If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
Powell used "genocide" in his description of what is happening in Sudan. If I remember right, during Clinton's presidency he decided that we would never ignore genocide again, even signed an executive order to that effect I think.
So, does Powell's use of "genocide" indicate that we are ready to go in ?
Sudanese official calls U.S. genocide accusation 'oil on the fire'
GILBERT DA COSTA, Associated Press Writer
Thursday, September 9, 2004
(09-09) 08:54 PDT ABUJA, Nigeria (AP) --
Secretary of State Colin Powell's declaration that genocide had taken place in western Sudan's Darfur only serves to heighten tensions, a top Sudanese official charged Thursday.
Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thursday in Washington that abuses by government-supported Arab militias in Sudan qualify as genocide against the black African population in the Darfur region -- a determination that should pressure the government to rein in the fighters.
"We don't think this kind of attitude can help the situation in Darfur," Sudanese Deputy Foreign Minister Najeeb Al-Khair Abdel-Wahab told The Associated Press. "We expect the international community to assist the process that is taking place in Abuja, and not put oil on the fire."
Abdel-Wahab spoke in Nigeria's capital, Abuja, scene of two weeks of peace talks between Sudan's government and rebels in the 19-month-old Darfur conflict.
You know the ones stretched so thin they are about to snap.
__________________ NEED GALLERY TEMPLATES? -AS LOW AS $50 PER GALLERY SPONSORS CONTACT ME FOR BULK AND LONG TERM DEALS contact info: eros@eroswebmaster.com | ICQ - 127027910 | VIEW MY PORTFOLIO
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
This is not a choice between war and peace, but rather fight or surrender.
Hopefully the world will wake up soon.
__________________
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Originally posted by grimm+Sep 9 2004, 12:01 PM-->
QUOTE (grimm @ Sep 9 2004, 12:01 PM)
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike AI@Sep 9 2004, 08:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by JR@Sep 9 2004, 11:27 AM
__________________
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Originally posted by Vick@Sep 9 2004, 09:22 AM I am an anti-Christ
I am an anarchist,
don't know what I want
but I know how to get it.
I wanna destroy the passer by
How many ways to get what you want
I use the best I use the rest
I use the enemy.
I use anarchy
Originally posted by Mike AI@Sep 9 2004, 12:18 PM Isolationism does not work in the modern world.
Not with weapons that can be easily trainsported by suitcase that could wipe out entire cities.
Not with balistic missles that can be launched from the middle east, or Korea and wipe out entire cities.
The US should not get involved with every ethnic or civil war, but a case can be drawn that what is happening in Suden is part of the Islamacists movement.
Grimm I am dissappointed in you. Where is your liberal compassion? is it because they are not white or speak english that its ok these people are slaughtered by islamicists?
As a Jew, can you not reflect upon the hollocost and see what evil human beings are capable of?
What amazes me about liberals is they refuse to raise a hand against those who slaughter millions of peple, but GOD HELP YOU IF YOU WANT TO CUT A REDWOOD tree down!!! They will go to the ends of the earth to save teh spotted owl.
Who cares about Sudanese Christians being slaughtered?? Or ethnic cleansing in the baltics?
Mikey, I think you're being a little disingenuous here.
I don't recall hearing any liberal opposition to possible involvement in ending the genocide in Sudan. Upon what do you base your assumption/conclusion that there is any? When did ethnic cleansing in the Balkans become a concern of the right? Remember the screeching from the right over that, and over George I's foray into Somalia?
Liberals have long held that the standards for intervention should include humanitarian concerns; both on an compassionate and on a practical level. Small ethnic conflicts have a tendency to spread, you know.
Second ... me wonders exactly how big a factor the fact that those committing the genocide are hiding behind Islam plays in your thinking that we should get involved. Me suspects that if it were Christians slaughtering Moslems you would be far less interested.
You wouldn't, by any chance, be re-thinking your opinion of Slobodan Milosevic, would you?
