X
XXXAnother PersonXXX
Guest
.
(This message was left blank)
(This message was left blank)
Z
zinger
Guest
zing
[broken link removed]
This might help you more Piggy , if the Japanese war had protracted into something like Europe we would be looking at very high figures for the US and Japanese, A US lead invasion of the islands and the mainland would have taken months and the toll on both sides would have been immense , Iwo Jima alone costs 24K Japanses their lives.
But the effort and toll on the Russian side was astronomical. Let me aks you would you have nuked Berlin , Bonn , Munich at a costs of a few million.
But that was then and the executive decision was taken , not lightly either. I am sure that a nuclear attack on Bagada had crossed their minds also.......
[broken link removed]
This might help you more Piggy , if the Japanese war had protracted into something like Europe we would be looking at very high figures for the US and Japanese, A US lead invasion of the islands and the mainland would have taken months and the toll on both sides would have been immense , Iwo Jima alone costs 24K Japanses their lives.
But the effort and toll on the Russian side was astronomical. Let me aks you would you have nuked Berlin , Bonn , Munich at a costs of a few million.
But that was then and the executive decision was taken , not lightly either. I am sure that a nuclear attack on Bagada had crossed their minds also.......
P
piggy
Guest
Re: zing
You're talking to the wrong poster zinger!
Oh...was that meant for Dowee or me?
If it was for me then what has it got to do with what we were just debating??
You're talking to the wrong poster zinger!
Oh...was that meant for Dowee or me?
If it was for me then what has it got to do with what we were just debating??
D
Dowee
Guest
Re: zing
I'm a little confused. But to clarify my post I was just commenting on The Grim Reaper's post on the number of casulties, which was suggesting that the "good" guys suffered far less than the "bad" guys, this may appear to be the case if you fail to take account of the Russian deaths but this argument is far less plausible when they are taken into account.
I'm a little confused. But to clarify my post I was just commenting on The Grim Reaper's post on the number of casulties, which was suggesting that the "good" guys suffered far less than the "bad" guys, this may appear to be the case if you fail to take account of the Russian deaths but this argument is far less plausible when they are taken into account.
T
The GR
Guest
Calculus of War
Fascinating link from zinger.
Dowee, yes I know the commies suffered worse.
But the point remains that the Anglo Saxon lost less than 1 million lives but probably inflicted 10 times that damage on Germany/Japan.
Piggy/Vincent Browne would then argue that it is the Anglo Saxon was a worse offender than the dictatorships.
Piggy also shows herself as hopelessly naive on the basis for terrorism. Any successful (by their own standards) relies heavily on either overt or tacit state sponsorship. Iraq/Iran/Syria/Libya have to one degree or another supported international terrorism.
Fascinating link from zinger.
Dowee, yes I know the commies suffered worse.
But the point remains that the Anglo Saxon lost less than 1 million lives but probably inflicted 10 times that damage on Germany/Japan.
Piggy/Vincent Browne would then argue that it is the Anglo Saxon was a worse offender than the dictatorships.
Piggy also shows herself as hopelessly naive on the basis for terrorism. Any successful (by their own standards) relies heavily on either overt or tacit state sponsorship. Iraq/Iran/Syria/Libya have to one degree or another supported international terrorism.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Calculus of War
Piggy/Vincent Browne would then argue that it is the Anglo Saxon was a worse offender than the dictatorships.
Piggy also shows herself as hopelessly naive on the basis for terrorism. Any successful (by their own standards) relies heavily on either overt or tacit state sponsorship. Iraq/Iran/Syria/Libya have to one degree or another supported international terrorism.
My spidey sense is tingling again. You and zinger and ElCid wouldn't be related would you? Your writing is remarkably similar.
Shocking argument this.
No...I would not argue that the Anglo Saxon's are worse offenders than the dictatorships, because fortunately I look at the bigger picture. If that's what it boils down to for you I feel great pity for you.
From what little you have posted you seem to have grasped very little concerning international terrorism.
It's he by the way.
