Welcome to the GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Post New Thread Reply

Register GFY Rules Calendar
Go Back   GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum > >
Discuss what's fucking going on, and which programs are best and worst. One-time "program" announcements from "established" webmasters are allowed.

 
Thread Tools
Old 01-04-2007, 11:11 AM   #51
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazonby View Post
Well, if a policeman stands next to a mugger, the mugger will be less likely to mug someone. If two carrier battlegroups park next to a country, the country is less likely to carry out their threat to annihilate a nearby country.
Yes, and more likely to hate the country that sent in the 2 carriers... and more likely to hate the nearby country even more for having these outsiders interfere where they don't belong.

Seriously, if they are intimidated enough not to act... then 1 carrier is all that is needed. If they're not intimidated enough, than 2 carriers won't change anything except to raise tensions.

Last edited by StuartD; 01-04-2007 at 11:13 AM..
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:16 AM   #52
Lazonby
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
Yes, and more likely to hate the country that sent in the 2 carriers... and more likely to hate the nearby country even more for having these outsiders interfere where they don't belong.

Seriously, if they are intimidated enough not to act... then 1 carrier is all that is needed. If they're not intimidated enough, than 2 carriers won't change anything except to raise tensions.
Holy jebus. Can someone else explain things to him as I'm eating right now.
Lazonby is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:28 AM   #53
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
Yes, and more likely to hate the country that sent in the 2 carriers... and more likely to hate the nearby country even more for having these outsiders interfere where they don't belong.

Seriously, if they are intimidated enough not to act... then 1 carrier is all that is needed. If they're not intimidated enough, than 2 carriers won't change anything except to raise tensions.
That's the whole point. Tension is good - tension always leads to resolution. Resolution can take many forms, it might be violent or not. There will be no resolution however without tension.

Tension and conflict is the basis of every great moment in life, personal or global. A prolonged gobal conflict (ie world war), The last minute of overtime in hockey, when your wife/girlfriend says "we need to talk", an impending sneeze, proposing to the woman of your dreams, the sustained diminished chord at the end of a beautiful hymn.. all are tension and/or conflict and all have resolution - and mostly beautiful in these cases.

If life is going to be interesting at all, tension and conflict must be embraced so one can experience the resolution (good or bad).
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:30 AM   #54
devilspost
Confirmed User
 
devilspost's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tampa yomebe -at- hotmail
Posts: 3,980
All you keyboard warriors are willing to spend as many american soldiers lives as it takes to get the job done arnt you?
__________________

Brothels and Escorts Worldwide.
devilspost is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:33 AM   #55
Pleasurepays
BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I live in a pile of boogers
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
Yes, and more likely to hate the country that sent in the 2 carriers... and more likely to hate the nearby country even more for having these outsiders interfere where they don't belong.

Seriously, if they are intimidated enough not to act... then 1 carrier is all that is needed. If they're not intimidated enough, than 2 carriers won't change anything except to raise tensions.
your arguements wrongly assume that if the US did nothing, relations with Iran would improve. the simple fact of the matter is that Iran has told the entire western world to fuck off, made endless threats, continues to pursue a nuclear program in spite of strong international condemnation.

its not like they are just reaching out for a hug. the problem is there.. the problem is real.. no one is doing anything about it. even if you dislike the US, their actions, Bush or anything else, that doesn't make Iran, their policies, their open defiance and thier threats go away.
Pleasurepays is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:36 AM   #56
Webby
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Far far away - as possible
Posts: 14,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dollarmansteve View Post
That's the whole point. Tension is good - tension always leads to resolution. Resolution can take many forms, it might be violent or not. There will be no resolution however without tension.
If ya want tension, chat to occupying forces in Iraq. Some folks there think tension is good too - and they are obviously intending that it remain that way.
__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.
Webby is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:41 AM   #57
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays View Post
your arguements wrongly assume that if the US did nothing, relations with Iran would improve. the simple fact of the matter is that Iran has told the entire western world to fuck off, made endless threats, continues to pursue a nuclear program in spite of strong international condemnation.
And you wrongly assume the terrorists attacked the US just for fun.... that the US didn't provoke it somehow.


