BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
European Auto Source
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-07-2014, 03:30 PM   #23
positiveions
Lieutenant General
 
positiveions's Avatar
 
Drives: 09 MKV JETTA 2.5 & E90 M3 :)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Verne, CA

Posts: 10,462
iTrader: (1)

Send a message via MSN to positiveions Send a message via Yahoo to positiveions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
1983 USA invaded Grenada for reason of safety for dozens of US citizens living there....

This is a direct comparison...
Actually it was a threat of increased communist activities. Rangers landed there, no one was found. Rangers kicked back on the beach. Story closed.
positiveions is offline   Lebanon
0
Reply With Quote
      03-07-2014, 03:31 PM   #24
positiveions
Lieutenant General
 
positiveions's Avatar
 
Drives: 09 MKV JETTA 2.5 & E90 M3 :)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Verne, CA

Posts: 10,462
iTrader: (1)

Send a message via MSN to positiveions Send a message via Yahoo to positiveions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
The invasion was illegal. The very word indicates that.

The fact that NATO did not join is an example.

UN did not sanction the invasion.... Therefore it was illegal to invade a sovereign nation
Follow the money trail, and you'll find out who was funneling the money.
positiveions is offline   Lebanon
0
Reply With Quote
      03-08-2014, 11:08 AM   #25
Socom
Major General
 
Drives: 2010 335D
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Atl.

Posts: 5,215
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
1983 USA invaded Grenada for reason of safety for dozens of US citizens living there....

This is a direct comparison...
#1 There were US medical students at the University. This was "reason".

#2 It was really about kicking out the Cuban Military.

If you ever visit the capital you can still see bullet holes in the fortress walls.
Socom is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-08-2014, 12:19 PM   #26
pt
Private
 
Drives: I miss my E12
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NY

Posts: 79
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socom View Post
Russia nor did the US sign a treaty. It was just an agreement.
You're right, it was an agreement for Ukraine to give its nuclear weapons to Russia and for Russia to not invade. Thanks!
pt is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-18-2014, 10:30 PM   #27
M3Denver
Lieutenant
 
M3Denver's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 BMW M3
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Denver CO

Posts: 423
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
1983 USA invaded Grenada for reason of safety for dozens of US citizens living there....

This is a direct comparison...
Did we take large swaths of their land and call it another US state?
M3Denver is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-19-2014, 06:07 AM   #28
Chadi335is
Private
 
Drives: my IS crazy
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: GTA

Posts: 55
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Denver
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
1983 USA invaded Grenada for reason of safety for dozens of US citizens living there....

This is a direct comparison...
Did we take large swaths of their land and call it another US state?
No.

However, the US did a regime change and installed a US puppet leader and government.

In Ukraine, one could argue that the US was the culprit in the crisis with politicians like McCain protesting against Yanukovch's government.

Bottom line is that Ukraine was used in a tug of war and the US lost and lost big in the international stage as all hot wind and no action with threats....

Similar occurrence was Georgia in 2008...
Chadi335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-19-2014, 03:21 PM   #29
bbbbmw
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

Posts: 547
iTrader: (0)

She called it:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...d-9167833.html
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
bbbbmw is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-19-2014, 03:36 PM   #30
pesonja
Registered
 
Drives: Subaru
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: austria

Posts: 2
iTrader: (0)

This all is such a mess and the poor people suffer for the sake of politicians and countries
__________________
pesonja is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-19-2014, 05:43 PM   #31
bbbbmw
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

Posts: 547
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesonja View Post
This all is such a mess and the poor people suffer for the sake of politicians and countries
+1
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
bbbbmw is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-24-2014, 09:43 PM   #32
42
240,000 Miles
 
42's Avatar
 
Drives: Moon
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Earth

Posts: 33
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pesonja View Post
This all is such a mess and the poor people suffer for the sake of politicians and countries
Actually, no they won't notice a difference. Their day to day existence will not change. Just like here after our elections and the other party wins. We just adapt and so will they.
42 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      03-28-2014, 12:02 AM   #33
128Convertibleguy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

Posts: 503
iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
Bottom line is that Ukraine was used in a tug of war and the US lost and lost big in the international stage as all hot wind and no action with threats....

Similar occurrence was Georgia in 2008...
What, you mean the great George W. Bush was all hot wind and no (effective) action? Imagine that <grin>.