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
1. Who appointed the US responsible to policing the world
2. What in Sudan that can directly effect the US?
and most importantly
3. WHAT IS IT GOING TO COST? And WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
Being a Jew - I am fully aware of what we as humans can do, I'm also fully aware that greed, aphathy, and "ostrichaism" (keeping your head in the sand) is the biggest reasons why the Jews are just as responsible for what happened in Europe during the 30's and 40's...
So what happened in Afaganstan with the women, and what is happening in Sudan is the responsiblity of the people who are letting it happen, not as I see it is it the responsibilty of the people of the United States. I'm not saying its right, and I'm not saying that something shouldn't be done, but shouldn't that be an individual decision?
Now if it is put to a general vote - and the majority agrees absolutely.
Hey here is a concept, with the greater population having access to phones and/or computers, why not put it to a vote... Why do we need congress? Do you really trust your congressman's ablity to make the best decision on your behalf? Or is he/she making decisions based on his/her best behalf?
Okay I'm done for the moment - I'm tired of people complaining "oh poor me, they are picking on me, blah blah blah. Can the US come in and clean everything up, improve our technology, way of life, rebuild, restructure, for me and by way of thank you I'm going to burn effigies of your leaders and attack your citizens"
I say if they want us to stop it they can pay us!!!
Originally posted by PornoDoggy+Sep 9 2004, 01:46 PM-->
QUOTE (PornoDoggy @ Sep 9 2004, 01:46 PM)
__________________
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Originally posted by Azure Sales@Sep 9 2004, 02:06 PM I have a few very important questions to ask.....
1. Who appointed the US responsible to policing the world
2. What in Sudan that can directly effect the US?
and most importantly
3. WHAT IS IT GOING TO COST? And WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
Being a Jew - I am fully aware of what we as humans can do, I'm also fully aware that greed, aphathy, and "ostrichaism" (keeping your head in the sand) is the biggest reasons why the Jews are just as responsible for what happened in Europe during the 30's and 40's...
So what happened in Afaganstan with the women, and what is happening in Sudan is the responsiblity of the people who are letting it happen, not as I see it is it the responsibilty of the people of the United States. I'm not saying its right, and I'm not saying that something shouldn't be done, but shouldn't that be an individual decision?
Now if it is put to a general vote - and the majority agrees absolutely.
Hey here is a concept, with the greater population having access to phones and/or computers, why not put it to a vote... Why do we need congress? Do you really trust your congressman's ablity to make the best decision on your behalf? Or is he/she making decisions based on his/her best behalf?
Okay I'm done for the moment - I'm tired of people complaining "oh poor me, they are picking on me, blah blah blah. Can the US come in and clean everything up, improve our technology, way of life, rebuild, restructure, for me and by way of thank you I'm going to burn effigies of your leaders and attack your citizens"
I say if they want us to stop it they can pay us!!!
These are all good points. However this is not an isolated incident. This is not just a regional problem, this is tied to Islamicism that is spreading from the middle east.
The United States as the world only superpower, as the country that has continually led the fight against tyrany since WWII.
We have expended our blood and our fortune to make the world a safer place.
In the long run it does help us. By stabilizing countries, they can eventually become part of the global economy, which would help the US in the long run.
This is a war we will have to fight. It is a matter of choosing to fight now, or fight later. Handling this now is the best way, before it becomes a much larger costly war.
__________________
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Originally posted by Mike AI@Sep 9 2004, 02:10 PM Do you deny that if Bush sent troops to Sudan, and were engaged in combat that many liberals and democrats would be calling Bush a war monger - and use this as "evidence"
I am sure a few groups would pop up saying Cheney has ties to the Sudan, there is oil there, etc....
Democrats do not stand for anything anymore..... the vote for Kerry because he is not Bush angle is not going to work.
PD do you beleive in evil?? Do you think evil exists in this world?
First of all, I have no doubt that some Democrats would raise questions about why were were getting involved in Sudan, just as many Republicans have flip-flopped on the definition of American interests since one of theirs is in the White House.