You guys seem to think that it doesn't matter what anyone thinks of the US moving in more troops into a conflict it doesn't belong in and that nothing will come of it. And then get all shocked when these guys turn around and fly a plane into a building.


If you seriously think that these actions won't raise tensions and make people hate the US even more than they might already do.... then you're just deluding yourself. Yes, sometimes you have to do something that will make people hate you... but sometimes you can do that without having to push it even further for no good reason.

If you push, people push back. I'd think the war eager bunch of you would realize that.
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:43 AM   #58
BitAudioVideo
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA, Georgia
Posts: 1,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daruma View Post
my opinion: yes its started already, when the history books are written 20-30 years from now

an off-shoot question from this

what businesses prosper during war?
how will porn do?
how will gaming do?
how will alcohol sales do?
what business is good to get into during a more wide-spread war time?
pussy alcohol and drugs will always sell, no matter what.
__________________
Hi-Quality Encoding - Bulk Orders - On Time!
http://bitaudiovideo.com
icq 50476697 - aim n3r0xXx
BitAudioVideo is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:43 AM   #59
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webby View Post
If ya want tension, chat to occupying forces in Iraq. Some folks there think tension is good too - and they are obviously intending that it remain that way.
Yep, it's a two way street - applies to both sides. Is it good for the US soldiers who die? Nope, it sucks balls.
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:44 AM   #60
Adult Search Results
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice View Post


]


__________________
Adult Search Results
Working the search engines for your adult website.

Currently not accepting new clients
ICQ 474143357
Adult Search Results is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:50 AM   #61
Webby
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Far far away - as possible
Posts: 14,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
And you wrongly assume the terrorists attacked the US just for fun.... that the US didn't provoke it somehow.

If you push, people push back. I'd think the war eager bunch of you would realize that.
Sure people attack the US just for fun - what other reason could there be??

The US relationship with Iran over decades was so close - it was almost incestuous and oozing a level of goodwill yet unsurpassed

Considering the US fucked Iran time and time again and messed in that nations internal affairs, assassinated members of it's (democratically elected) government - then whined and moaned when more extreme elements surfaced in opposition to the US. Fuck with people and they will fuck you back.

The level of naivety on this is awesome.
__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.
Webby is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:52 AM   #62
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
And you wrongly assume the terrorists attacked the US just for fun.... that the US didn't provoke it somehow.


You guys seem to think that it doesn't matter what anyone thinks of the US moving in more troops into a conflict it doesn't belong in and that nothing will come of it. And then get all shocked when these guys turn around and fly a plane into a building.


If you seriously think that these actions won't raise tensions and make people hate the US even more than they might already do.... then you're just deluding yourself. Yes, sometimes you have to do something that will make people hate you... but sometimes you can do that without having to push it even further for no good reason.

If you push, people push back. I'd think the war eager bunch of you would realize that.
Why would the United States, as a rational national actor 'care' about the 'feelings' of a group of people who already 'hate' them. It makes no difference if people in the middle east hate the US 'more'. If you think that Iran or some terrorist is sitting around going "Man I really hate the US.. but i wont do anything yet, but lemme tell you if they send another aircraft carrier make me MORE MAD then Im really gonna fuck them up" then you are deluding yourself.

Anyone who wants to harm the US/west doesnt need a tipping point - save it be for political reasons. Unlike the US however, domestic politics in the middle east is a farce. Crazy totalitarian leaders dont worry about the latest approval ratings or re-election.
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:54 AM   #63
montel
Confirmed User
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: See sig!
Posts: 2,606
This is all about securing oil for the future. The USA isnt in Iraq because they are concerned about selling the oil or terrorists or wmds or spreading democracy. They are concerned that we are going to hit Peak Oil in around 2010 and they wont have a reliable source of oil at all. This was the role Iraq was going to play for the USA and the reason for the incasion. If you dont beleive Peak Oil is coming soon, read this report by Deutsche Bank http://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/DBR_IN...0000181487.PDF

