitely was not. They also don't meet the requirements of the lawful combatant, such as bearing arms openly, wearing a fixed insignia visible at a distance, etc. (This is why spies and saboteurs were historically executed, despite representing signatory nations.)

If you want to create "snivel rights" for terrorists, the Geneva Convention does not help you. If you want to make arguments based on morality and PR, you may, but what you might call the "moral high ground" is what I'd call weakness or the reckless endangerment of lives by placing arbitrary limitations on the ability to deal flexibly and effectively with dangerous adversaries.

Quote:


The US is supposed to be the beacon on the hill for modern democracy, al qaeda as you no doubt think are supposed to be evil camel fuckers. So why don't we stoop to their level?

I'm sure again you'll say pillow biter, but its like a cancer. The lower you go the worse it gets. Isn't that what they want? To destroy your society?

So haven't they already won?




"Stoop to their level"...really. When do we start beheading captives on CNN? How about crashing a plane into Mecca?

The only obligations the US government has is to its own citizens, not to detained Jihadists. Despite leftist hysterics over domestic intelligence gathering or Guantanamo, life in America is the same as ever for virtually all its citizens. The detention or even the execution of German saboteurs in WWII certainly did not mean they "already won", as the detention or execution of Guantanamo detainees would not mean they "already won". In fact, executing saboteurs was good policy as would the liquidation of Guantanamo's detainees, despite the potential hearing loss from European sniveling.

Quote:


The US won't even let their arab allies run their ports. Yet its ok for the US to put bases in any country they like.

Asks the Japs, Phillipinos, Saudis, Australians for that matter, Cubans, former Russian republics etc etc etc how they feel about US bases.




You do know most of these bases are leased, right? Their aggrieved "feelings" are generally a gambit for demanding more money. In the case of Cuba, an unexpiring agreement was signed with the Batista regime, which is still valid, despite the fact Castro regularly refuses to accept the due payment.

Quote:


Yep, threats. China is building up its military alarmingly. India and China have emerging middle classes and exploding economies that are sucking investment and technology etc away from the US.

So they are huge threats to the US. Huge. In fact they threaten to topple the US as a world power. Its hard to maintain military power when you have a destroyed economy.




Who exactly is making the money on China and India's growth? Typically the US firms which sell the technology or gain equity for their shareholders by saving expenses on the discounted labor. As the average Chinaman or Indian gains money, they will find themselves consumers of American products and accordingly enrichers of America. Even trade defecits/surpluses don't tell a clear story: Which would be the "American" company? Nike, with its workforce of mostly third world Asians? Or a Chinese firm where the majoity shareholders are the California Public Employees Retirement System?

And, economically, the big losers of a US collapse would be the same international investor class which bankrolls the growth of India and China. The cliche says when the US sneezes, the rest of the world gets the flu. Plus, such economic ties decrease the prospect of warfare, in the same way economic integration has made future wars between Western European nations exceptionally unlikely.

Quote:


GWOT is just a load of shit to justify whatever America feels like doing. Its all just a bunch of chest-beating flag-waving shit.

Fight them? How you going to fight them on the streets?

I think you have been listening too much to Bush and all the other war-mongers. War is profit.




Now here you go. Another leftist terror sympathiser outs himself: "terrorism doesn't exist, it's all just a conspiracy to enable the evil Americans to engage in imperialism." (Just as one would hear on an al-Zawahiri tape.) And you were doing so well avoiding the major cliches like "war-mongers", etc. How's the appeasement working out in France, BTW? They've led the vanguard of the pro-terrorist Europeans, yet they still had weeks of Islamic rioting (domestic terrorism) with no resistance.

Enjoy your dhimmitude. Have fun riding on your London buses with all the British-born Muslims rubbing their hands at the prospect of detonating their backpacks and killing you. But maybe you'll get lucky and they'll just burn your car or gangrape your girlfriend/wife if she walks unescorted to a corner store.

I'll just take it as proof that the centuries of internecine wars left the brave Europeans who deserved to survive dead, and the cowards, faint-hearts, and traitors alive to overwhelm future generations with inferior genetic material.