Cause countries that invest into colonies or foreighn lands don't usually do well in the long run

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 1:22 AM. Reason : 0]

2/23/2006 1:01:54 AM

i say we nationalize their oil fields and build some big ass walls

2/23/2006 1:02:50 AM

that is the only thing that i can think of

2/23/2006 1:22:56 AM

The sun never goes down on the U.S Empire. Oh wait...

2/23/2006 1:30:54 AM

colonialism n. - exploitation by a stronger country of a weaker one; the use of the weaker country's resources to strengthen and enrich the stronger country.


The Iraq War n. - exploitation by The United States of America of Iraq; the use of the Iraq's resources to strengthen and enrich The United States of America.


Yeah, it seems like a pretty good fit to me.....

2/23/2006 1:36:07 AM

How are we being strengthened and enriched by iraq?

2/23/2006 1:38:47 AM

^

2/23/2006 1:40:57 AM

sweet, I'ma move to Iraq and start a plantation!

2/23/2006 1:59:29 AM

^ aha I was gonna say it isn't really a colony until you got niggas farming shit up in there.

2/23/2006 2:10:11 AM

Quote :

"i say we nationalize their oil fields and build some big ass walls"

without a doubt the coolest thing jonhguth has ever posted

2/23/2006 3:16:22 AM

Quote :

"exploitation by The United States of America of Iraq; the use of the Iraq's resources to strengthen and enrich The United States of America."

really? I know that must sound good after a few bongs, but do you mind actually reviewing the overall flow of resources between Iraq and the US?

2/23/2006 8:08:05 AM

well

let's see

we imposed economic sanctions on them in 1990

sanctions under which half a million kids starved to death

how's that for a basis for trade

2/23/2006 8:31:31 AM

if those kids werent out killing kurds it wouldnt have been an issue.

2/23/2006 9:02:57 AM

never heard of a five-year-old iraqi killing anybody

2/23/2006 9:27:50 AM

you ever been to iraq!!?!?!?!?!?!?

2/23/2006 9:29:59 AM

Quote :

"The Iraq War n. - exploitation by The United States of America of Iraq; the use of the Iraq's resources to strengthen and enrich The United States of America."

Because Iraq gave the U.S. billions last year.

2/23/2006 9:31:20 AM

^ I hope all of that money is going towards the deficit. About time, too.

2/23/2006 10:00:01 AM

Quote :

"you ever been to iraq!!?!?!?!?!?!?"

Have you seen a five year old iraqi kill anyone?

2/23/2006 10:13:02 AM

....it is too paintful to talk about...even to santa.

2/23/2006 10:13:59 AM

HOOKAAAAY

2/23/2006 10:17:39 AM

Quote :

"we imposed economic sanctions on them in 1990 sanctions under which half a million kids starved to death"

at any time, saddam could have complied, the sanctions would have been lifted, and those kids would have lived.

but i guess you have a magic solution that will solve these intractable diplomatic crises without the use of sanctions, without the use of military force, without the use of pretty much anything beyond smiles and hugs, because heaven forbid - the dictator might continue policies that result in some kids deaths if we look at him the wrong way.

hey you know what, lets divide our nuclear stockpiles and parcel them out to north korea, iran, and syria... just to keep them happy and maybe then they won't continue their programs of economic oppression to their own populations.

Because if you're gonna hold the US responsible for "sins of commission" (sanctions) which dictators ignored to kill people, then hey why stop there - might as well hold us responsible for "sins of ommission" (we're not supplying them with nukes) because if the dictators were happier and had more bombs and stuff then surely they would be nicer to their populations right and then we could all sleep easier knowing that we'd done everything we could do to keep that syrian kid's belly full of food.

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 11:08 AM. Reason : s]

2/23/2006 10:58:17 AM

iraq needs to remember the reason for the season is pleasin'

they need to get with the program

2/23/2006 11:37:50 AM

Holy fuck, I knew Excoriator was stupid, but DEFENDING SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAQ? WHAT THE FUCK?

Quote :

"at any time, saddam could have complied, the sanctions would have been lifted, and those kids would have lived."

So you're saying it's entirely reasonable to entrust the lives of millions of Iraqi children to Saddam fucking Hussein?

Let me ask you this:
1) Do you think Saddam ever went hungry?
2) Do you think he gave a shit whether his citizen's went hungry?

2/23/2006 11:40:49 AM

Neo-Colonialism

new policies of oppression
same great taste!

mmmm mmmm good

2/23/2006 11:46:39 AM

how long did it take india to become profitable for the british?

2/23/2006 11:51:34 AM

Quote :

"Is Iraq sort of like our colony now?"

yes

2/23/2006 11:52:16 AM

absolutely maybe

2/23/2006 12:07:22 PM

Quote :

"So you're saying it's entirely reasonable to entrust the lives of millions of Iraqi children to Saddam fucking Hussein?"

The Iraqi's seemed to think it was a good idea.

Nevertheless, I'm always curious, what was the alternative to sanctions? (I fergot)

2/23/2006 12:43:55 PM

Quote :

"DEFENDING SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAQ? WHAT THE FUCK?"

Yeah, what is the alternative you think we should have run with? It's reasonable enough to say we can't bomb or invade them. Now we can't even choose not to sell him stuff? What's next, we can't talk mean to him or it will hurt someone's feelings?

2/23/2006 12:49:05 PM

I'm not talking about not selling him stuff.

I am talking about shit like banning the importation of eggs into Iraq. That did nothing but starve the poorest people in Iraq. Do you think Saddam couldn't get a damn McMuffin if he wanted one?

I'm not saying I have a better solution. I'm saying it's fucking gutter to punish a bunch of random ass people because their bodies happen to be in the zone of crazy dictator #7.