If you want to read the scariest page on the internet check this out- http://lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

When WW3 comes, it will be because of this......................
__________________
Barefootsies
montel is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:56 AM   #64
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dollarmansteve View Post
Why would the United States, as a rational national actor 'care' about the 'feelings' of a group of people who already 'hate' them. It makes no difference if people in the middle east hate the US 'more'. If you think that Iran or some terrorist is sitting around going "Man I really hate the US.. but i wont do anything yet, but lemme tell you if they send another aircraft carrier make me MORE MAD then Im really gonna fuck them up" then you are deluding yourself.

Anyone who wants to harm the US/west doesnt need a tipping point - save it be for political reasons. Unlike the US however, domestic politics in the middle east is a farce. Crazy totalitarian leaders dont worry about the latest approval ratings or re-election.
You've never read up on Operation Ajax, have you?
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:56 AM   #65
Lazonby
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,262
I'm thinking of writing to my local Member of Parliament, asking him to disband the police. You see, if the criminals do not feel threatened then they will not commit any crime.

Also, if anyone were to threaten the life of my family, I would not do anything about it, because I wouldn't want to infame any tensions.

You see, everyone and everything is good and there is no evil in the world (except the Joooos, NeoCons, Bush, SUV drivers, etc).

When the Iranians say "Death to America", "death to Israel", "death to all infidels", "etc", "etc", "etc", and when they simutaneously develop nukes, what they are really saying is "we love you and there is no need to worry." So let's bring the carriers home. History shows that when some madman makes threats to annihilate people, it is always no more than hot air. Just ask the 60 million people killed in World War 2.
Lazonby is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:58 AM   #66
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webby View Post
Sure people attack the US just for fun - what other reason could there be??

The US relationship with Iran over decades was so close - it was almost incestuous and oozing a level of goodwill yet unsurpassed

Considering the US fucked Iran time and time again and messed in that nations internal affairs, assassinated members of it's (democratically elected) government - then whined and moaned when more extreme elements surfaced in opposition to the US. Fuck with people and they will fuck you back.

The level of naivety on this is awesome.
People forget the past way to easily and way to quickly.
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 11:59 AM   #67
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by montel View Post
This is all about securing oil for the future. The USA isnt in Iraq because they are concerned about selling the oil or terrorists or wmds or spreading democracy. They are concerned that we are going to hit Peak Oil in around 2010 and they wont have a reliable source of oil at all. This was the role Iraq was going to play for the USA and the reason for the incasion. If you dont beleive Peak Oil is coming soon, read this report by Deutsche Bank http://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/DBR_IN...0000181487.PDF

If you want to read the scariest page on the internet check this out- http://lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

When WW3 comes, it will be because of this......................
Everyone knows this, the strategic importance of the middle east isnt a mystery to anyone with half a brain or any knowledge of history/economics/global politics. And as a citizen of the (rich) west you probably want to be on the side of the group of countries that has strategic advantage in the middle east for the sake of your current way of life and your future generations.

As a side note, the 'oil crash fear mongers', as like any group of extremists, have the thing way over done. Anyone with an incentive to adopt and pormote extremist views on any topic lack credibility and conservatism, meaning that it is in their best and personal interest to adopt irrational and extreme assumptions.
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:03 PM   #68
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
You've never read up on Operation Ajax, have you?
I am very familiar with the history of American/Iranian relations - how does that fit into the argument you are trying to present? Subtlety will do nothing to keep the conversation going.
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:04 PM   #69
Pleasurepays
BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I live in a pile of boogers
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
And you wrongly assume the terrorists attacked the US just for fun.... that the US didn't provoke it somehow.

You guys seem to think that it doesn't matter what anyone thinks of the US moving in more troops into a conflict it doesn't belong in and that nothing will come of it. And then get all shocked when these guys turn around and fly a plane into a building.