The fact is the world just won't jump to our tune no matter what our absurdly high "defense" budget is or how many ridiculous wars we start. We need to grow up.
128Convertibleguy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-30-2014, 10:25 PM   #34
south26
New Member
 
Drives: silver 98 528i manual
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dayton, OH

Posts: 9
iTrader: (0)

Well we see where Putin takes the world.


Andy
south26 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-14-2014, 06:11 PM   #35
Patronus86
Banned
 
Drives: 2013 335is
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Upstate NY

Posts: 269
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2013 335is  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
1983 USA invaded Grenada for reason of safety for dozens of US citizens living there....

This is a direct comparison...
Please?! Really?! The US invaded Grenada yes for reasons of national security...we didn't want another volatile and potentially hostile regime on our doorstep. We didn't invade Grenada because we wanted to setup a puppet regime or gain territory. We invaded because the country had been experiencing four years of political infighting and turmoil which culminated in a bloody coup. We invaded because the Organization of American States asked for our assistance. And when the invasion was done and an interim government was established, we left....no territory was seized, no resources stolen.

The invasion was for US interests, there is no denying that, and we even took a lot of heat from our traditional allies (UK, Canada, ect.) but there is no comparison between our motives then and Russia's motives now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
No.

However, the US did a regime change and installed a US puppet leader and government.

In Ukraine, one could argue that the US was the culprit in the crisis with politicians like McCain protesting against Yanukovch's government.

Bottom line is that Ukraine was used in a tug of war and the US lost and lost big in the international stage as all hot wind and no action with threats....

Similar occurrence was Georgia in 2008...
We didn't install a puppet government in Grenada. They had democratic elections immediately after we withdrew...no hint of tampering with the elections or intimidating politicians (unfortunately same can't be said for Russia in Crimea).

To say that the US is the culprit in the Crimea crisis is giving this government too much credit. Before Crimea even became an issue, much of the US govt, namely the Presidential Administration, didn't give a shit about the Ukraine. Except for some of the Europeans, no one really cared when Yanukovch decided to move towards closer ties with Russia. The Obama administration was caught off guard when the Russians siezed Crimea, or at least pretended to be. The current US administration has had very little success in anticipating or planning for numerous foreign crises, including this one. So no, we didn't cause this crisis...we have instead mishandled our response to it.

Russia seized Crimea because:
1) they wanted naval port access,
2) they wanted to grab territory before the new Ukranian government got its act together
3) they knew that both the Ukranian and international response would be weak at best

Everyone has forgotten about how Hitler invaded and ravaged most of western Russia and killed tens of millions of Russians (civilians and soldiers), everyone except Russia..The cold war might be dead, but Russia will always be conscious of the buffer (real or perceived) it has between itself and its closest potential enemies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
The invasion was illegal. The very word indicates that.

The fact that NATO did not join is an example.

UN did not sanction the invasion.... Therefore it was illegal to invade a sovereign nation
The invasion was not supported by the UN, but it was not illegal according to international law. There were plenty of UN regulations that Saddam was in violation of that mandated military force as repercussions. Also, NATO's involvement, or lack there of, does not determine the legality of a military action. There are plenty of military actions (by the US and others) that lacked NATO involvement but were still considered legal (peacekeeping mission after Rwandan genocide is just one example).

Now, as to whether or not the Invasion of Iraq was a smart move, that is a whole other debate...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
What, you mean the great George W. Bush was all hot wind and no (effective) action? Imagine that <grin>.

The fact is the world just won't jump to our tune no matter what our absurdly high "defense" budget is or how many ridiculous wars we start. We need to grow up.
Are you referring to the Russian invasion of Georgia? Well anyway, GW was known for many things, but "all hot wind and no effective action" isn't one of them. Obama yes, but GW was certainly willing to take action (the reasoning and thought behind that action is really what you should debate).

Also, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, isn't a big deal because Russia "won't jump to our tune." It's a big deal because Russia violated the national sovereignty of another nation in order to seize territory. Regardless of how many Russians live in Crimea and elsewhere in eastern Ukraine, Russia is using brute force to host "democratic elections" and seize territory with no regard for the political rights of the Ukrainian government or its people who take issue with these actions.

In simple terms, this sets a very bad precedent for the international scene, and even Obama, who would prefer to stay uninvolved, recognizes this.

Last edited by Patronus86; 04-16-2014 at 11:43 AM. Reason: typo's
Patronus86 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-19-2014, 10:05 AM   #36
Chadi335is
Private
 
Drives: my IS crazy
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: GTA

Posts: 55
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patronus86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
1983 USA invaded Grenada for reason of safety for dozens of US citizens living there....

