From a US Marine in Bosina

[RedRed]

Without businesses, large and small, the taxes and the wages they pay (and the taxes paid by their employees, suppliers and their employees etc. etc.) who is going to pay for all those lovely social programs the liberals and social democrats are so fond of?

Which social policies are they? Mass armament? the US has as a percentage of GDP, the smallest spends on social programmes of any western country - and more than 1 THIRD of the ENTIRE PLANETS SPEND on military hardware.....

The last time the continental Europeans tried fighting a war (against Germany in WW-II) it was a Chinese fire drill until the US, UK and Russians got directly involved.

No. The UK was in it from 39 as well, and damn near got its arse whipped. The US was still on the fence for long after than. The US was able to pour in more arms and men than any other country and could afford to take the redicoulous losses (all the others, including old Blighty had lost too much of its materiel by that stage). Hitler opening the Eastern Front too early probably is the main reason he lost when he did.

What are the motives? Preventing 9/11 from happening to us or anyone else again and yes; assuring a stable oil market and production, which is like it or not is in everyones best interest.

its only in our intrest if its not abused. With a completely different power block in control in the ME, the cards are too much in the US's favour - there is little or nothing there to benefit europe. We are allies and share simmilar (not the same) culture - we are not the same country. Much of europe is unhappy with the US having another monopoly....

Why? If Saddam (or anyone else) were able to do nuclear/chemical/biological blackmail on his neighborhood the massive insecurity would make for $100/barrel oil, in which case the world economy would really go into the shitter. Not good for anyone, even socialists.

If oil sustains prices for more than 3 months at $42 we will be in a world recession for a couple of years.... last I read Brent futures it had climbed to $38..... from $26 earlier in the year... the threat of war is enough for this... We havent had Iraqi oil on the market for 10 years.... we havent missed it.

You might also be interested to know that the first instincts of the American people are to define the problem and go about solving it. Once the debate over how to solve it is over, and it is, we don't stand around talking about it ad infinitum like many of those in the EU or UN. We act.

no you act when it suits ... It has been known that N Korea has been about to pop for years.... nothing was done because A/ no economic advantage B/couldnt afford to have 4 Million Chineese reinforcements twatting South Korea. Now we have C/ they have a nuke, and the ability to drop it, form home soil on not just South Korea, but the much more intresting target of capitalism - JAPAN. There aint no amount of lasers going to defend against a strike on such disperate targets.....

As for the new EU countries: they have so far been aligning with the US in terms of foreign policy. Many of them are already offering basing, overflight rights, troops (including some crack chem/bio warfare units) and material for the upcoming efforts in Iraq, for example.

Who? - the troops, I mean...... I really want to know..... cos at the moment , I can feel the drafts round this alliance....

If N Korea DOES sell Bin Laden a nuke, and he DOES use it here, North Korea had better be afraid, because we won't be considering China's or Japan's feelings anymore.

Oh yes you would. that could well start world war 3. And how, from a hole in the ground are you going to convince ANYONE that a North korean bomb was responsible? - rather than a Russian one? or Chineese? Or Israeli ? or Pakistani? or home made? or .....

[Dr Mordrid]

RedRed;

You don't do much research before spewing, do you?

2001 social program spending:

Not as a % of GDP, but given we have such a huge GDP to start with these numbers for budget percentage are pretty impressive IMHO:

United States: 58% (figures: US Bureau of Economic Analysis )
Sweden: 51.3% (figures: International Monetary Fund)

2001 US budget "pie":



That 58% comprises a social spending budget in the US of over

drumroll.....

ONE TRILLION DOLLARS!!

WTF do you want us to do, spend the whole freakin' thing on the nanny state?

Oil in middle east:

What you're forgetting is that most of the oil concessions in Iraq are French and Russian, so go talk to Total and Lukoil about how much they'll be abused.

WW-II:

Yes, the UK was in it from '39 but not effectively. Most of the royal political screwups were by Chamberlain of course, but the continental Euopean response was lame as hell.

Iraqi oil in the market:

No Iraqi oil in the market for 10 years 'eh? Then why is it that Iraqi oil made up 1.8 million barrels/day of US market? Ever hear of the UN's Oil for Food program? Didn't think so.....

http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/

Side point: 44% of Iraq's oil goes to Europe and 11% to Asia.