If you seriously think that these actions won't raise tensions and make people hate the US even more than they might already do.... then you're just deluding yourself. Yes, sometimes you have to do something that will make people hate you... but sometimes you can do that without having to push it even further for no good reason. the political process with Iran has failed on every level... due to their own staunch refusal to engage ANY developed country or even discuss their nuclear program.

If you push, people push back. I'd think the war eager bunch of you would realize that.
i dont assume anything. get over yourself. you act as if the world is perfect... with simple problems and easy solutions. hate to break it to you, but the world is a much more complicated place and driven by and shaped into a clusterfuck of the political, economic and security interests of each nation.

its easy to criticise taking action... i submit however, that you are definately less informed and less qualified to determine a proper course of action, than anyone actually making the decisions.

again... the problem is there. just like with N Korea. whats teh world doing about it? uhmm...nothing. meanwhile, their own sabre rattling continues to grow louder and louder and louder as do their threats. thats a fact. its also a fact that the UN and world at large, has a horrible track record of dealing with threats early on before it becomes a major catastrophe.

the whole "you push and they push back" argument is weak. they have been pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing against the entire world, against the UN, against the IAEA etc. at some point, you have to push back or become the victem.

Last edited by Pleasurepays; 01-04-2007 at 12:05 PM..
Pleasurepays is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:06 PM   #70
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dollarmansteve View Post
I am very familiar with the history of American/Iranian relations - how does that fit into the argument you are trying to present? Subtlety will do nothing to keep the conversation going.
Well, do you seriously think that Iran felt the same way about the US before Operation Ajax as they do now, or do you think that the US's meddling may have created a little bit of tension?
Do you really think that if the US had used Operation Ajax with the best intentions of the Iranian people, instead of their own best intentions, that maybe things might be a tad different now?

Or are they just evil and would want hate Americans just the same?
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:10 PM   #71
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays View Post
its easy to criticise taking action... i submit however, that you are definately less informed and less qualified to determine a proper course of action, than anyone actually making the decisions.
And yet I knew there were no WMD's... funny that huh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays View Post
the whole "you push and they push back" argument is weak. they have been pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing against the entire world, against the UN, against the IAEA etc. at some point, you have to push back or become the victem.
Again, I wonder why that is... hmm... maybe because the Iranian's primary source of income in the 1940's and 50's was carpets and not oil? That could be because they've never held ownership of something within their own country.
Or are they just bitter because they have a lot of sand?
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:13 PM   #72
StuartD
Sofa King Band
 
StuartD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outside the box
Posts: 29,903
Anyway, you guys keep going on and on about how you should do more, and then gripe that they get upset about it and retaliate, forcing you to do yet more than you did last time.

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

Keep on believing what you will. Go kill the bad guys who hate you just because they're the bad guys.

Good luck with all that. I'm outta this pointless thread.
StuartD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:15 PM   #73
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
Well, do you seriously think that Iran felt the same way about the US before Operation Ajax as they do now, or do you think that the US's meddling may have created a little bit of tension?
Do you really think that if the US had used Operation Ajax with the best intentions of the Iranian people, instead of their own best intentions, that maybe things might be a tad different now?

Or are they just evil and would want hate Americans just the same?
All irrelevant. Governments must act in the rationaly in the presentl to protect their national interest with the future in mind. Decisions made by past administrations in different geo-political times should not cloud the judgement of the present and the future. In fact, it would be a grave error. Do not misconstrue my statement to mean that administrations should not learn from history,

If the US were to follow your way of thinking:

a) Japan would still be a third world country desperately trying to fire some nukes at the US for screwing them over in WWII
b) Germany would be PISSED
c) The US would allow a crazy idiot to run around the middle east with nukes blowing up jews at will cause they 'feel bad' about 'messing with them' oh so many times in the past.
d) Russia would still be bitter
e) Central america? dont even go there!

It's the same as the Isreali/Palistinian situation. We can sit here and talk about how Britain was 'wrong' and the UN was 'wrong' and that the land that is now Israel never should have been split up the way it was and blah blah blah.

