US isn't very picky when it comes to chosing allies

[Serb]

"[Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule....blah...blah...blah....

It's only one side of the coin. There was also a real famine caused by dry weather. And btw, collectivization and "war vs. Kulaks as class" had happen everywhere in Soviet Union, in Siberia too.

I suppose you don't consider paying out US $25 000 to the families of dead Palestinian terrorists links to terrorist organizations?

A lot of people here use Palistinian flag as avatar in solidarity with Palistine. Do you consider them as terrorists too?

Did you even read the article? It says he was executed because he refused to train Al-Quaeda terrorists based in Iraq.

With the same success this article could said that he was executed becuase he refused to dance and sing for Saddam. What this reporter could know about the reason? Did he was there? Did he investigated this case? It's just his own fantasies about the reasons why this guy was killed (if he was killed of course).

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Serb
It's only one side of the coin.

You sound like a holocaust denier.

[Serb]

No. I don't deny that Stalin's collectivization was terrible. He was a real crazy bastard. But you portray it like a genocide of Ukranians, like he wanted to kill all Ukranians. For him there was no difference who are you Ukranian, Russian or Uzbeck. If you deny his collectivization- you are an enemy and should be destroyed. If you think that during Stalin's reign was a genocide of Ukranians, then I think that it was genocide of Russians. Because Russians suffered the most from Stalin's atrocities.

[GeneralTacticus]

A lot of people here use Palistinian flag as avatar in solidarity with Palistine. Do you consider them as terrorists too?

NO! There is a very big difference between waving a flag and paying out huge sums of money to the families of dead terrorists. This is a huge encouragement to suicide bombers and is the closest you can get to paying them for what they do.

GeneralTacticus, what your article gets wrong about the Ukraine is that it didn't simply declare indpendence and get invaded by the Russians. Following the February Revolution, a Rada was extablished in Kiev. Later that year, the Bolsheviks of the Ukraine set up a Red government in Karkov, then overthrew the Rada and moved to Kiev. While I believe that the Rada had declared independence at one point, up to its overthrow, it was still cooperating with the Soviets of Russia. After a Soviet government had been established, the two countries continued working together.

However, by this time, the Russian Army had completely collapsed. Soviet attempts to declare peace on the Gemans met with failure (D'uh), and the Soviets were forced to accept all German demands. One of these demands was tuning the Ukraine over to Germany.

Germany ousted the Red government and set up it's own government, until the collapse of the Geman Empire in Nov. At this point, the White government of the Ukraine helped to organize a White Army to overthrow the Reds in Moscow. The Ukraine wasn't caught in the middle, it was part and parcel of the struggle.

You should note that I did not emphasise any part of the article relating to the Ukraine pre-famine. I was posting that in response to Serb's claims that it was impossible to artificially create a famine.

It's only one side of the coin. There was also a real famine caused by dry weather. And btw, collectivization and "war vs. Kulaks as class" had happen everywhere in Soviet Union, in Siberia too.

So I take it you withdraw your assertation that the famine was not deliberate? And I don't think there was anywhere else in the USSR which saw 25 000 people starving every day.

No. I don't deny that Stalin's collectivization was terrible. He was a real crazy bastard. But you portray it like a genocide of Ukranians, like he wanted to kill all Ukranians. For him there was no difference who are you Ukranian, Russian or Uzbeck. If you deny his collectivization- you are an enemy and should be destroyed. If you think that during Stalin's reign was a genocide of Ukranians, then I think that it was genocide of Russians. Because Russians suffered the most from Stalin's atrocities.

True in that he didn't really care where you came from. He only cared whether you would obey him unquestioningly or not. However, the forced famine in the Ukraine was most certainly genocide.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: US isn't very picky when it comes to chosing allies

Originally posted by Saint Marcus

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/08/20/afghanistan.graves/index.html

who's worse? The Taliban or the US-backed Northern Alliance? Both are equally guilty of warcrimes and crimes against humanity, yet one is backed by the US and the other isn't.

Both are guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity by western standards, but the Taleban are definitely worse as to scale and dominance during the time they ruled. Given the same degree of power and territorial control, Dostum's bunch would be almost as bad, but in a more general purpose rapist, murderer and thug sort of way, as opposed to the ideological fanatacism and systematic oppression of the Taleban.