Piggy/Vincent Browne would then argue that it is the Anglo Saxon was a worse offender than the dictatorships.
Piggy also shows herself as hopelessly naive on the basis for terrorism. Any successful (by their own standards) relies heavily on either overt or tacit state sponsorship. Iraq/Iran/Syria/Libya have to one degree or another supported international terrorism.
My spidey sense is tingling again. You and zinger and ElCid wouldn't be related would you? Your writing is remarkably similar.
Shocking argument this.
No...I would not argue that the Anglo Saxon's are worse offenders than the dictatorships, because fortunately I look at the bigger picture. If that's what it boils down to for you I feel great pity for you.
From what little you have posted you seem to have grasped very little concerning international terrorism.
It's he by the way.
G
GR
Guest
Numbers Game
Piggy, it's you that keeps snorting about how many more people the Yanks have taken out than they themselves lost on 9/11.
That's a load of trotters when it comes to making moral judgements as to which side is "better" as my WWII counter example clearly shows.
BTW I am neither of those two ladies/gentlemen. Whether they are one and the same only he/she/they know.
Sorry for the misplaced identification it's just that I associate extreme naivete with the fairer sex.
Piggy, it's you that keeps snorting about how many more people the Yanks have taken out than they themselves lost on 9/11.
That's a load of trotters when it comes to making moral judgements as to which side is "better" as my WWII counter example clearly shows.
BTW I am neither of those two ladies/gentlemen. Whether they are one and the same only he/she/they know.
Sorry for the misplaced identification it's just that I associate extreme naivete with the fairer sex.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Numbers Game
Piggy, it's you that keeps snorting about how many more people the Yanks have taken out than they themselves lost on 9/11.
I believe I did make a point (not to you though) that people make the mistake of looking at the atrocity that happened in New York, without considering the other side of the coin. That's the point I'm trying to make.
That's a load of trotters when it comes to making moral judgements as to which side is "better" as my WWII counter example clearly shows.
Y'see GR. You need to open your eyes and actually read what I'm writing. I'm not saying that one side is better than the other.
I'm trying to point out the inadequacies in believing that the cowboys kill the Indians. It's not as black and white as the US and British would have you believe it is. It's over simlified and unfortunately some people swallow the children's stories hook, line and sinker.
BTW I am neither of those two ladies/gentlemen. Whether they are one and the same only he/she/they know
Fair enough.
Sorry for the misplaced identification it's just that I associate extreme naivete with the fairer sex.
You better hope Miss Ribena isn't around or you're a dead man.
Piggy, it's you that keeps snorting about how many more people the Yanks have taken out than they themselves lost on 9/11.
I believe I did make a point (not to you though) that people make the mistake of looking at the atrocity that happened in New York, without considering the other side of the coin. That's the point I'm trying to make.
That's a load of trotters when it comes to making moral judgements as to which side is "better" as my WWII counter example clearly shows.
Y'see GR. You need to open your eyes and actually read what I'm writing. I'm not saying that one side is better than the other.
I'm trying to point out the inadequacies in believing that the cowboys kill the Indians. It's not as black and white as the US and British would have you believe it is. It's over simlified and unfortunately some people swallow the children's stories hook, line and sinker.
BTW I am neither of those two ladies/gentlemen. Whether they are one and the same only he/she/they know
Fair enough.
Sorry for the misplaced identification it's just that I associate extreme naivete with the fairer sex.
You better hope Miss Ribena isn't around or you're a dead man.
G
GR
Guest
A straight question
Piggy, who do you want to win the War on Terror?
Piggy, who do you want to win the War on Terror?
P
piggy
Guest
Re: A straight question
Piggy, who do you want to win the War on Terror?
You might think that's a straight question GR. I don't.
The war on terror is a fabricated war GR in many respects. That's not to say that 911 never happened or that there isn't a threat to America and those who support their current policies. There is.
The point is there is a deep history to all of this before 911. There were reasons behind it.
So...I don't want anyone to WIN anything GR.