But that's just a gigantic waste of time and it disounts the present reality and solutiuons that will lead to a better future in favour of a distorted 'hind-sight-is-20/20 "I told you so"' past.
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:16 PM   #74
AssPirate
Confirmed User
 
AssPirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays View Post
Hahahah! I was thinking the same thing. Where the hell are the Terminators? Where's Sarah Connor when you need her?
__________________
AssPirate is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:19 PM   #75
Pleasurepays
BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I live in a pile of boogers
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
blah blah wmd's blah blah - i have no argument and basically am just expressing my own anxiety about possible escalatoins on the issue... but readily admit through my evasive remarks and feable attempts to redirect the conversation that i have nothing of substance to say... and certainly have no solutions or better ideas because the fact of the matter is that its a complicated situation and diplomacy in resolving the issue has been failing for 2 decades
your solution so far seems to be "do nothing and all will be ok" - good luck with that hippy!

its easy to criticise whats being done. but the funny reality about the situation is that you can't offer any other solution.
Pleasurepays is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:28 PM   #76
Webby
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Far far away - as possible
Posts: 14,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuartD View Post
People forget the past way to easily and way to quickly.
Think we prob have been down this avenue before which other areas designated "terrorist". It happens all the time on varying scales - ie the IRA activity in the UK et al... Stuff people under pressure or oppression and they will react and prob result can be what is simplfied into a category known as "terrorism". People don't wake up on a Monday morning and decide to blow stuff up

On a global scale... often the oppression or aggression is over greed - the desire to possess land, oil or establish a sphere of influence to further abuse/rape natural resources. The old British Empire among others, was the same - now it's the new kid on the block who wants to be the predator and, sadly, has not got wiser thru history.

The US has over time fucked so many countries now - from Latin/South America, Asia and now the Middle East. The Latin America area has seen "quiet wars" with some very shitty conduct (killings, torture, assassination of democratically elected leaders, drugs trading - while kids in the US got locked up for trading drugs).

The "modern way" is now attempting to establish trading treaties (kinda like the Mafia having accountants and establishing banks from laundered money) - but there is a caution in dealing with predators in a fair number of countries who experienced the worse side of the "values" of the US. Their familes were wiped out by killers and torturers trained by the US - It will take many decades to get that trust back. It's surprising there were never more attacks on the US long before 9/11.


PS Suppose further evidence of a predator is in the size/security of their embassies - do a quick survey of US embassies in other nations and these will be bunkers with max security - while in other embassies, ya can have a drink with the Ambassador at the poolside - without guards.
__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.

Last edited by Webby; 01-04-2007 at 12:29 PM..
Webby is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:39 PM   #77
bdld
$100,000
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 11,452
people have been saying that ever since the end of WWII.
bdld is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:39 PM   #78
polish_aristocrat
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 40,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays View Post

the whole "you push and they push back" argument is weak. they have been pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing against the entire world, against the UN, against the IAEA etc. at some point, you have to push back or become the victem.
well, but they (Muslims, Iran etc - you name it) say the same about America, some things are just relative

A kid is getting bad grades at school so parents force him to study instead of playing some sport. In their mind they are doing the right thing, but if the child really loves that sport, it will definitely get him mad/frustrated/angry/disappointed.

Perhaps not the best analogy but it shows that everything depends on the point of view. Often there's no right or wrong, and remember, history is written by those who win wars and currently rule the world.

Sure, since we are a part of the western Civilisation and not the Arab World, we should rather take the position of the US and not Iran in this case. But still, if America always acts superior, as the only world power, which knows everything best, and in eyes of other nations - they act very selfish and often in a hypocritical way - it is obvious that some part of the world gets frustrated with it and they show some resistance.

Surely if America suddenly changes their politics/attitude 180%, they will still have many enemies and will still be a target for an attack for many years to come. But unlike DollarManSteve said, personally I think that each action / decision of the US can surely add to the fuel. Each war will kill tens of thousands of innocent people, but at the same time it will create thousands more terrorists than we already have.