Dostum's bunch are the worst of the worst of the NA, but all of the tribes in the general area (going from the tribal areas of Pakistan up into the former USSR Republics and Chechnya) have a historically brutal and vindictive approach to warfare, and none of them could give a **** less about actual or professed western standards of conduct.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kramerman
Serb, oil is not an issue. We dont even need to get oil from Iraq in the first place. We get all we need from sources around the world. The US is intentionally pulling out of our small dependance (I believe 8% of all our oil is imported from the middle east) on the middle east for oil and moving towards Latin America and Russia. This stooge crap you refer to is rediculous. We have long had all the stooges we need else where .
Kman

And the scientists predict that we have only 40 years before we will run out of oil. So, its the major strategic resource of the near future. Who controls the oil, controls the world.
(just play Fallout to see why nuclear war was started)
So, please don't tell me that USA don't care about oil and don't want to see its puppet regimes in countries which have a lot of oil, like Iraq.

Also, you know, even the thought of an attack on Iraq can be completely forgotten if he would only let our weapons inspectors into his country to dismantle his WoMD. He claims he has none, yet refuses UN inspetors to check. Why? Because he has them. Is it unreasonable to just let us check to make sure he is not lying? Ill tell you its not, because in the cease-fire after he got his ass kicked, he agreed to have the weapons inspectors. HE AGREED TO IT. And now he has broken the agreement. And if he does have WoMD, is it unreasonable that we dismantle them?

And how many spies was among those inspectors? He claimed that some of those inspectors were CIA agents. And I guess its true. Why he should let in his country people who is spying on him? And btw, just recently he agreed to cooperate with inspectors. UN could send its inspectors again.

Saddam is bringing any attack that happens upon himself. If he would only live up to the agreement that he made then no attack would even be considered, and Saddam could happily go about his tyrranous reign.

In other words, if he would started to kiss your ass, you let him to continue his atrocities? Nice, how typical for your foreign policy.

Hmmm... does this breaking treaties thing of Saddam sound familiar to anyone else??? *cough* hitler *cough*.

*cough* Bush*cough* *cough* ABM treaty*cough*

[GeneralTacticus]

And how many spies was among those inspectors? He claimed that some of those inspectors were CIA agents. And I guess its true. Why he should let in his country people who is spying on him?

Does he have any evidence that they are CIA agents? Do you?

[Serb]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
NO! There is a very big difference between waving a flag and paying out huge sums of money to the families of dead terrorists. This is a huge encouragement to suicide bombers and is the closest you can get to paying them for what they do.

The same acts of solidarity. I see no difference.

So I take it you withdraw your assertation that the famine was not deliberate? And I don't think there was anywhere else in the USSR which saw 25 000 people starving every day.

I don't think that 25 000 people died every day on Ukraine. In that case all of them should be dead very soon. But perhaps you misunderstood me. I don't deny things you described, but also there was natural (not artificial) famine saused by dry weather. Stalin's actions turned already bad sitiation into terrible situation.

True in that he didn't really care where you came from. He only cared whether you would obey him unquestioningly or not. However, the forced famine in the Ukraine was most certainly genocide.

Genocide toward political group- "kulaks", not genocide toward Ukrainians as nationality.

[GeneralTacticus]

Genocide toward political group- "kulaks", not genocide toward Ukrainians as nationality.

It was genocide towards every non-Party member living in the Ukraine.

The same acts of solidarity. I see no difference.

Do you see a difference between an American waving a flag in the streets and voluntarily bankrolling Unit 406?

I don't think that 25 000 people died every day on Ukraine. In that case all of them should be dead very soon. But perhaps you misunderstood me. I don't deny things you described, but also there was natural (not artificial) famine saused by dry weather. Stalin's actions turned already bad sitiation into terrible situation.

Quote from the article I posted:
"By the spring of 1933, the height of the famine, an estimated 25,000 persons died every day in the Ukraine."

Even Moscow at the height of Stalin's purges only managed a paltry 1000 victims per day.

[Serb]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus


It was genocide towards every non-Party member living in the Ukraine.

Not everyone who accepted Stalin's collectivization were party members. In fact people who lived in 'colhozah' (communes, I don't know English word) - which were a goal of Stalin's collectivization weren't party members. Only tiny part of them were communists.

Do you see a difference between an American waving a flag in the streets and voluntarily bankrolling Unit 406?

