sad thoughts on poly posters

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger


?

You're being a little muddle-headed. I said that the US forced others to make sacrifices it would never have asked of its own citizens, like putting up with government death squads roaming the street squashing dissent, not that the US never made any sacrifices.

I said that both sides engaged in merely proxy conflict against each other, not that there was no conflict.

Deny what? I do not deny that the USSR was, generally, worse than the US internally (I would rather have the US governing me as a US citizen than the USSR governing me as a Soviet citizen) or that both were similarly distasteful in their dealings with other nations. In fact, the only one engaged in whitewashing here is you.

And I say bull sh!t. The US directly sacrificed a good number of it's citizens on the fields of the Cold War.

And you said... 'It was a state of tension'. Bull sh!t. It was a war with nuclear weapons in the wings.

White washing? Me? I am the one saying what the nature of the conflict was. You are sticking to the party line.

[KrazyHorse]

Source on the Vietnam thing is forgotten, but if GP were here he could testify to it. He made claim, looked up figures and admitted error.

[KrazyHorse]

What party line? I am not, and have never been...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger
The Khmer Rouge was backed by the US and kicked out of power by the Vietnamese.

Bull sh!t sensor goes off the scale.

[KrazyHorse]

And you said... 'It was a state of tension'. Bull sh!t. It was a war with nuclear weapons in the wings

Then every important country has been at war every day since its birth. There's a difference between an actual war and a potential war. You're seeking to eliminate that distinction and thus provide justification for military action anywhere, anytime.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Bull sh!t sensor goes off the scale.

That's a historical fact, NYE. The Vietnamese army crossed into Cambodia and kicked out the Khmer Rouge in 1977 or whenever. US support is more arguable, but there is documentary evidence, IIRC. The Khmer Rouge grew up as a nationalist reaction against Viet Namese infiltration of Cambodia along Ho Chi Minh trail and subsequent US bombing of said trail and surrounding territory (incurring massive civilian casualties, BTW). As the US wasn't kindly disposed to Viet Nam's government at the time, they supported anti-Viet Namese groups everywhere in the region, even if said groups were ultra-Maoist fanatics.

[notyoueither]

No. You are denying that there was a pivoltal conflict of historical significance played out between 1950 and 1990. That conflict was played out without the major protaganists ever coming into direct conflict. Rather, they waged war by proxy. Thank God.

There never has been a war like it, and may there never be again.

[GeneralTacticus]

You want American sacrifice? Korea. Vietnam. The Americans (and others) bled a hell of a lot more than the Russians ever did, until Afghanistan.

Do you think the sacrifices made by the US in Korea and Vietnam was even close to the sacrifices made by the citizens of other Third World nations because of the US?

Pfff. Vietnam, Cambodia, the KGB. Give me a break!

Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, Iraq, Iran Greece, Turkey... need I go on?

Bull sh!t sensor goes off the scale.

They were backed by the Chinese and later preserved by the Americans as opposition to the Vietnamese-backed government.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger


That's a historical fact, NYE. The Vietnamese army crossed into Cambodia and kicked out the Khmer Rouge in 1977 or whenever. US support is more arguable, but there is documentary evidence, IIRC. The Khmer Rouge grew up as a nationalist reaction against Viet Namese infiltration of Cambodia along Ho Chi Minh trail and subsequent US bombing of said trail and surrounding territory (incurring massive civilian casualties, BTW). As the US wasn't kindly disposed to Viet Nam's government at the time, they supported anti-Viet Namese groups everywhere in the region, even if said groups were ultra-Maoist fanatics.

US support is more arguable



and I'll let you keep banging that drum.

[KrazyHorse]

Suppoert was most extensive after the Khmer Rouge had managed to prove their self-genocidal tendencies, BTW...

[KrazyHorse]

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/pol/polpotmontclarion0498.html

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus


Do you think the sacrifices made by the US in Korea and Vietnam was even close to the sacrifices made by the citizens of other Third World nations because of the US?



Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, Iraq, Iran Greece, Turkey... need I go on?



They were backed by the Chinese and later preserved by the Americans as opposition to the Vietnamese-backed government.

1. It wasn't just the US. It was Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Austrailia, and on and on...

2. Yes, you need to go on if you want to blame the twisted regime of South Africa on the US. Turkey? Are you Greek? Brazil? Are you sane?

3. Cry on. Your side lost.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger
http://www.chss.montclair.edu/englis...arion0498.html

To the Editor:

That has to be a definitive source.

[KrazyHorse]

http://www.edwebproject.org/sideshow/khmeryears/fall.html

[GeneralTacticus]

1. It wasn't just the US. It was Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Austrailia, and on and on...

And your point is... what? The US never had to make sacrifices even close to those it imposed on other nations.

2. Yes, you need to go on if you want to blame the twisted regime of South Africa on the US. Turkey? Are you Greek? Brazil? Are you sane?

1) The US supported the apartheid regime.

2) No, I am not Greek, but Turkey was and is very repressive toward the Kurds.

3) What exactly do you mean? the US supported a Brazilian military coup in 1964, which brought about a dictatorship.

3. Cry on. Your side lost.

Please identify 'my side'.