This is a direct comparison...
Please?! Really?! The US invaded Grenada yes for reasons of national security...we didn't want another volatile and potentially hostile regime on our doorstep. We didn't invade Grenada because we wanted to setup a puppet regime or gain territory. We invaded because the country had been experiencing four years of political infighting and turmoil which culminated in a bloody coup. We invaded because the Organization of American States asked for our assistance. And when the invasion was done and an interim government was established, we left....no territory was seized, no resources stolen.

The invasion was for US interests, there is no denying that, and we even took a lot of heat from our traditional allies (UK, Canada, ect.) but there is no comparison between our motives then and Russia's motives now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
No.

However, the US did a regime change and installed a US puppet leader and government.

In Ukraine, one could argue that the US was the culprit in the crisis with politicians like McCain protesting against Yanukovch's government.

Bottom line is that Ukraine was used in a tug of war and the US lost and lost big in the international stage as all hot wind and no action with threats....

Similar occurrence was Georgia in 2008...
We didn't install a puppet government in Grenada. They had democratic elections immediately after we withdrew...no hint of tampering with the elections or intimidating politicians (unfortunately same can't be said for Russia in Crimea).

To say that the US is the culprit in the Crimea crisis is giving this government too much credit. Before Crimea even became an issue, much of the US govt, namely the Presidential Administration, didn't give a shit about the Ukraine. Except for some of the Europeans, no one really cared when Yanukovch decided to move towards closer ties with Russia. The Obama administration was caught off guard when the Russians siezed Crimea, or at least pretended to be. The current US administration has had very little success in anticipating or planning for numerous foreign crises, including this one. So no, we didn't cause this crisis...we have instead mishandled our response to it.

Russia seized Crimea because:
1) they wanted naval port access,
2) they wanted to grab territory before the new Ukranian government got its act together
3) they knew that both the Ukranian and international response would be weak at best

Everyone has forgotten about how Hitler invaded and ravaged most of western Russia and killed tens of millions of Russians (civilians and soldiers), everyone except Russia..The cold war might be dead, but Russia will always be conscious of the buffer (real or perceived) it has between itself and its closest potential enemies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
The invasion was illegal. The very word indicates that.

The fact that NATO did not join is an example.

UN did not sanction the invasion.... Therefore it was illegal to invade a sovereign nation
The invasion was not supported by the UN, but it was not illegal according to international law. There were plenty of UN regulations that Saddam was in violation of that mandated military force as repercussions. Also, NATO's involvement, or lack there of, does not determine the legality of a military action. There are plenty of military actions (by the US and others) that lacked NATO involvement but were still considered legal (peacekeeping mission after Rwandan genocide is just one example).

Now, as to whether or not the Invasion of Iraq was a smart move, that is a whole other debate...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
What, you mean the great George W. Bush was all hot wind and no (effective) action? Imagine that &lt;grin>.

The fact is the world just won't jump to our tune no matter what our absurdly high "defense" budget is or how many ridiculous wars we start. We need to grow up.
Are you referring to the Russian invasion of Georgia? Well anyway, GW was known for many things, but "all hot wind and no effective action" isn't one of them. Obama yes, but GW was certainly willing to take action (the reasoning and thought behind that action is really what you should debate).

Also, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, isn't a big deal because Russia "won't jump to our tune." It's a big deal because Russia violated the national sovereignty of another nation in order to seize territory. Regardless of how many Russians live in Crimea and elsewhere in eastern Ukraine, Russia is using brute force to host "democratic elections" and seize territory with no regard for the political rights of the Ukrainian government or its people who take issue with these actions.

In simple terms, this sets a very bad precedent for the international scene, and even Obama, who would prefer to stay uninvolved, recognizes this.
Fox News is really rotting your brain....
Chadi335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-19-2014, 10:11 AM   #37
Chadi335is
Private
 
Drives: my IS crazy
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: GTA

Posts: 55
iTrader: (0)

Grenada isn't near USAs doorstep. It has many rooms to go through ... Cuba, Canada and Mexico is at USA's doorstep....

NATO (USA puppet in Europe) is the culprit... They have been trying to isolate the Russian union with cash and other incentives ....

The proposed missile defense system in Poland is a prime example...


Please tell how many tears would USA cry if Russia installed a missile defense shield in Cuba??
Chadi335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-19-2014, 11:20 AM   #38
Lups
Brigadier General
 
Lups's Avatar
 
Drives: Peter II
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

Posts: 3,272
iTrader: (0)

This is Putin's last chance to shine. The home front is not as supportive as it was in the last decade, and tough it's true that the EU is depending heavily energy wise to the east, and there fore making sure Putin will have their backing, he is now making his stand in the world history.

