Israel vs Hezbollah; Turkey vs. PKK

[clevin]

Hezbollah kidnaped 2 Israel soldiers, killed 1,
Israel bombed Lebanon for more than a month,
US said "Israel has the right to protect itself"

PKK kidnaped 8 turkish soldiers, killed 12
US say "sorry mate."

Where is justice?

[Agathon]

Hezbollah kidnaped 2 Israel soldiers, killed 1,
Israel bombed Lebanon for more than a month,
US said "Israel has the right to protect itself"

PKK kidnaped 8 turkish soldiers, killed 12
US say "sorry mate."

Where is justice?

The same place it usually is: miles away from any government. ;)

It's always been difficult for thinking people to take government pronouncements seriously, now it's impossible.

All they have left is audacity. The problem is that this seems more than sufficient.

[PlaceofDis]

the question shouldn't be: where is the justice?
the question is: why is the US involved at all. we are not the world's police.

[Agathon]

the question shouldn't be: where is the justice?
the question is: why is the US involved at all. we are not the world's police.

Because retaining your standard of living requires military domination of other countries? :rolleyes:

[Swarmlord]

Hezbollah kidnaped 2 Israel soldiers, killed 1,
Israel bombed Lebanon for more than a month,
US said "Israel has the right to protect itself"

PKK kidnaped 8 turkish soldiers, killed 12
US say "sorry mate."

Where is justice?

So, you expect the US to mobilize our military to attack the PKK? How about Turkey has the right to protect itself?

And by the way, when did our government start speaking in British English?

[Ugg]

And by the way, when did our government start speaking in British English?

It always has.

[Swarmlord]

It always has.

Mate? I thought I was reading a script from the Benny Hill Show or something.

Refer to some guy as your "mate" here in the states sometime and see how long it takes to get punched in the nose. :)

[PlaceofDis]

Mate? I thought I was reading a script from the Benny Hill Show or something.

Refer to some guy as your "mate" here in the states sometime and see how long it takes to get punched in the nose. :)

um, i have used the word before. no surprises. don't see why it would be.

[skunk]

um, i have used the word before. no surprises. don't see why it would be.Any diversion will do when there's a question to be sidestepped.
So, you expect the US to mobilize our military to attack the PKK?Did anyone suggest that at any point? He was pointing out the different standards being applied.

[Swarmlord]

Any diversion will do when there's a question to be sidestepped.

I answered the question before making my language observation. What about my question? Who's sidestepping?

I'll remember your response the next time you go picking nits between the words in my sentences in future threads.

[skunk]

I answered the question before making my language observation. What about my question? Who's sidestepping?I believe Turkey has every right to defend itself. You have not answered except with another question.

[Swarmlord]

I believe Turkey has every right to defend itself. You have not answered except with another question.

Then we're of similar minds on this, mate! :)

[Ugg]

Mate? I thought I was reading a script from the Benny Hill Show or something.

Refer to some guy as your "mate" here in the states sometime and see how long it takes to get punched in the nose. :)

You must come from a backward and paranoid corner of the US. Have you and your ilk ever considered secession?


By the way, US policies have only furthered the PKK's aims and fanned the flames in the middle east. Seems pretty cowardly to back off when a little US pressure on the Iraqi kurds is all it would take. I guess that's what happens when you and your mates elect a chickenhawk for a president!

[Iscariot]

I guess that's what happens when you and your mates elect a chickenhawk for a president!

Chickenhawk. G'damn if that doesn't sound like it'd grill up nice and tender.

Topically, I'm surprised we're not hearing more about this in the media. With the parallels to the Isreal/Palestine conflict, the scale of the terrorism involved and the effects it could have on regional stability, I would have expected this would have been a hot topic as early as the staging of the coalition invasion. (Not to mention the widespread involvement of children in the conflict).