But so the fuck what? How many fucking Republicans are SCREAMING about the six judicial nominees the Democrats refuse to pass on, when five years ago they were blocking DOZENS of judicial nominees themselves? How many Republicans are (now) justifying intervention in Iraq in terms that they categorically rejected when Clinton first proposed intervention in the Balkans?
Democrats and Republicans have many differences, but many of them share one thing in common - they are more than willing to flop when the other side flips. In spite of the screaming banshees on either side, no party has a monopoloy on hypocricy.
I find it hard to understand how you can launch an attack on the left based on the fact that politicians are going to act like politicians. I find your earlier references to the race of the victims even more puzzling - while I am sure there will be plenty of people who will raise questions about the need for red-blooded 'merikin tax dollars being spent to keep them from killin' each other, those folks can be characterized as leftists.
Yes, I believe in evil, and I think we have waited far too long to intervene. That being said, I don't give a fine flying fuck who the victims are, who the victims pray to, or anything else. I'm all for stopping the killing, but the fact that it is Christians being killed, or the fact that it is people hiding behind Islam doing the killing, is completely and totally irrelevent to me.
I repeat my questions - on what basis do you assume that the left, the Democrats, whatever demon you're railing agains this week, would oppose humanitarian intervention in Sudan?
Is your interest in this situation truly humanitarian, Mike? What's important here, Mike? Is it that people are dying? Is it that Christians are dying? Is it that Muslims are doing the killing?
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
This is a war we will have to fight. It is a matter of choosing to fight now, or fight later. Handling this now is the best way, before it becomes a much larger costly war.
That worked well in Vietnam and Iraq so far.....
How about this then - we'll come in fix it and then annex them. If we are a super power and they all want us to come in and spill our blood, sweat, tears and money they can damn well pay taxes too!!!
The UN will most likely support this, so it will not be the US alone. Also it can help improve the US image in the UN - yeah there is oil in Sudan, but everyone agrees there is a genocide going on (we are not talking WMD). Another thing Africa needs - just like the middle east - is democracy... I do not think Sudan will be a democracy, but if Sudan or parts of Sudan is put in control of the UN, because Sudan is "pissing" on the UN rules, then it might shake up the other african countries...
It should be easy to win a war in Sudan (or rather fight down anyone who do not like UN peacekeepers)... Sudan airforce would probably last 1 day, their heavy divisions also a few days, and their foot soldiers/patrols would have to do PR terror to make any real effect. There is no need to occupied the whole country - just need to create safe zones, and put soldiers from the african league between the safe zones and the rest of Sudan.
If the US or UN does nothing, then the problem does not go away... it will only get worse, and the risk is that it might spread to other countries in the region.
__________________ "Chaos is the law of nature, order is the dream of man."
~Henry B. Adams (Historian) 1838-1918
Agreed! However, that is what people are acusing the US of being - Isolationalists. "That we are going at things alone, blah blah." Whereas I view the fanatical Islamists as being the Isolationalists. So, I guess it is just what point of view you are looking at it from.
Originally posted by Jesse_DD@Sep 9 2004, 04:33 PM "Isolationism does not work in the modern world."
Agreed! However, that is what people are acusing the US of being - Isolationalists. "That we are going at things alone, blah blah." Whereas I view the fanatical Islamists as being the Isolationalists. So, I guess it is just what point of view you are looking at it from.
They are not isolationists. They are anti-globalization, anti-free markets, anti-democracy. Their stated goal is a united Islamicist state stretching from Indonesia to Europe ( including Spain).
__________________
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Mike, dumb question, but what makes the US alone the police man to the world? Shouldn't europeans, africans, asians, whoever also be upset about this situation? Is there a reason why the US should be way more worried than everyone else?
I suspect after Iraq, it is way harder for the US to go to the UN with a plan.
When does the draft get restarted? Y'all are going to need it if the US goes into any more countries to play god.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 9 2004, 05:41 PM When does the draft get restarted? Y'all are going to need it if the US goes into any more countries to play god.