Russia has two type of leaders, One is the big boys (15+ million of their own killed), and then there are the good guys (no free press, no rights to many, and of course pin pointing someone else to blame for the troubles). Putin has been an artist when it comes to painting a pretty front, and EU has nicely just asked him to play nice.

A few of my home countries ministers said a couple of things about this invasion, and we had the pleasure of having boys with weapons practicing on our boarders. We were never under the Solviet union, but what I gather that piece of information has been lost from the history books, and though I do not think Putin is far enough gone to invade the parts that claimed their independence after the union collapsed, this will shut up EU well enough.

If something good has to be said about Russia as a neighbor, it is the fact that we will ones again see if the freedom of our press is real thing. We have a long history in dealing with them, but we also like to sweep the bad stuff under a rug just so that we don't have to form an opinion. In the seventies we turned writing history in a new way into an art form, and people who's lifes had been ruined by the second world war anyhow, were made to feel guilty about defending our borders. I don't think this will come to that, but I will be following the writings of the main newspapers back home more carefully because all this.

I wish Ukraine will turn a new leaf and in all have peace and calm in their future, but now it's just a pawn in the game of the big boys.

Last edited by Lups; 04-19-2014 at 11:22 AM. Reason: Typoes
Lups is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-20-2014, 12:08 AM   #39
128Convertibleguy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

Posts: 503
iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patronus86 View Post
The US invaded Grenada yes for reasons of national security...we didn't want another volatile and potentially hostile regime on our doorstep.

Now, as to whether or not the Invasion of Iraq was a smart move, that is a whole other debate...

Are you referring to the Russian invasion of Georgia? Well anyway, GW was known for many things, but "all hot wind and no effective action" isn't one of them. Obama yes, but GW was certainly willing to take action
We invaded Grenada for national security? What was the regime there going to do? Use the mighty Grenada navy and army to attack?

Whether invading Iraq was a smart move is not up for debate. It was the biggest foreign policy blunder in a great many years. It cost us somewhere between half a trillion and two trillion, money we borrowed from China because Bush cut taxes in a time of war, a horrendous idea. Thousands of brave soldiers lives were lost and ten of thousands of their lives and their families lives were severely damaged. It diverted attention from Afghanistan, which we've paid for dearly. We've shot our bolt on those two wars, diminishing our capacity to influence events elsewhere. The public is very war weary, and who can blame them?

For what? The chief long term geopolitical result is that Iran was unleashed, after it had been held down by concerns over Iraq. Iraq is now little more than a puppet of Iran. This is an improvement over it being run by Saddam? At the time we invaded Saddam was weak, and presented very little threat to us.

Exactly what "action" did Bush take on Georgia? In what way did it have any effect? I don't blame him for not doing much, but the revisionist history of his cronies is laughable to all but FauxNews.

Here's the thing about Ukraine. The country is pretty evenly split by numbers, into those who favor ties with Europe and those who favor ties with Russia. They've elected politicians on both sides. The pro-Europe group in Kiev deposed the duly elected President, admittedly not a good guy, but the protestors are far from having a clear majority of the country in support.

It's a difficult situation, one easy for Putin to exploit, and we have no really good options. If we actually did hurt Putin economically, he could retaliate by cutting off natural gas to Europe, and our allies would desert our position, fast.

Sometimes in foreign policy, there just are no good options. North Korea is another example.

Last edited by 128Convertibleguy; 04-20-2014 at 12:22 AM.
128Convertibleguy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-20-2014, 11:53 AM   #40
pt
Private
 
Drives: I miss my E12
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NY

Posts: 79
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
It's a difficult situation, one easy for Putin to exploit, and we have no really good options. If we actually did hurt Putin economically, he could retaliate by cutting off natural gas to Europe, and our allies would desert our position, fast.
Agreed, the situation is ripe for Putin to exploit. The thing is, he doesn't have unlimited resources to finance puppet regimes and subsume all the countries he wants either. The laws of basic economics will hold everyone in check to some degree.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the best thing to to right now is to build the infrastructure needed to export our own nat-gas to Europe. It's something we can afford to do, will make us money and will provide favorable political utility. Other tactics can be employed once Europe is taken off Putin's hot seat.