Problem is that the proceeds from this program go everywhere but into his peoples bellies. Saddam also smuggles and sells oil on the spot market then uses the proceeds for WMD's while his people starve...then he (and the liberal/socialist establishment) blames the US and UK for it

Korea:

The US was ready to take on Korea over nuclear issues way back in 1994, and Clinton even claims they had plans to attack said reactors back then but good 'ole Jimmy Carter got involved and brought on those totally worthless "treaties" that supposedly "solved" the problem.

For this and his other failures in Hati etc. he "earned" the Nobel Peace Prize? Pfffttttt.....

We only found out that those treaties were being routinely violated about 2 months ago, so pardon us if we're only now reacting to the problem

Targeting Japan....good luck:

The US has Aegis cruisers parked there for the specific purpose of shooting down IRBM's launched at either South Korea of Japan.

Yes, the Aegis system is now capable of anti-missile defense using the SM-3 missile. It was tested against one of our own missles launched over 300 miles from the USS Lake Erie. The Lake Erie caught the missile track and engaged it 6 minutes after launch. The SM-3 intercepted the target 100 miles up and ~150 miles from the Lake Erie. The closing speed was over 9,000 mph.

Who's in with the US in Iraq:

A NATO official said that the governments of Britain, Denmark, Spain, Portugal, Norway, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Turkey expressed "strong and unequivocal support" for the U.S. war preparations.

In a Dec. 23rd news story posted by The Washington Times the following nations are on board with troops: US, UK, France (finally!!), Italy, Spain, Hungary, Poland and possibly even Germany (they join the Security Council in Jan. and have hinted support).

Other reports state that the Poles, Czech's and Romania may be sending chem/bio units.

As far as basing, staging and overflight: most of the Gulf States, Turkey, Saudi Arabia (finally came around) and possibly Jordan.

WW-III

WW-III my ass. Both China and Japan are just as nervous as we are about these bozos because a nuclear North Korea is bad for business, and if anyone is as pro-business as the US it's China and Japan. There may be a bit of posturing here and there, but you'd better believe that NOBODY in the area wants thes morons to get an arsenal of nukes.

Missile launch detection:

You can use radar and satellite data to track a missile back to its source, and many US allies have access and could verify the data. In point of fact a decent weather satellite can pick up the infra-red signature given clear conditions.

Had enough?

Dr. Mordrid

[Dogbert]

Terror

Guys, try to open your mind to this one:

You're all westeners. Your thoughts are arranged in a certain paradigm which is imprinted very strongly in your head. I'll *try* to break this loose a little.

There are three major kinds of fighting forces we know:

1. Army and army like units - nuff said
2. Guerilla - see army only less trained and with less equipment
3. Terrorists (?): Intelligence organisation (CIA / KGB / MOSSAD etc.)

Most people think of terrorists as people and not as an organisation, "loosly arranged cells" etc.

WRONG
Terrorists are not different than any major intelligence force in the world like the CIA etc.
How ? the CIA has cells too. Those cells are mostly independent, can improvise, can make their own assignments etc.
The CIA funds his cells exactly like Some countries fund terrorist cells and networks.
Thinking that Saddam hates Osama bin-laden is a. wrong and b. irrelevant.
Saddam also hates Iran yet they both send money to the same families who's sons died as "shahids".

Currently the biggest and most organised terrorist oranisation is the Hezbollah. They have agents all over the world. They have people working for them and controlling drugs cartels in South America, they have people in the Palestinian Authority collaborating with Hamas etc. They have agents which act as political agents in universities all over Europe. You can call them dormant cells in the way that they can execute or assist a major terror action in the country where they're stationed.

Terrorist networks work together, they share information and they act together just like the CIA works with other organisations.
Maybe they're less funded and their equipment isn't as good. But they're armed with a more suitable morals for conducting their 'business'. Their "red lines" are so faint and so far away if they exist at all that they'd stop at nothing to get their job done.
Another big plus in favor of terrorists is that they aren't chained by procedures and all these kinds of 'shit'. They do whatever needs to be done to get their job done and they'd stop at nothing.
Best way to understand it is to think about things you'd consider inhuman (think about the worst murder cases you saw TV, like the murder of Sharon Tate), this is the "bread and butter" for a terrorist. Why ? Cause it shocks you so hard it makes you vulnerable. By then, he'd won.

