more cracks from europe.

[Whaleboy]

Afghanistan isn't a fair comparison. It has NOTHING. absolutely NOTHING. It will certainly take a LOT of time to build it. I actually think that the US' grade on Afghanistan is fair.

It has nothing? It has much cultural capital. Look at what it was like before the '70s. Nonetheless, Iraq is easier than Afghanistan, and yet it's still screwed up!!!

I wouldn't trust the US to be the world's policeman. It is terribly biased, no doubt. But it seems to be willing to do good in Afghanistan, and in Iraq. I say we should let it. The Americans want the Iraqi oil? The Iraqis wouldn't care who'll build it, and who will they get the dividents from. (And saying that a UN administration won't give away nice condition is at best wishful thinking. Would YOU place an investment in current Iraq, unless you had some nice conditions?)

Really? I thought the US was doing it because they were genuinely nice people... . I'm more concerned about the general precident it sets, no one nation should be allowed to dominate the world like that. The PNAC calls it benevolent hegemony. I call it dangerous. If the USA wants to help, then fine. It should not impose that help upon others. You of all people should understand that .

So once again. World's policeman? no way. But for THIS PARTICULAR CAUSE, and since it's not like we have someone better for the job, anyway, I say, it's ok.

Technically, the British would be better at the job, since the institutions of centuries of nation building are still in place, and I dare say a more agreeable culture with the Iraqi's, as seen in places like Basra for the most part. A British-led UN task force would be perfect...

[yavoon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


We did not give democracy to South Korea. We gave them th Rhee dictatoship which slaughtered over 100,000 Koreans. The RoK only became a democracy in the 1990s. The same with most of our East Asian clients: Taiwan, Indonesia. The Philippeans became a democracy inspite of our support of their dicator, Marcos. We only stopped backing him when it became obvious in the last six hours of his raeign he couldn't maintain control. Only in Japan did we delver on democracy.

Our record in Asia is very poor. If Vietnam became a democracy, it would be inspite of us, not because of us.

yes yes the US sucks. point still stands. vietnam would have been better off fighting for the other side.

[Whaleboy]

I'm not going to let u drag me into relativism. sorry go take ur "no point is valid" troll elsewhere.

Awww but how am I supposed to enjoy my evening?

Seriously though, the logic applies, and thus far you havent refuted it.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


Awww but how am I supposed to enjoy my evening?

Seriously though, the logic applies, and thus far you havent refuted it.

I'm not touching relativistic logic w/ a 50 foot pole. now go away.

[Whaleboy]

And yes, Vietnam would have been better off fighting for the other side. Just like the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
And yes, Vietnam would have been better off fighting for the other side. Just like the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto.

yes because america's plan was to exterminate the vietnamese.

for being a relativist u sure give piss poor analogies.

[Whaleboy]

I'm not touching relativistic logic w/ a 50 foot pole. now go away.

Why not?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Azazel
Goddamn, people are so blinded by their hatred of the US, they're fully willing to sacrifice the fait of the iraqi people to see the US fail. It's all quite sad really. Do you know what will happen If the US will fail in Iraq? complete and utter chaos. Unimaginable suffering. What would happen if the US would succeed? only good stuff, in comparison to what exists there today.

But I guess when you're foaming at the mouth, and your only consideration is the failure of the US, none of this matters.

I wish the US manages to get a good diplomat that will establish a coalition on the aims of stabilty and nation-building, instead of trying to lure allies in with corruption or false promises of reward.

I for one would be glad if my country could help the Nation building in Iraq. But that would require the premise that Washington stops to consider its potential allies as simpletons.

[Whaleboy]

for being a relativist u sure give piss poor analogies.

Do explain!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


Why not?

because relativism is ur constant meta-argument. u have real arguments and u have relativism. stick to real arguments and stop shoving that crap down ppl's throats.

its tiring and played out. "ur wrong because everyone's opinion is equally invalid!" hahahahah *dances irish jig*

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


Why not?

What makes your point any more valid than his?

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


Do explain!

comparing american involvement in vietnam to the nazi involvement w/ the jews IS A PISS POOR ANALOGY.

its not so much explaining as completing the sentence.

[Whaleboy]

because relativism is ur constant meta-argument. u have real arguments and u have relativism. stick to real arguments and stop shoving that crap down ppl's throats.

its tiring and played out. "ur wrong because everyone's opinion is equally invalid!" hahahahah *dances irish jig*

Hardly. I'm showing why your argument of your view being more valid than theirs does not hold water. Sure they may have been better off but that doesnt mean they should have done as you now wish they'd have done.

I believe that counts as a formal fallacy.

In other words, my point is well within the grounds of answering your point. However, it's all spam, and I'm too tired to argue around in circles with you. Back on the block list!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by yavoon
point still stands. vietnam would have been better off fighting for the other side.

You can't say that for sure. We can't even say what the probabilty is. There is every chance it could have ended up as poor and messed up as Indonesia or the Philippines. Especially after the massive damage to the countryside from the bombing and spraying.

[Whaleboy]

What makes your point any more valid than his?

It doesn't, unless you're looking at arguments in terms of critical errors.

comparing american involvement in vietnam to the nazi involvement w/ the jews IS A PISS POOR ANALOGY.

Why? I think its a perfectly valid argument. Don't look at it with the tinted glasses of histories winners and losers, look at the event itself. In terms of what we're dealing with here, how is it different? It's a suicidal altercation against superior odds is it not?