I want the US and other Western countries to start acting in a way that befits cibvilised nations. I want the Israeli Palestine issue to be sorted out in a fair and peaceful manner. I want Iraq to be dealt with (now that we have this mess) in a fair and decent way.
There's a lot of things I'd love to see. Most of them won't happen. Money and power corrupt.
Some of these things will come to pass, but not for a long, long time.
You talk about winning as if either America wins the war or Al Queda do and we'll all be walking around in Muslim robes worshipping Allah!!
It's not that straighforward. It never was. Much like the war on drugs is in many ways fictitious, so is the war on terror.
The only way it can ever be ended (if that is what you are talking about) is to deal realistically with the causes of it.
In 2001 we had terrorism in the world. It existed everywhere. I don't think many people would disagree that it's now much, much worse than it was then. This is largely due to the foreign policies of the Bush administration and Tony Blair. A lot of other countries went along for the ride too.
That doesn't mean that the terrorists are winning y'know. That just means that these guys are feckin ejits who are lying to you, making you fear what you don't understand.
I see people talking on this forum in a way that makes me feel very empty and sick. It's a bit like the way people used to talk about black people, and before them witches!
Stop believing the scare mongering and read between the lines.
I get accsued of being anti-semetic because I point out the harm that Israel is doing in in the region. I get accused of being anti-American because I point out gaping injustices in their foreign policies. All I'm doing is pointing out that these people are the aggressors.
People think that the US had the right to do whatever they wanted after 911 because Al Queda had somehow decided to start a war. That war has been going on for decades. It just wasn't on the news 24 seven so you never paid attention to it before.
You live in Ireland, so you watch the news and support the West. If you lived in the Middle East you'd watch the news and support whatever was going on over there...anti-Americanism (call it what you will).
I'd rather look at the whole situation with my eyes open and make informed decisions about what goes on and more importantly why it goes on.
Piggy, who do you want to win the War on Terror?
You might think that's a straight question GR. I don't.
The war on terror is a fabricated war GR in many respects. That's not to say that 911 never happened or that there isn't a threat to America and those who support their current policies. There is.
The point is there is a deep history to all of this before 911. There were reasons behind it.
So...I don't want anyone to WIN anything GR.
I want the US and other Western countries to start acting in a way that befits cibvilised nations. I want the Israeli Palestine issue to be sorted out in a fair and peaceful manner. I want Iraq to be dealt with (now that we have this mess) in a fair and decent way.
There's a lot of things I'd love to see. Most of them won't happen. Money and power corrupt.
Some of these things will come to pass, but not for a long, long time.
You talk about winning as if either America wins the war or Al Queda do and we'll all be walking around in Muslim robes worshipping Allah!!
It's not that straighforward. It never was. Much like the war on drugs is in many ways fictitious, so is the war on terror.
The only way it can ever be ended (if that is what you are talking about) is to deal realistically with the causes of it.
In 2001 we had terrorism in the world. It existed everywhere. I don't think many people would disagree that it's now much, much worse than it was then. This is largely due to the foreign policies of the Bush administration and Tony Blair. A lot of other countries went along for the ride too.
That doesn't mean that the terrorists are winning y'know. That just means that these guys are feckin ejits who are lying to you, making you fear what you don't understand.
I see people talking on this forum in a way that makes me feel very empty and sick. It's a bit like the way people used to talk about black people, and before them witches!
Stop believing the scare mongering and read between the lines.
I get accsued of being anti-semetic because I point out the harm that Israel is doing in in the region. I get accused of being anti-American because I point out gaping injustices in their foreign policies. All I'm doing is pointing out that these people are the aggressors.
People think that the US had the right to do whatever they wanted after 911 because Al Queda had somehow decided to start a war. That war has been going on for decades. It just wasn't on the news 24 seven so you never paid attention to it before.
You live in Ireland, so you watch the news and support the West. If you lived in the Middle East you'd watch the news and support whatever was going on over there...anti-Americanism (call it what you will).
I'd rather look at the whole situation with my eyes open and make informed decisions about what goes on and more importantly why it goes on.
G
GR
Guest
Reality
Jayz, piggy, that was some reply.