Originally posted by Jesse_DD@Sep 9 2004, 04:38 PM Porndoggy,
I believe in generalizations! You know why? Because, for the most part, THEY ARE TRUE! There are a very small group of Jews, Christians, and dare I say Hindus, etc that go around killing large groups of people. Meanwhile, Fanatical Muslins have made it an art and everyday practice of it. Are you protecting a generalization against them?
I do not doubt that there are members of all religions who advocate cleansing the earth that [insert diety here] gave to them alone of the infidels who worship [insert other deity here]. In the immortal words of the Jefferson Airplane, that "doesn't mean shit to a tree."
While I can understand the appeal of simplicity, the problem with generalizations is that they fail to take into account way too much. One of the biggest problems we inflicted upon ourselves in the cold war is the "Bonanza" mentality - everybody is wearing white hats or black hats, and there is no in between. The fact that Islamic people are killing off others in the Sudan does not AUTOMATICALLY make this a part of some galactic "islamist" conspiracy, and that alone is no reason for us to get involved - nor, I might add, is the fact that the folks they are killing are Christian.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 9 2004, 04:41 PM Mike, dumb question, but what makes the US alone the police man to the world? Shouldn't europeans, africans, asians, whoever also be upset about this situation? Is there a reason why the US should be way more worried than everyone else?
I suspect after Iraq, it is way harder for the US to go to the UN with a plan.
When does the draft get restarted? Y'all are going to need it if the US goes into any more countries to play god.
Alex
No need for a draft right now ... the economy serves the same purpose.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 9 2004, 01:41 PM Mike, dumb question, but what makes the US alone the police man to the world? Shouldn't europeans, africans, asians, whoever also be upset about this situation? Is there a reason why the US should be way more worried than everyone else?
I suspect after Iraq, it is way harder for the US to go to the UN with a plan.
When does the draft get restarted? Y'all are going to need it if the US goes into any more countries to play god.
Alex
Alex, the answer to this is simple: because the US is the only country that can financially and militarily support such operations. There are a lot of countries that care about what is going on but can't even think about assisting unless the US is there in support.
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 9 2004, 04:55 PM One of the biggest problems we inflicted upon ourselves in the cold war is the "Bonanza" mentality - everybody is wearing white hats or black hats, and there is no in between.
Good thing the guys with the white hats won ;-)
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
RawAlex, I do not think US have a great desire to be "the worlds policeman", but because the US is a superpower, then everyone with a problem/conflict etc. want to involve the US on "their side", and if that is not possible, then having US on the opposite might be the next best thing to gain support from others. Ex. I think most islamists didnīt really care about the US lifestyle, when they needed the US to fight the communists, but once the communists were gone then they needed a new enemy to unit the islamists.
French President Chirac would probably not had been travling the world to "save iraq", if only a few EU countries with NO US soldiers wanted to invade... that would have caused more problems internal with the EU, then what Chirac would gain from the french muslims and business...
Etc.
Ofcourse the US also have more/greater intrests in the world than ex. China, so the US will react on more issues, but that might not always be so... maybe in 20-30 years China will a super power also, and then there will be two "policemen" in the world - just like the coldwar...
__________________ "Chaos is the law of nature, order is the dream of man."
~Henry B. Adams (Historian) 1838-1918
Originally posted by Rolo@Sep 9 2004, 05:11 PM RawAlex, I do not think US have a great desire to be "the worlds policeman", but because the US is a superpower, then everyone with a problem/conflict etc. want to involve the US on "their side", and if that is not possible, then having US on the opposite might be the next best thing to gain support from others. Ex. I think most islamists didnīt really care about the US lifestyle, when they needed the US to fight the communists, but once the communists were gone then they needed a new enemy to unit the islamists.
French President Chirac would probably not had been travling the world to "save iraq", if only a few EU countries with NO US soldiers wanted to invade... that would have caused more problems internal with the EU, then what Chirac would gain from the french muslims and business...
Etc.