So to sum up, there are really no easy answers and solutions when it comes to international policits, power, culture and religion.... and definitely there's no "black and white" as George Bush wants to portrait it. Yes, the Muslims also see it as "black and white" but if you assume that you're better or smarter than them, then you should also act more wisely. You obviously can't nuke all of them even if you wanted, and at the same time, enforcing democracy is also not an option as the Iraq case recently proved.

We can safely assume that the Muslims will change and become more "civilized" in future, but it will definitely be a slow process, taking decades or centuries. How many wars do you want to start until then?
__________________
I don't use ICQ anymore.
polish_aristocrat is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 12:46 PM   #79
directfiesta
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
directfiesta's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 29,679
USA Foreign policy is ... foreign to themselves
__________________
I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !

But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....
directfiesta is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 01:05 PM   #80
4Man
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,830
USA is going to start it!!!
4Man is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 01:08 PM   #81
aico
Moo Moo Cow
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 14,748
According to Al Gore, we're all fucked anyway.
aico is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 01:27 PM   #82
Pleasurepays
BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I live in a pile of boogers
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat View Post
well, but they (Muslims, Iran etc - you name it) say the same about America, some things are just relative
of course.

Quote:
We can safely assume that the Muslims will change and become more "civilized" in future, but it will definitely be a slow process, taking decades or centuries. How many wars do you want to start until then?
again... that has nothing to do with the reality on the ground...today. its today that is the issue. not "what might be" in 30 years or 100 years.

i am not for war or beating the war drums or anything like that. i was simply pointing out that the problem is real... its there. its been there. there has been massive efforts to engage them politically with them simply telling the world to fuck off.

either someone has to propose a better solution than "ignore them and maybe they will go away", or get them to engage in diplomacy and work towards a solution... or accept whatever happens as the result of innaction or failure to keep things on a better course. hating the USA or making disparaging remarks about the USA, pointing out no WMD's were found or whatever, does not address the reality in Iran and the threat they present.

i think that the general pattern of blaming the USA 100% for anything and everything is just a short sighted and easy answer and a distraction from the complicated truths that exist that have no easy answers.
Pleasurepays is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 01:40 PM   #83
corvette
Confirmed User
 
corvette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: scottsdale
Posts: 7,880
great posts dollarmansteve
__________________
If you need a good company for check writing services, then check out checkissuing, and for webhosting, check out Phoenix NAP
corvette is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 02:00 PM   #84
directfiesta
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
directfiesta's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 29,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dollarmansteve View Post
All irrelevant. Governments must act in the rationaly in the presentl to protect their national interest with the future in mind. Decisions made by past administrations in different geo-political times should not cloud the judgement of the present and the future. In fact, it would be a grave error. Do not misconstrue my statement to mean that administrations should not learn from history,

If the US were to follow your way of thinking:

a) Japan would still be a third world country desperately trying to fire some nukes at the US for screwing them over in WWII
b) Germany would be PISSED
c) The US would allow a crazy idiot to run around the middle east with nukes blowing up jews at will cause they 'feel bad' about 'messing with them' oh so many times in the past.
d) Russia would still be bitter
e) Central america? dont even go there!

It's the same as the Isreali/Palistinian situation. We can sit here and talk about how Britain was 'wrong' and the UN was 'wrong' and that the land that is now Israel never should have been split up the way it was and blah blah blah.

But that's just a gigantic waste of time and it disounts the present reality and solutiuons that will lead to a better future in favour of a distorted 'hind-sight-is-20/20 "I told you so"' past.
and Khadafi would still be a bad person ( now he is a good one ..).

Sad analysis but quite valid.

So maybe if this administration would open up to talk to Iran ( instead of the cowboy approach), maybe something could come out of it, like for the above examples.
__________________
I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !

But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....
directfiesta is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 02:01 PM   #85
AdultDeals
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 70
Last I saw from that report they had other reasons but it was also a 'threat' to Iran, for whatever that is worth.
AdultDeals is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 02:09 PM   #86
TheShaft
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 248
Well said Matt

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt 26z View Post
You've got to have more than one major country involved for it to be considered WW3. A few terrorist attacks here and there don't lead to world war anyway.