Try to understand, terrorism isn't a loosly Organised BS, Terrorism is a very well organised network of networks with independent cells and agents all over the world. Though they're less trained and equipped than your average intelligence organisation, they're move diverse, much more determined and armed with the best set of morals for any kind of warfare you'd like to think about. And yes, morals are a deadly weapon.

About bio/chem/nukes, you can buy those cheap at the ex-USSR black market.

Eradicating Saddam will cut heavily the funds terrorist networks are getting. Which in turn means less equipment, less places to train, less money to their families after they die etc.




If you want to know how morals can be a deadly weapon, read on.
I have friends who'd never punch a guy in the face, they don't want to hurt the guy. Other people would stop somewhere else. A person armed with a gun and a good set of morals will lose to an "unarmed man" with no morals.

Think horror movie scene:
"You woundn't shoot an unarmed crippled old man, would you...?"

[KeiFront]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
Oil in middle east:

What you're forgetting is that most of the oil concessions in Iraq are French and Russian, so go talk to Total and Lukoil about how much they'll be abused.

Iraqi oil in the market:

No Iraqi oil in the market for 10 years 'eh? Then why is it that Iraqi oil made up 1.8 million barrels/day of US market? Ever hear of the UN's Oil for Food program? Didn't think so.....

http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/

Side point: 44% of Iraq's oil goes to Europe and 11% to Asia.

http://images.forbes.com/newswire/2002/10/14/rtr750028.html

Since U.S. firms began to shy away from Iraqi crude in April and May, Europe has become the leading destination for Baghdad's exports, taking in about 44 percent, followed by the United States at 37 percent, and Asia at 19 percent.

This compares to the second half of 2001, when the United States consumed 70 percent of Iraq's crude oil, with Europe taking in 27 percent and Asia only 3 percent.

[Rags]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
RedRed;

You don't do much research before spewing, do you?

2001 social program spending:

Not as a % of GDP, but given we have such a huge GDP to start with these numbers for budget percentage are pretty impressive IMHO:

United States: 58% (figures: US Bureau of Economic Analysis )
Sweden: 51.3% (figures: International Monetary Fund)

2001 US budget "pie":



That 58% comprises a social spending budget in the US of over

drumroll.....

ONE TRILLION DOLLARS!!

WTF do you want us to do, spend the whole freakin' thing on the nanny state?

Oil in middle east:

What you're forgetting is that most of the oil concessions in Iraq are French and Russian, so go talk to Total and Lukoil about how much they'll be abused.

WW-II:

Yes, the UK was in it from '39 but not effectively. Most of the royal political screwups were by Chamberlain of course, but the continental Euopean response was lame as hell.

Iraqi oil in the market:

No Iraqi oil in the market for 10 years 'eh? Then why is it that Iraqi oil made up 1.8 million barrels/day of US market? Ever hear of the UN's Oil for Food program? Didn't think so.....

http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/

Side point: 44% of Iraq's oil goes to Europe and 11% to Asia.

Problem is that the proceeds from this program go everywhere but into his peoples bellies. Saddam also smuggles and sells oil on the spot market then uses the proceeds for WMD's while his people starve...then he (and the liberal/socialist establishment) blames the US and UK for it

Korea:

The US was ready to take on Korea over nuclear issues way back in 1994, and Clinton even claims they had plans to attack said reactors back then but good 'ole Jimmy Carter got involved and brought on those totally worthless "treaties" that supposedly "solved" the problem.

For this and his other failures in Hati etc. he "earned" the Nobel Peace Prize? Pfffttttt.....

We only found out that those treaties were being routinely violated about 2 months ago, so pardon us if we're only now reacting to the problem

Targeting Japan....good luck:

The US has Aegis cruisers parked there for the specific purpose of shooting down IRBM's launched at either South Korea of Japan.

Yes, the Aegis system is now capable of anti-missile defense using the SM-3 missile. It was tested against one of our own missles launched over 300 miles from the USS Lake Erie. The Lake Erie caught the missile track and engaged it 6 minutes after launch. The SM-3 intercepted the target 100 miles up and ~150 miles from the Lake Erie. The closing speed was over 9,000 mph.