I don't think that there's nothing that can be done here. it's just more of a long game than immediate gratification IMO.
pt is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-20-2014, 12:23 PM   #41
128Convertibleguy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

Posts: 503
iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by pt View Post
Agreed, the situation is ripe for Putin to exploit. The thing is, he doesn't have unlimited resources to finance puppet regimes and subsume all the countries he wants either. The laws of basic economics will hold everyone in check to some degree.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the best thing to to right now is to build the infrastructure needed to export our own nat-gas to Europe. It's something we can afford to do, will make us money and will provide favorable political utility. Other tactics can be employed once Europe is taken off Putin's hot seat.

I don't think that there's nothing that can be done here. it's just more of a long game than immediate gratification IMO.
Agree with all of this. Solar energy systems would be a good addition. Europe has wind covered, as well as economical vehicles.

But it will take at least ten years. Among other things it's going to take a fleet of liquified natural gas ships.

It will also take unified political will, something in short supply here right now.
128Convertibleguy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-20-2014, 02:48 PM   #42
Patronus86
Banned
 
Drives: 2013 335is
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Upstate NY

Posts: 269
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2013 335is  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
We invaded Grenada for national security? What was the regime there going to do? Use the mighty Grenada navy and army to attack?
Military aggression by a rogue Genada regime wasn't the likely concern....any unstable and undemocratic regime on USA's doorstep is bad for business...literally. In the same way we would prefer Cuba was an open democracy, we didn't want Grenada to turn into permanently corrupt and broken country. And it was quite clear that the government that had taken form in Grenada was one that was not supported by either its people or the Organization of American States (south and central America's version of NATO).

An integral part of the national security for the USA has been ensuring and promoting peace and democracy in our hemisphere. Yes our involvement in some central and south american countries facilitated the rise of some pretty undemocratic regimes (mostly caused by cold war era politics), the intent however has remained consistent throughout the last several decades: promote democracy and keep major foreign powers (used to be USSR) from interfering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
Whether invading Iraq was a smart move is not up for debate. It was the biggest foreign policy blunder in a great many years. It cost us somewhere between half a trillion and two trillion, money we borrowed from China because Bush cut taxes in a time of war, a horrendous idea. Thousands of brave soldiers lives were lost and ten of thousands of their lives and their families lives were severely damaged. It diverted attention from Afghanistan, which we've paid for dearly. We've shot our bolt on those two wars, diminishing our capacity to influence events elsewhere. The public is very war weary, and who can blame them?
Yeah, I definitely agree with you that Iraq was not a smart move. I never said it was; I was saying that it was a separate topic from what you and I were previously discussing (the legality of the invasion itself).

Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
For what? The chief long term geopolitical result is that Iran was unleashed, after it had been held down by concerns over Iraq. Iraq is now little more than a puppet of Iran. This is an improvement over it being run by Saddam? At the time we invaded Saddam was weak, and presented very little threat to us.
Iraq is not a puppet of Iran. Iran is very likely trying to influence the sectarian politics of Iraq, but it by no means has enough control over the government or any of the different ethnic/religious groups (shia, sunni, kurd, ect.) to make Iraq its puppet.

Also, the longterm geopolitical consequences of invading Iraq and removing Sadam have yet to be realized. The central Iraqi government is currently experiencing trouble keeping control of the mostly Sunni Al Anbar province (the same area that the US had trouble with). And Kurdistan has essentially established itself as a stable and somewhat democratic autonomous state (really one of the few good things that has developed in Iraq so far).

Whether Iraq will remain an unified nation or will splinter along religious/ethnic lines remains to be seen, and the long term international consequences will take more than a few years to manifest.

I will say this, as stupid as it was to invade Iraq in the fashion and time that we did, Iraq is without a doubt a better place without Saddam. Some Iraqi's will claim they had better lives under Saddam, but even they will admit Saddam's mass killing of Shia, Kurds and political dissidents was without parallel. He killed anywhere from 50k-150k kurds in the late 1980's, and easily killed another 50k-100k more in the aftermath of the 1st Gulf War (that time it was Shia and Kurds). His secret police was notorious for making numerous people disappear.

He was a monster, a monster the US worked with during the 1980's to fight Iran, but nevertheless a monster. And taking into account the war with Iran and all of his own people that he killed, he easily wrought more destruction and death than has so far resulted from the sectarian violence in Iraq.

Two wrongs don't make a right...our ill-planned invasion wasn't justified by Saddam's previous crimes, but to suggest Iraq was a better place with Saddam is very ignorant.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
Exactly what "action" did Bush take on Georgia? In what way did it have any effect? I don't blame him for not doing much, but the revisionist history of his cronies is laughable to all but FauxNews.
Bush didn't take any military action against Russia, if that is what you are getting at...but then again, everyone including Bush himself, knew that would be entirely unrealistic and irresponsible, especially considering that our military was heavily engaged in the Middle East and Afghanistan.