No. Should I? [j/k]
I see nothing wrong if someone waving an American flag to celabrate, f.e. their landing on Moon. But it's not the same as if someone start to waving an American flag and shout USA! USA! USA! to celabrate death of thousands of Korean civilians killed by biological weapons.

Quote from the article I posted:
"By the spring of 1933, the height of the famine, an estimated 25,000 persons died every day in the Ukraine.
Even Moscow at the height of Stalin's purges only managed a paltry 1000 victims per day. "

That's why I think this data is greatly exaggerated.

[GeneralTacticus]

That's why I think this data is greatly exaggerated.

Why? It's a lot easier, if slower, to kill people by mass starvation than by execution.

Not everyone who accepted Stalin's collectivization were party members. In fact people who lived in 'colhozah' (communes, I don't know English word) - which were a goal of Stalin's collectivization weren't party members. Only tiny part of them were communists.

The relevant paragraph form the article -"While police and Communist Party officials remained quite well fed, desperate Ukrainians ate leaves off bushes and trees, killed dogs, cats, frogs, mice and birds then cooked them. " - does not detail whether those who bowed down to Stalin were spared. I doubt it, though, since their food would have been part of the quotas like everyone else's. And food for them would have been stopped at the border like everyone else's.

EDIT: Most of the population was already living in communes by the time of the famine. Stalin ordered it because they didn't like it.

I see nothing wrong if someone waving an American flag to celabrate, f.e. their landing on Moon. But it's not the same as if someone start to waving an American flag and shout USA! USA! USA! to celabrate death of thousands of Korean civilians killed by biological weapons.

I would be sickened if I saw an American celebrating the use of biological weapons against innocent civilians, and Im would probably ask them what the hell they were doing. However, this is passive support, i.e. holding an opinion. Voluntarily funding said biological attacks, on the other hand, is active support and is on the same level as conducting the attack yourself.

[Kramerman]

And the scientists predict that we have only 40 years before we will run out of oil. So, its the major strategic resource of the near future. Who controls the oil, controls the world.
(just play Fallout to see why nuclear war was started)
So, please don't tell me that USA don't care about oil and don't want to see its puppet regimes in countries which have a lot of oil, like Iraq.

We do care about oil, but not nearly enough to stick around in the middle east. This region is by far the leading foreign source of headaches, we dont need that. We got plenty of stuff here at home to give us headaches. It is not worth the pain and suffering our presence there causes.

You dont seem to understand. First of all, the 40 year estimate doesnt take into account the vast untapped underwater reserves, were the majority of the worlds oil still waits. Next, reasons we are pulling our oil interests out of the middle east is just as much political than anything else. Those countries make billions and and billions of dollars from the oil trade. Without that money their nations would be ****. As it is they arent great, and they have some fantastic wealth. By taking are money elsewhere, we are both disassociating ourselves with their culture that is obviously hostile towards ours, and we are taking our money with us.

Also, oil may only perhaps be important for the next 15 - 20 years. American as well as Japanese and European motor companies have been progressing by leaps and bounds on alternative fuel for cars, such as fuel cells which is the primary consumption of fossil fuels. Oil is the past.

And how many spies was among those inspectors? He claimed that some of those inspectors were CIA agents. And I guess its true. Why he should let in his country people who is spying on him? And btw, just recently he agreed to cooperate with inspectors. UN could send its inspectors again.

SPYS? WTF. The job of the inspectors was to make sure Saddam had no functioning weapons of mass destruction. This would require some poking around, WHICH SADDAM AGREED TO AFTER SIGNING THE CEASE-FIRE TO THE GULF WAR. After kicking his ass and letting him stay in power, we have every right to search every facet of his country, so that he could never wage war on anybody again. When did he agree to let inspectors back in? I never heard of this, I only heard that he was receptive to the idea. Though this is bull****, as long as he says this he is just buying time to keep the US off his back. As long as he is 'receptive' to the idea, the world would never tolerate an attack. remember when Japan was receptive to a peace agreement in 1941? It was horse **** meant to buy time. Times change, tactics dont.

WTF do you not get about this? Your arguements are groing more and more irrational. Why dont you just swallow your pride for 5 seconds and agree that Saddam is in the wrong, and if he doesnt comply with the cease-fire that he agreed to, we have every right to attack him just for that. Sometimes I think we should attack him just for being a cruel leader, but that would never be tolerated. The US would be accused of bullying the world and all that ****. It has nothing to do with oil, or any of that other ****, it only has to do with protecting the US and our allies.