Your main point is that we should deal with the causes of terrorism rather than with terrorism itself.
Those causes can be summarised as (a) religious fanaticism against everything we in the West mostly believe in and (b) extreme resentment that our culture leads to economic prosperity while Islam leads to poverty.
There is no way should we address these root causes of terrorism. We cannot possibly adopt their madly fanatical religious beliefs just to stop them terrorising us. Nor can we subsidise their impoverished societies, which is entirely their fault despite the luck of Allah having given them so much black gold.
Jayz, piggy, that was some reply.
Your main point is that we should deal with the causes of terrorism rather than with terrorism itself.
Those causes can be summarised as (a) religious fanaticism against everything we in the West mostly believe in and (b) extreme resentment that our culture leads to economic prosperity while Islam leads to poverty.
There is no way should we address these root causes of terrorism. We cannot possibly adopt their madly fanatical religious beliefs just to stop them terrorising us. Nor can we subsidise their impoverished societies, which is entirely their fault despite the luck of Allah having given them so much black gold.
E
ElCid
Guest
Question
Well don't we all piggy. But the problem is that you have two traditional and ancient enemies at each others throats. 9-11 was of course partly about the Palestinian issue, and I don't for a minute support what Israel has done to the Palestinians, but I remember the day Arafat walked away from the Oslo talks and called down a new intifada...the one which has escalated into the nightmare we now have. Arafat displayed all the credentials of his faith by refusing to compromise with Israel over the Jerusalem issue. Islam does not compromise in matters of faith. In fact they see it as their greatest strength.
By the way, I am ElCid and nobody else. Just because more than one person disagrees with your view is not a cause to feel suspicious. You are not so well informed as well intentioned (and wrong).
Well don't we all piggy. But the problem is that you have two traditional and ancient enemies at each others throats. 9-11 was of course partly about the Palestinian issue, and I don't for a minute support what Israel has done to the Palestinians, but I remember the day Arafat walked away from the Oslo talks and called down a new intifada...the one which has escalated into the nightmare we now have. Arafat displayed all the credentials of his faith by refusing to compromise with Israel over the Jerusalem issue. Islam does not compromise in matters of faith. In fact they see it as their greatest strength.
By the way, I am ElCid and nobody else. Just because more than one person disagrees with your view is not a cause to feel suspicious. You are not so well informed as well intentioned (and wrong).
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Question
I find it impossible to have a rational debate with you ELCid seeing as you have an abhorent view of Muslims and Islam.
I find it impossible to have a rational debate with you ELCid seeing as you have an abhorent view of Muslims and Islam.
E
ElCid
Guest
Muslims and Islam
Gee piggy, you're wrong again. I have several Muslim friends, so nothing against Muslims per se. I tend to subscribe to the Catholic philosophy on this of separating the sinner from the sin. Islam in its refined form (i.e. the Koranic Islam) is what I do indeed abhor.
Have a nice day now.
Gee piggy, you're wrong again. I have several Muslim friends, so nothing against Muslims per se. I tend to subscribe to the Catholic philosophy on this of separating the sinner from the sin. Islam in its refined form (i.e. the Koranic Islam) is what I do indeed abhor.
Have a nice day now.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Muslims and Islam
I have several Muslim friends, so nothing against Muslims per se.
Since democracy is actually immoral under Islamic teaching, the weak democracies that exist at present are eventually doomed to failure as the populist fundamentalist movement converts more and more muslims to the belief that only they can establish the Khallifate...Gods Rule on Earth. This is what OBL is actually fighting for quite proudly, and it is seen as a good and noble thing by ordinary muslims.
I am 100% certain you've never lived in or even visited a Muslim country. If you had done you would realise how popular mister Bin Laden is in the general mislim population. I've seen children in those countries wearing T-Shirts emblazoned with his image and the burning towers pictured behind him. It also strikes many of us how little outspoken condemnation he receives from the so called 'moderate' muslim leaders around the world. So in that respect, yes, I would unfortunately have to 'tar' the vast majority of true muslims with the fundamentalist sympathiser brush.