Who's in with the US in Iraq:



In a Dec. 23rd news story posted by The Washington Times the following nations are on board with troops: US, UK, France (finally!!), Italy, Spain, Hungary, Poland and possibly even Germany (they join the Security Council in Jan. and have hinted support).

Other reports state that the Poles, Czech's and Romania may be sending chem/bio units.

As far as basing, staging and overflight: most of the Gulf States, Turkey, Saudi Arabia (finally came around) and possibly Jordan.

WW-III

WW-III my ass. Both China and Japan are just as nervous as we are about these bozos because a nuclear North Korea is bad for business, and if anyone is as pro-business as the US it's China and Japan. There may be a bit of posturing here and there, but you'd better believe that NOBODY in the area wants thes morons to get an arsenal of nukes.

Missile launch detection:

You can use radar and satellite data to track a missile back to its source, and many US allies have access and could verify the data. In point of fact a decent weather satellite can pick up the infra-red signature given clear conditions.

Had enough?

Dr. Mordrid

Hahahaha....OWNED!!!



Rags

[Novdid]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
Not as a % of GDP, but given we have such a huge GDP to start with these numbers for budget percentage are pretty impressive IMHO:

United States: 58% (figures: US Bureau of Economic Analysis )
Sweden: 51.3% (figures: International Monetary Fund)

You as well as I both know it's not a matter of how much you spend, it's how you spend it. And in that case I guess Sweden (and just about all of northern europe, GB excluded) has an edge as we don't have 12.7% living below the poverty line. Number taken from the CIA World Factbook.Check!

But I also do know that the last ten years have been very good for the US while the economic growth in Sweden has been pathetic, and that may also have an affect on these numbers you present.

And I do agree with you that we all should check our sources and read up before we post anything, but then again sources do vary quite a bit depending on where you acquire them.

[Wulfman]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid


2001 social program spending:

Not as a % of GDP, but given we have such a huge GDP to start with these numbers for budget percentage are pretty impressive IMHO:

United States: 58% (figures: US Bureau of Economic Analysis )
Sweden: 51.3% (figures: International Monetary Fund)

That 58% comprises a social spending budget in the US of over

drumroll.....

ONE TRILLION DOLLARS!!

nice big number, many zeros in it. quite an eye-catcher.

you quoted some percentages here from (most likely) completey independent sources, are they comparable? you know how statistic works, I'm sure. what does each nation include in it's social program? what not? are state-run schools (just one example) or the like incl. in the swedish budget? why haven't you just quoted the numbers of the IMF for both countries?
here in austria the budget is always created for the following year, same in the us? if yes, that would have been the last clinton-influenced one. have the numbers changed since then? what has changed?

WW-II:

Yes, the UK was in it from '39 but not effectively. Most of the royal political screwups were by Chamberlain of course, but the continental Euopean response was lame as hell.

not effectively? maybe they were not very effective, but they were definitly effectively involved. ask the 200 000 british soldiers who were rescued in 1940 from Dunkirk after the german invasion. and from what I heard, the air war was not really an easy one for the uk.

...until the US, UK and Russians got directly involved.

well, russia - they invaded finland in 1939/40 iirc. imho that is enough involvement. looks like only the US neded some time to kick in.

Iraqi oil in the market:

No Iraqi oil in the market for 10 years 'eh? Then why is it that Iraqi oil made up 1.8 million barrels/day of US market? Ever hear of the UN's Oil for Food program? Didn't think so.....

http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/

Side point: 44% of Iraq's oil goes to Europe and 11% to Asia.

playing with numbers? what have you tried to suggest here - that europe is funding terrorism? thx keifront.


This compares to the second half of 2001, when the United States consumed 70 percent of Iraq's crude oil, with Europe taking in 27 percent and Asia only 3 percent.

how fast these numbers are changing - is there a summary about the last 20 years somewhere?

Targeting Japan....good luck:

The US has Aegis cruisers parked there for the specific purpose of shooting down IRBM's launched at either South Korea of Japan.

Yes, the Aegis system is now capable of anti-missile defense using the SM-3 missile. It was tested against one of our own missles launched over 300 miles from the USS Lake Erie. The Lake Erie caught the missile track and engaged it 6 minutes after launch. The SM-3 intercepted the target 100 miles up and ~150 miles from the Lake Erie. The closing speed was over 9,000 mph.

what exactly is the success rate? you are talking about 1 (one) hit here, how many have failed? 5% through? 10%? if we are talking about WMD here, that should be worth another thought.