WW3 is where China and Russia get together and attempt to take down the US. When WW3 finally does break out, this "war on terror" bullshit will seem like we were just swatting flies.
TheShaft is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 02:17 PM   #87
Dollarmansteve
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: T.O.
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by corvette View Post
great posts dollarmansteve
thank you - its nice to know people notice (and that im not just talk to myself )
__________________
I died.
Dollarmansteve is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 02:22 PM   #88
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude
Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn
 
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 38,323
BEWARE of teh mad cows...



ADG Webmaster
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 03:05 PM   #89
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude
Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn
 
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 38,323
Blame Bush for eliminating the buffer between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and aiding in the creation of another radical Islamic nation in the Middle East.

Quote:
Posted Thursday, Jan. 04, 2007

The cat is out of the bag. Thanks to images from a cell phone, we now know that the Iraqi National Police unit we turned Saddam over to was in fact a Shi'a lynch mob. Saddam's hangmen made no effort to hide their allegiance, taunting the deposed Iraqi leader with the name of radical Shi'ite cleric and power broker Muqtada al-Sadr. Afterwards, they danced around Saddam's corpse.

Saddam didn't hide what he thought about them either. At one point, he called them "Persians" ? in other words, traitors ? and his choice of insult was very revealing. Like Saddam, most Iraqi Sunnis view Sadr as all but a paid-up Iranian agent, and his militia, the Mahdi Army, as an Iranian creation.The Sunnis are convinced that one day, given the opportunity, Sadr will hand Iraq over to Iran. For all the shock Iraq's Sunnis felt on hearing Sadr's name shouted at Saddam's execution, Iranian diplomats might as well have been in attendance.

Just as consequential, for Sunnis and anyone else who knows Iraqi history, Saddam's executioners shouted the name of Ayatollah Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, Muqtada's father-in-law. Ayatollah Sadr, whom Saddam executed in 1980, is perhaps as responsible as Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini for modern, resurgent Shi'a Islam. Sadr founded the Da'wa Party, a violent, secretive organization committed to the creation of an Iraqi Shi'a Islamic republic ? and today a political party that counts none other than Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as a member.

In 1979, Sadr and the Da'wa took the side of the Iranian revolution, sparking demonstrations and unrest across Iraq. After Sadr's Da'wa attempted to assassinate Hussein's longtime foreign minister Tariq Aziz on April 1, 1980, Saddam, in fairly quick succession, executed Sadr and invaded Iran. Saddam was convinced that unless he pre-empted Sadr ? in other words, Iran ? he would end up on the gallows. Two years later, in Dujail, the Da'wa did try to assassinate Saddam. Saddam's brutal retribution against Dujail is what got him hanged last Saturday.

The West had its own bloody experience with Sadr's Da'wa. In December 1983, Da'wa attacked the American and French embassies in Kuwait. The Da'wa was the core around which Iran created Lebanon's Hizballah, another violent Shi'a group that went on to kidnap scores of foreigners and hijack half a dozen airplanes during the '80s ? long before it also became a political player in Lebanon.

Only time will tell us what Sadr intends do with Iraq if he ever does take over. But the Sunnis today will tell you they don't need to wait. On Saturday, they saw all the evidence they needed: the symbolism of executing Saddam on the Muslim High Holiday of Id al-Adha as a gift to the Shi'a, and and the decision of Maliki to get special approval from Iraq's senior Shi'a clerics, the "marja'iya," to carry out the execution on that day.

No one is ever going to take a poll, but it's safe to say that most Sunnis fear that Ayatollah Sadr's dream of an Iraqi Shi'a Islamic republic has already come true.

-----

Editorial by Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East
ADG Webmaster
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 03:30 PM   #90
Vendzilla
Biker Gnome
 
Vendzilla's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: cell#324
Posts: 23,200
that's why they build these bad boys! http://www.csp.navy.mil/usshawaii/va72-1.jpg
__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that
Vendzilla is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 03:37 PM   #91
BogY_KinG
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,870
Like in the World of warcraft
BogY_KinG is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 05:04 PM   #92
Lazonby
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendzilla View Post
that's why they build these bad boys! http://www.csp.navy.mil/usshawaii/va72-1.jpg
Sweet. I can't help thinking that it would be better in the long run to just outlaw belief in such ideologies against which we'll need to use these weapon systems anyway.