Perhaps you need to take a deeper look at your own prejudices. They would seem to run quite deep. In your own words, you tar the vast majority of Muslims with the same brush.
I have several Muslim friends, so nothing against Muslims per se.
Since democracy is actually immoral under Islamic teaching, the weak democracies that exist at present are eventually doomed to failure as the populist fundamentalist movement converts more and more muslims to the belief that only they can establish the Khallifate...Gods Rule on Earth. This is what OBL is actually fighting for quite proudly, and it is seen as a good and noble thing by ordinary muslims.
I am 100% certain you've never lived in or even visited a Muslim country. If you had done you would realise how popular mister Bin Laden is in the general mislim population. I've seen children in those countries wearing T-Shirts emblazoned with his image and the burning towers pictured behind him. It also strikes many of us how little outspoken condemnation he receives from the so called 'moderate' muslim leaders around the world. So in that respect, yes, I would unfortunately have to 'tar' the vast majority of true muslims with the fundamentalist sympathiser brush.
Perhaps you need to take a deeper look at your own prejudices. They would seem to run quite deep. In your own words, you tar the vast majority of Muslims with the same brush.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Reality
I only just read your reply now GR.
Those causes can be summarised as (a) religious fanaticism against everything we in the West mostly believe in and (b) extreme resentment that our culture leads to economic prosperity while Islam leads to poverty.
There is no way should we address these root causes of terrorism. We cannot possibly adopt their madly fanatical religious beliefs just to stop them terrorising us. Nor can we subsidise their impoverished societies, which is entirely their fault despite the luck of Allah having given them so much black gold.
Religious fanaticism: There will always be religious fanatics. They only ever find a voice when pretty bad things are happening to their peoples. Al Queda have found a strong voice in Iraq because of what is going on there.
extreme resentment that our culture leads to economic prosperity: Do you really believe this? It's nonsense but if you want to believe it then so be it.
We cannot possibly adopt their madly fanatical religious beliefs just to stop them terrorising us:
This isn't exactly what I had in mind. Perhaps you should re-read what I talked about in the post you last replied to. Namely, the Israel Palestine situation amongst others.
Unfortunately, all of this should have been dealt with decades ago and we wouldn't have seen the rise of these fundamentalist lunatics. It's too late for that. The future we should be looking at is a peaceful one.
The sad thing is in a few years time people will begin to forget what life was like before the war on terror when barrels of oil will cost twice what they do now and terrorist acts will be commonplace across the world and we'll be throwing more and more soldiers at more and more so called wars.
I only just read your reply now GR.
Those causes can be summarised as (a) religious fanaticism against everything we in the West mostly believe in and (b) extreme resentment that our culture leads to economic prosperity while Islam leads to poverty.
There is no way should we address these root causes of terrorism. We cannot possibly adopt their madly fanatical religious beliefs just to stop them terrorising us. Nor can we subsidise their impoverished societies, which is entirely their fault despite the luck of Allah having given them so much black gold.
Religious fanaticism: There will always be religious fanatics. They only ever find a voice when pretty bad things are happening to their peoples. Al Queda have found a strong voice in Iraq because of what is going on there.
extreme resentment that our culture leads to economic prosperity: Do you really believe this? It's nonsense but if you want to believe it then so be it.
We cannot possibly adopt their madly fanatical religious beliefs just to stop them terrorising us:
This isn't exactly what I had in mind. Perhaps you should re-read what I talked about in the post you last replied to. Namely, the Israel Palestine situation amongst others.
Unfortunately, all of this should have been dealt with decades ago and we wouldn't have seen the rise of these fundamentalist lunatics. It's too late for that. The future we should be looking at is a peaceful one.
The sad thing is in a few years time people will begin to forget what life was like before the war on terror when barrels of oil will cost twice what they do now and terrorist acts will be commonplace across the world and we'll be throwing more and more soldiers at more and more so called wars.
E
ElCid
Guest
Higgeldy Piggledy
Hi Piggy, thought you'd refused to talk to me any more. Welcome back.