[Swarmlord]

You must come from a backward and paranoid corner of the US. Have you and your ilk ever considered secession? Yeah. We did from England a couple hundred years ago. Although not well documented, it was primarily due to the Brits use of words like mate for buddy and fag for cigarette that caused us to declare our independence. :rolleyes:


By the way, US policies have only furthered the PKK's aims and fanned the flames in the middle east. Seems pretty cowardly to back off when a little US pressure on the Iraqi kurds is all it would take. I guess that's what happens when you and your mates elect a chickenhawk for a president! Well, fortunately, we have the democrats applying pressure to a now defunct Ottoman empire instead. Hope it works out for them. I'm waiting for the resolution for Atta Turk's body to be exhumed and shot for crimes against Armenia any day now.

By the way, does Hillary not serving in the military make her a chickenhawk too? What branch of the service was Obama in? Just wondering if the rules still apply to the other side.

[solvs]

Yeah. We did from England a couple hundred years ago. Although not well documented, it was primarily due to the Brits use of words like mate for buddy and fag for cigarette that caused us to declare our independence.
I thought it was because they didn't want the King being able to do whatever he wanted.

Well, fortunately, we have the democrats applying pressure to a now defunct Ottoman empire instead.
To prove what a weakened position we've been put into thanks to the people you still support.

By the way, does Hillary not serving in the military make her a chickenhawk too? What branch of the service was Obama in? Just wondering if the rules still apply to the other side.
Uh, no because they're against the war.

Theoretically.

[Swarmlord]

<snip>
Uh, no because they're against the war.

Theoretically.

And so the hair splitting begins. I'm theoretically against war too. :)

[solvs]

I'm theoretically against war too. :)

I meant because they're against the war, but haven't really done much to try and stop it. Still doesn't make them chickenhawks because they aren't supporting the war. Her early support was more of a bandwagoning. If they support the Iran attack, despite our lack of resources, then yes, they would be chickenhawks.

Since when are you even theoretically against the war though? You're one of the few left who still supports it. And if you've never served yourself, well we know what hair that splits.

[Swarmlord]

<snip>

Since when are you even theoretically against the war though? You're one of the few left who still supports it. And if you've never served yourself, well we know what hair that splits.

I didn't say I was theoretically against "the" war, I said I was theoretically against war in general. It's a shame the human race resorts to it, but that's the way it is.

We'll soon see whether the libs label Hillary a chickenhawk since she hasn't served in the military either. In fact, some in this forum has suggested or implied that during war time that might/should make the person ineligible to be president.

[hulugu]

I didn't say I was theoretically against "the" war, I said I was theoretically against war in general. It's a shame the human race resorts to it, but that's the way it is.

We'll soon see whether the libs label Hillary a chickenhawk since she hasn't served in the military either. In fact, some in this forum has suggested or implied that during war time that might/should make the person ineligible to be president.

I don't think that was the overall suggestion, rather it was impatience with a number of political operatives who made great noise about the necessity of sacrifice and military service and yet deferred the draft at every opportunity. That person is, in my opinion, a chicken hawk.

[solvs]

I didn't say I was theoretically against "the" war, I said I was theoretically against war in general.
Except for this war, which you seem to be very much for.

We'll soon see whether the libs label Hillary a chickenhawk since she hasn't served in the military either.
I don't know where you've been, but most of the libs here don't like Hillary. But if she starts a war for dubious reasons, then continues it despite little or no progress, despite avoiding service herself, then you probably will. Since she doesn't exactly seem like a war monger right now, you probably won't.

Once again, somehow this is all about Hillary though, even though it isn't. :rolleyes:

In fact, some in this forum has suggested or implied that during war time that might/should make the person ineligible to be president.
Who?

[skunk]

It's a shame the human race resorts to it, but that's the way it is.It's a shame some people here see war, like capital punishment, as a solution.

In fact, some in this forum has suggested or implied that during war time that might/should make the person ineligible to be president.I think you'll find that the suggestion was that the same person elected to be President might not be best qualified to lead the armed forces. But rewrite it as you will.