Ofcourse the US also have more/greater intrests in the world than ex. China, so the US will react on more issues, but that might not always be so... maybe in 20-30 years China will a super power also, and then there will be two "policemen" in the world - just like the coldwar...
Good post.
Bi-polar worlds are always more stable. Its multipolar worlds that leads to world wars.
__________________
Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!
Originally posted by Jesse_DD@Sep 9 2004, 05:01 PM Listen, everyone understands that not all people that worship Allah are bad people. The problem is that 100,000,000 of them are!
If someone gave you the power - that you, PornDoggy, could wipe the earth clean of all Islamic Fundamentalists, would you?
First of all, I think your estimate of 100,000,000 is way off base at the moment.
Second, I think that religion is one of the least significant factors contributing to Islamic fundamentalism.
Third, I think your question is sophmoric at best.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Rolo, the US appears to be LOOKING for places to police. Specifically anywhere that there are "muslim extremists" on the loose.
The slaying of X number of people (I am reminded of the onion headline, 50,000 brown people die somewhere) is a bad thing, yes indeedy. But I am wondering if it had been, 100,000 tutsis in central africa as opposed to a "muslim extremist action", would the US be even looking at it? They shrugged their shoulders and didn't do much about previous mass slayings.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Sep 9 2004, 10:37 PM Rolo, the US appears to be LOOKING for places to police. Specifically anywhere that there are "muslim extremists" on the loose.
The slaying of X number of people (I am reminded of the onion headline, 50,000 brown people die somewhere) is a bad thing, yes indeedy. But I am wondering if it had been, 100,000 tutsis in central africa as opposed to a "muslim extremist action", would the US be even looking at it? They shrugged their shoulders and didn't do much about previous mass slayings.
Alex
Alex, I tend to agree with a lot of what you post, but sometimes I think I'm reading exchanges between Raw Mike and Alex AI.
I still don't know whether Mike wants to go in to defend the Christians AND kill off some A-rabs, or just to kill off some "Islamists."
What I do know is that you would be equally critical of a publicly-announced deliberate U.S. decision not to intervene (as opposed to the cautious indifference we've shown) as you would be of a decision TO intervene.
Our actions during the Rwanda crisis, like the actions of the rest of the world, were reprehensible. The fault can be split equally between the Clinton Administration, which lacked the balls to act, and the Republicans who would have scuttled any action he might have attempted.
What I don't understand is how the fuck that matters at all in the current circumstances. Since we fucked up last time, we can't act this time? If it saves a couple hundred thousand lives in the process, does it really matter if the reasons for intervening fails some kind of litmus test?
What would you propose be done - let the genocide continue? The Europeans are acting even more cautiously than the Bush Administration. A U.N. Peacekeeping Force is NEVER effective in the face of active hostilities.
I don't give a damn if it's Moslems killing Christians, Christians killing Hindus, Mormons killing Jehovah's Witnesses* - it needs to be stopped.
Okay, so maybe in this instance I think we should support whatever side happens to be losing at the moment.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
at the end of the day, all that matters is each countries national interests. Alex doesn't care because Canada is not a target and has no direct interests in Sudan. Iceland does not care because Iceland is neither a target, nor do they have any other interests to protect. when a country is being over run by Islamic extremists, it is definately in the USA's interest to take it seriously. when a country is being butchered by average joe's with machetes, it's not really a problem for the US... or as we continually witness, for anyone else in the world either.
right and wrong has nothing to do with survival. in the end, everyone does what they feel is right for them... be it action, or inaction.
The international community should already be in Sudan. Hell, they should have been in there a long time ago. Not only is the government sanctioning what is going on; they are participating in it. They bomb villages from above and they are supplying these death squads with weapons. It's going to be Rwanda all over again.
Fucking UN. Arguing amoungst themselves about the colour of armoured vehicles and who was going to pay for it while the Hutus were murdering the Tutsis with machettes at a faster rate than the nazis were able to gas the jews.
One would hope they have learned their lesson from Rwanda, but given how long it's taken for them to even begin talking about it, i'm guessing they haven't.
09-09-2004
Linear Mode