Unfortunately your posts haven't improved much in their logic, lots of emotion there piggy but not much in terms of a logical rebuttal.
Calling me names doesn't really further your argument much.
Your response to GR is just a fruitless restatement of your previous position. You failed to respond to my point that the Isael Palestine situation is clearly traced back to Yasser Arafats walkout at the Oslo peace accord under the Clinton administration, which was generally very sympathetic to the peace project and the Palestinian cause.
That was the best opportunity for the Palestinian people yet to grasp a good deal...almost everything had been agreed, except the Jerusalem issue, and Arafat rejected the deal on that point, bringing down the whole project, plunging his people into a new intifada, and seeing a hardened Israeli government step into the picture with the support of any equally cynical and hard line US government.
Very very stupid move, and deadly for all sides involved.
But as much as I hate Sharon and his policies, I can see...just like you...that intolerance and violence breeds intolerance and violence in return.
If Al Qaeda is a product of the west, then Sharon is a product of the east - you agree?
Hi Piggy, thought you'd refused to talk to me any more. Welcome back.
Unfortunately your posts haven't improved much in their logic, lots of emotion there piggy but not much in terms of a logical rebuttal.
Calling me names doesn't really further your argument much.
Your response to GR is just a fruitless restatement of your previous position. You failed to respond to my point that the Isael Palestine situation is clearly traced back to Yasser Arafats walkout at the Oslo peace accord under the Clinton administration, which was generally very sympathetic to the peace project and the Palestinian cause.
That was the best opportunity for the Palestinian people yet to grasp a good deal...almost everything had been agreed, except the Jerusalem issue, and Arafat rejected the deal on that point, bringing down the whole project, plunging his people into a new intifada, and seeing a hardened Israeli government step into the picture with the support of any equally cynical and hard line US government.
Very very stupid move, and deadly for all sides involved.
But as much as I hate Sharon and his policies, I can see...just like you...that intolerance and violence breeds intolerance and violence in return.
If Al Qaeda is a product of the west, then Sharon is a product of the east - you agree?
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Higgeldy Piggledy
Unfortunately your posts haven't improved much in their logic, lots of emotion there piggy but not much in terms of a logical rebuttal
Point them out.
That was the best opportunity for the Palestinian people yet to grasp a good deal
Says who?
But as much as I hate Sharon and his policies, I can see...just like you...that intolerance and violence breeds intolerance and violence in return.
Glad we agree on something.
If Al Qaeda is a product of the west, then Sharon is a product of the east - you agree?
Sharon is a product of the situation in Israel. He's a bad solution though.
Unfortunately your posts haven't improved much in their logic, lots of emotion there piggy but not much in terms of a logical rebuttal
Point them out.
That was the best opportunity for the Palestinian people yet to grasp a good deal
Says who?
But as much as I hate Sharon and his policies, I can see...just like you...that intolerance and violence breeds intolerance and violence in return.
Glad we agree on something.
If Al Qaeda is a product of the west, then Sharon is a product of the east - you agree?
Sharon is a product of the situation in Israel. He's a bad solution though.
E
ElCid
Guest
Sharon is a bad solution...
And so is Al Qaeda. No 'ifs' or 'buts' piggy.
And so is Al Qaeda. No 'ifs' or 'buts' piggy.
P
piggy
Guest
Re: Sharon is a bad solution...
Seriously ELCid. You're just showing yourself up now. You obviously haven't read a single thing I've posted. Like all piggy-haters on these topics you seem hell bent on asking the most ridiculous questions.
Of course Al Queda is bad. Go back and re-read what I've said on that very subject in both of these posts. I'm not going to take you seriously if you ask me questions like that in future.
Seriously ELCid. You're just showing yourself up now. You obviously haven't read a single thing I've posted. Like all piggy-haters on these topics you seem hell bent on asking the most ridiculous questions.
Of course Al Queda is bad. Go back and re-read what I've said on that very subject in both of these posts. I'm not going to take you seriously if you ask me questions like that in future.