Who's in with the US in Iraq:

United States, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, Hungary, Poland, Poles, Czech's and Romania, Turkey, most of the Gulf States, Portugal, Norway, (Germany).

Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Honduras, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Korea, Spain, Syria Turkey, The United Arab Emirates, The United Kingdom, and the United States.

last time. do you see the difference?

Missile launch detection:

You can use radar and satellite data to track a missile back to its source, and many US allies have access and could verify the data. In point of fact a decent weather satellite can pick up the infra-red signature given clear conditions.

and what if it is not launched but delivered in a more creative way?

Had enough?

I'm not used to see you playing around like that - that postings looks impressive, but it lacks regarding (important) details.

mfg
wulfman

PS.: owned? is that a discussion or an event of some kind?

[Rags]

Originally posted by Wulfman

PS.: owned? is that a discussion or an event of some kind?

Discussions usually imply that facts are being exchanged. Something that has been lacking in some of these so-called discussions. Lots of emotions, yet few facts. Owned indeed.

Rags

[Dr Mordrid]

I'll compare the living stanadard of our 12.7% "poor" (if that figure is even correct) to those poor folks living in other countries any time.

The stats on the "have-nots" show that they're not missing much with most having TV's, cable service, cell phones, cars and even credit cards.

Ever hear of the term "Welfare Cadillac"? I've personally seen people pay for their groceries with food stamps and go to a car a whole lot nicer than mine, and this is NOT an unusual occurrance

The only people on the streets these days are those who choose to be (emergency housing services are available) or who were turned out when the liberals closed down most of the resident psychiatric facilities back in the 70's because they were "opressive".

I was working at a facility whose psychiatric division housed over 5000 of these folks when they were put out to the street. It IMHO was a criminal act by a so-called "enlightened" liberal government.

When ever the conservatives have tried to set up institutions for those mentally ill folks still on the streets, and procedures for their comittal to them for their own protection, the ACLU screams like hell for their right to freeze to death during a Michigan winter

Dr. Modrdid

[Rags]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid


I was working at a facility whose psychiatric division housed over 5000 of these folks when they were put out to the street. It IMHO was a criminal act by a so-called "enlightened" liberal government.

When ever the conservatives have tried to set up institutions for those mentally ill folks still on the streets, and procedures for their comittal to them for their own protection, the ACLU screams like hell for their right to freeze to death during a Michigan winter

Dr. Modrdid

No, what they want us to do is buy their homes, feed their offspring, buy their health care, and then pay for their victims.

Logical thinking

Rags

[SitFlyer]

Originally posted by Rags
No, what they want us to do is buy their homes, feed their offspring, buy their health care, and then pay for their victims.

Logical thinking

Rags

I will have to agree 100%

[Jammrock]

why don't you stabilize the african region instead.

Because Africans (with the exception of some radical Muslims) leave us alone.

With the exception Libiya in the 80's and Somolia in the early 90's, the US hasn't touched Africa, and won't. Unless something like Somolia or Libiya happens agains.

What I think a lot of people don't understand is that radical muslims view any non-radical muslim as an enemy...that includes some other muslim group, hindus, christians, 'westerners', asians, buddists...it doesn't matter. They are just as bad about ethnic clensing as Hitler or neo-nazis ever where.

Jammrock

[Dr Mordrid]

This may change as Al Qaeda moves into the horn of Africa, and we do have troops there, but mostly working in concert with the local governments.

I have to agree about the radical islamists. They're equal opportunity despots.

Dr. Mordrid

[goldstein]

Re: Terror

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dogbert
Guys, try to open your mind to this one:

That's rich coming from you Anan. What are you, a chameleon now. Why don't you stick to threatening people or wishing them dead - at least you are more entertaining that way.

[goldstein]

And if you want terrorism to go away - the least we can do is stop driving those ridiculous vehicles that run on oil from countries that hate America. Ride a bike, take transit, whatever. But it's about damn time alternative energy sources take center stage - because at thise rate we'll be facing a disaster on huge proportions. Everytime you fill up, a percentage of the money from your US wallet goes directly into the pocket of a terrorist somewhere.

It's nuts but it seems like we love our gasoline cars more than fighting terrorism.