In other words, if he would started to kiss your ass, you let him to continue his atrocities? Nice, how typical for your foreign policy.

Sheesh, logic at its finest. You just contridicted yourself in this statement.....
this debate should've ended long ago. If he lets us have full access to all his stuff and let us make sure he had no WoMD and let us dismantle what he does have and let us make sure it stays that way (or kiss our ass, in your eyes, though this would only be living up to his agreement), than Saddam can keep his power as long as he can. Who is the United States to go in there and take him out for comitting attrocities? Huh? As it is when we have to go after him for our own self defense people call us 'bullys' or 'cowboys' and crutucize us for being sucgh a cruel and unjust country. They seem not to understand how horrible he is. Can you begin to see my frustration? But does the US have the right to decide other nation's fate, no matter how good it may be? If we went in there for no other reason than because of his attrocities, then what would you think would happen? If you are pissed off at us wanting to take him out for self defence yet if we did it because of his horrible leadership it would be ok???
Please. This debate is just starting to get rediculous.

Kman

And no, I have not been able to locate Fall out. Perhaps you could mail it to me . I havent really looked very hard though. Not much time. I will though, it sounds like alot of fun.

[Ghengis-Sean]

Serb is arguing that Iraqi oil is import, and it is, but not to the US. The is the worlds largest producer of oil, we produce roughly half of what we consume, the rest we import from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela, and about 10% from the gulf. The problem is that Europe and Japan import 30% and 70% of their oil from the middle-east. Trouble in the middle-east means higher prices in Europe and Japan and since oil prices don't exist independently of one another it also means higher oil prices in America.

Iraqi oil isn't the main issue here. does anyone remember that pesky little "War on Terrorism"???

The reason we have people from Saudi Arabia trying to fly planes into skyscrpaers is because they aren't happy with the US. One of the key reasons for this is because of the American military presence in Saudia Arabia. Why? Because Mecca happens to be in Saudi Arabia. One of the slogans of Osama bin Laden is "Drive the infedels from the holy places" implying that American forces are actually in the holy places (which they aren't).

Now why are US troops in Saudi Arabia? Because of Saddam Hussein and because Saudi and Kuwaiti oil is important (to Europe and Japan who lack the ability/willingness to protect their own oil supplies). Get rid of Saddam and US troops leave Saudia Arabia and radical muslims lose the ability to say Americans are occupying Islamic holy sites.

sometimes, even in the politcal world 1+1=2.

oh, and Serb, can you say "Croat"? how about "Bosnian"? how about "Albanian"? when the Serbs recognize that the fact that they attempted to exterminate millions of people then you can post your BS, until then pipe down and learn humility. You like to talk about WWII alot, but that happened in our grandparents lifetimes, Kosovo happened just a few years ago. WHAT DID YOU DO TO STOP IT?????

as martin luther king jr. once said, "It isn't the actions of the children of darkness that are so horrible, but the inaction of the children of light.

let ye without sin cast the first stone.

[Kramerman]

Now why are US troops in Saudi Arabia? Because of Saddam Hussein and because Saudi and Kuwaiti oil is important (to Europe and Japan who lack the ability/willingness to protect their own oil supplies). Get rid of Saddam and US troops leave Saudia Arabia and radical muslims lose the ability to say Americans are occupying Islamic holy sites.

sometimes, even in the politcal world 1+1=2.

Thats another excellent point, expanding on what i was trying to say as far as the conflict we create while we have a presence in the middle east.
Ghengis-Sean

oh, and Serb, can you say "Croat"? how about "Bosnian"? how about "Albanian"? when the Serbs recognize that the fact that they attempted to exterminate millions of people then you can post your BS, until then pipe down and learn humility. You like to talk about WWII alot, but that happened in our grandparents lifetimes, Kosovo happened just a few years ago. WHAT DID YOU DO TO STOP IT?????

It sounds like, though i may be mis interpreting what you wrote, that you think serb to be serbian. You arent the first to make this mistake . He is actually Russian (siberia). So ths last statement is irrelevant. No matter, it was an honost mistake, unless I be mistaking myself...

[Saint Marcus]

SPYS? WTF. The job of the inspectors was to make sure Saddam had no functioning weapons of mass destruction.

That was the intention, but the US had several spies operating as weapon's inspectors who were looking at entirely different things. This has also been confirmed by the UN.