If only someone would have the balls to decree that anyone who believes in the jihad ideology can be shot on sight.
Lazonby is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 05:41 PM   #93
Pleasurepays
BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: I live in a pile of boogers
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by directfiesta View Post
and Khadafi would still be a bad person ( now he is a good one ..).

Sad analysis but quite valid.

So maybe if this administration would open up to talk to Iran ( instead of the cowboy approach), maybe something could come out of it, like for the above examples.
no one has EVER said Khadafi was a "good person" or a friend of any western country. he is a known terrorist and known supporter of terrorism who made significant strides after a couple decades of sanctions to reverse his policies, admit to what he did as well as other concesions. what was a better solution? overthrow him?

if Iran wanted to talk to ANYONE... they would be talking to the UN and every country that has tried to talk to them rather than telling them to fuck off.

Iran isn't a problem of the US or the Bush administration. The UN and most of the countries weren't condemning their behavior because the world cares about the relationship between two ignorant lunatics. There is a problem in Iran and short of condemning their behavior... no one wants to take action. Just like Rwanda. It was never called what it was (genocide) by the UN because it would have required them to take action. Meanwhile 2 million people died. How many more times does that shit have to repeat itself before the rest of the world starts taking a proactive stance in either bringing people to the table or shutting them down?

The funny thing about this discussion is this... your choices are;

1) bash the USA and ignore the history and facts
2) enjoy a world with an unstable, radical islamic state with Nuclear weapons
3) get in the game and do something about it either through diplomacy or any other means.

Everyone likes "1" because its easy, its fun and it draws attention away from a very difficult issue with no good solutions. its simply popular and the easy way out.

meanwhile... Iran is still on course. Threatening world war 3 and trying to get the bomb. But yeah... blame the US... because ONLY the US can get involved and bring them to the table and talk. No other country on the planet has that power i guess. I mean thats what everyone is basically saying right? The US is the problem, Iran... known supporters of terrorism, ran by radical fundamentalists and determined to wipe Isreal off the map.... can't possibly be accountable for their own behavior. Someone "makes them" do those things.
Pleasurepays is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2007, 07:47 PM   #94
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude
Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn
 
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 38,323
Wouldn't it have made more sense for the Bush Administration to have focused the war on terror on capturing/killing Bin Laden and destroying al Qaeda, which was mostly holed up in Afghanistan, instead of attacking Iraq, creating a new haven for al Qaeda, and turning the country into a new ally for Iran?

Had Bush done so, instead of piling lie, upon blunder, upon lie, then he would have had an easier time rallying U.S. and world public opinion on stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, which is a much greater threat than Saddam's non-existent/weak WMD program.

Bush has helped Iran take control of Iraq through surrogates, something they couldn't do as a result of the Iran-Iraq war, and he has made the region and the would less safe as a result.

Now that the President's party has lost control of the House and Senate, largely due to widespread dissatisfaction for their handling of issues in the Middle East, he will be hard pressed to build a consensus for attacking Iran.

Should the Democrats succeed in retaking the White House in 2008, while strengthing their thin hold on Congress, that would be the best hope for the U.S. to try a fresh approach with the Middle East and the world.

It might still end with us confronting Iran, but I believe it would have a better chance for success, with greater domestic and international support (especially if sufficient effort is made to resolve issues diplomatically), than creating some cooked up artificial trigger, which seems to be Bush's only option at this time.

ADG Webmaster
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Post New Thread Reply
Go Back   GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum > >

Bookmarks



Advertising inquiries - marketing at gfy dot com

Contact Admin - Advertise - GFY Rules - Top

©2000-, AI Media Network Inc



Powered by vBulletin
Copyright © 2000- Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.