2/23/2006 1:08:30 PM

the iraq war is a half baked idea to substantially project US power into the middle east

and when i say half baked, i mean it's like someone thought about war, and then thought about war ON WEED

2/23/2006 1:11:21 PM

RED TEAM GO, RED TEAM GO

2/23/2006 1:13:05 PM

Quote :

"countries that invest into colonies or foreighn lands don't usually do well in the long run "

tell it to the Brits

2/23/2006 1:27:15 PM

THEY'LL GET THEIRS EVENTUALLY OK

RIGHT NOW THEY'RE CONTENT BEING OUR LAPDOG

WAIT

I THINK THAT IS "THEIRS"

>.<

2/23/2006 1:32:02 PM

Quote :

"at any time, saddam could have complied, the sanctions would have been lifted, and those kids would have lived."

Yeah, but he didn't, so we just killed a half million kids, and as if that isn't bad on it's own, we have exactly NOTHING to show for it.

Your logic is the logic of a hostage taking terrorist. "At any time, they could have released our comrades from prison and given us the $100 million we demanded, but they didn't, so it's not our fault we had to kill everyone on the plane."

Quote :

"I'm saying it's fucking gutter to punish a bunch of random ass people because their bodies happen to be in the zone of crazy dictator #7."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

2/23/2006 2:05:02 PM

Quote :

"Your logic is the logic of a hostage taking terrorist"

yes, in the same sense that imprisoning a burglar can be compared to kidnapping elizabeth smart

Quote :

"Couldn't have said it better myself."

its quite easy to stick your elitist nose into the air and oppose something. why don't you break from the liberal mindset, and COME UP WITH A WORKABLE ALTERNATIVE. otherwise stfu.

I mean, seriously, you guys are the liberals. Do I have to spoonfeed your argument to you? Fine, whatever. The trendy liberal response to my question is that targeting sanctions against the leaders of the nation will work. Don't allow them to travel, etc.

k u can latch on now.

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 2:36 PM. Reason : s]

2/23/2006 2:32:40 PM

Quote :

"yes, in the same sense that imprisoning a burglar is the same as kidnapping elizabeth smart"

Unless those 500,000 kids were stealing your shit, no you're wrong, it's exactly analogous. Like a hostage taking terrorist, you believe it's alright to kill as many innocents as it takes to force someone else to give in to your demands.

Personally, I don't care how reasonable your demands are, or how evil the third party is, none of that gives you any right to kill innocent children.

2/23/2006 2:39:36 PM

Quote :

"I don't care how reasonable your demands are, or how evil the third party is, none of that gives you any right to kill innocent children."

that's cool, now come up with a workable alternative.

2/23/2006 2:44:20 PM

Quote :

"its quite easy to stick your elitist nose into the air and oppose something. why don't you break from the liberal mindset, and COME UP WITH A WORKABLE ALTERNATIVE. otherwise stfu."

Well, given what was known at the time I suspect sanctions were the best bet.

However, hindsight being 20/20, given the knowledge that Sadam was never going to rellent, we should have invaded in 1991 and removed him from power at that time.

The international coalition at that time (Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc) could have helped us transition the government to something else (perhaps the Iraqi King is exile?) Either way, the world would be a much better place if Sadam had been taken down during the first gulf war.

Hell, 9/11 may never have happened. Who's to say what the outcome of a favorable conclusion would have been?

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 2:56 PM. Reason : ,.,]

2/23/2006 2:55:33 PM

edit

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 2:56 PM. Reason : s]

2/23/2006 2:56:29 PM

^^^ Have you ever considered the possibility that shitty dictators half-way around the world aren't our fucking responsibility to deal with?

Here's a working alternative, mind our own fucking business, and our business is business. We should maintain frendly relations with other countries and open our borders to trade, but when it comes to reforming the less enlightened portions of the globe, our most useful function is as an example, not a club-weilding enforcer of western values.

2/23/2006 3:00:55 PM

Quote :

"Have you ever considered the possibility that shitty dictators half-way around the world aren't our fucking responsibility to deal with? Here's a working alternative, mind our own fucking business"

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA i should have known

ok there's no point discussing this with you. our worldviews are irreconcilable

2/23/2006 3:03:21 PM

"mind our own fucking business" is the naive foreign policy of a 5 year old.

2/23/2006 3:05:24 PM

Yeah, 'cause minding everyone else's business is working out great.

And I'm sure our founding fathers would appreciate being called "naive 5 year olds."

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 3:06 PM. Reason : ']

2/23/2006 3:05:59 PM

Isolationism worked!

2/23/2006 3:06:33 PM

I keep hitting the hammer on my thumb so I will build this house by sitting under that tree over there.

Quote :

"Isolationism worked!"

yea it works pretty well for countries that are not super-powers.


[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 3:11 PM. Reason : s]

2/23/2006 3:07:05 PM

We weren't a superpower until we abandoned isolationism and embraced imperialism.

If we once again adopted an isolationist stance, we would no longer be a superpower. So, by your own admission, isolationism works pretty well.

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 3:17 PM. Reason : word usage]

2/23/2006 3:16:54 PM

Quote :

"And I'm sure our founding fathers would appreciate being called "naive 5 year olds.""

I'm pretty sure the founding fathers didn't know about ICBMs.

2/23/2006 3:17:46 PM

Quote :

"If we once again adopted an isolationist stance, we would no longer be a superpower. So, by your own admission, isolationism works pretty well."

well, like i said. our worldviews are irreconcilable. i don't want the US to lose its superpower status

2/23/2006 3:28:56 PM

Why the hell not? It's brought nothing but needless trouble and expense.

[Edited on February 23, 2006 at 3:32 PM. Reason : ']

2/23/2006 3:32:06 PM