However, Bush did send strong messages to Russia about our commitment to Georgia's national sovereignty: in addition to strongly condemning Russia's actions, he used military aircraft to deliver humanitarian supplies the Georgians; he initiated US military training missions on Georgian soil and also incorporated Georgian military units into our operations in Afghanistan.

Also he, and the US congress, put sanctions on Russia...which were lifted by President Obama in 2010.

So short of going to war, which everyone acknowledge would have been a horrible idea, Bush did a lot to show US support for Georgia.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
Here's the thing about Ukraine. The country is pretty evenly split by numbers, into those who favor ties with Europe and those who favor ties with Russia. They've elected politicians on both sides. The pro-Europe group in Kiev deposed the duly elected President, admittedly not a good guy, but the protestors are far from having a clear majority of the country in support.

It's a difficult situation, one easy for Putin to exploit, and we have no really good options. If we actually did hurt Putin economically, he could retaliate by cutting off natural gas to Europe, and our allies would desert our position, fast.

Sometimes in foreign policy, there just are no good options. North Korea is another example.
What is your reference for the claim that Ukraine is evenly split between pro-Russian and pro-European groups? I have read that there are numerous pro-Russian citizens in the eastern Ukraine (mostly because they are more ethnic Russian than they are Ukrainian), but I have not seen that the country is evenly split in terms of population numbers.

And regardless of how split the country actually is on this issue, Russia's actions in seizing Crimea and fomenting revolts and militant uprisings in Eastern Ukraine are illegal in every sense of international law. A UN-monitored referendum on Ukraine's political and national sovereignty would at least have some credibility and some semblance of democratic process, but what Russia is doing is criminal.

Also, full on sanctions on the Russian economy are a very obvious solution to this problem...Russia's economy is literally paper thin, and sanctions would very quickly cripple it. The US, South America, Middle east and numerous other places could easily satisfy Europe's energy requirements...the issue isn't that Europe has no alternative to Russia gas, it's that the Europeans would have to pay more money (transport, handling, import fees, ect.) to get their gas from elsewhere.

Yes, this wouldn't be ideal for Europe, but it is feasible...I think a better phrase would be that there are no perfect solutions in international affairs, but there are 90% solutions...an embargo on Russian gas is definitely a 90% solution that would work.

Last edited by Patronus86; 04-20-2014 at 02:54 PM.
Patronus86 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-20-2014, 03:18 PM   #43
Patronus86
Banned
 
Drives: 2013 335is
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Upstate NY

Posts: 269
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2013 335is  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
Fox News is really rotting your brain....
Chadi335is go pick up a history book or read an international affairs journal...the stuff I talked about can easily be found in those literary forums. And to be honest, I don't watch Fox News for international affairs, I watch BBC and NPR.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
Grenada isn't near USAs doorstep. It has many rooms to go through ... Cuba, Canada and Mexico is at USA's doorstep....
Really? Of all the things I discussed, you want to debate that? Seems kind of petty. Well okay. Yes Cuba, Canada and Mexico are closer...but Grenada really isn't that much further, especially when you travel by air. I consider Grenada to be on our doorstep in the same way that Columbia and Panama (2 other countries we have been heavily involved with) are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadi335is View Post
NATO (USA puppet in Europe) is the culprit... They have been trying to isolate the Russian union with cash and other incentives ....

The proposed missile defense system in Poland is a prime example...


Please tell how many tears would USA cry if Russia installed a missile defense shield in Cuba??
Don't know what you mean by NATO trying to isolate Russia with cash and other incentives.

The missile defense in Poland was something the Poles wanted just as much, if not more so, that we did. Poland and other former Soviet-bloc countries are very aware of the Russia's attempts to influence and re-exert Cold War era control over eastern Europe and thus look to the US for assistance/protection.

Missile Defense in Cuba would be mostly irrelevant to Russian security...there are plenty of other countries (UK, France) and other areas (US ballistic missile subs anywhere in the world) that pose a greater missile threat to Russia and Cuba would offer little defense against them. But yes I agree with you, we do have somewhat of a double standard; we don't like other countries messing around in Central and South America, but we are willing to get involved in other areas.
Patronus86 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      04-20-2014, 03:36 PM   #44
128Convertibleguy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

Posts: 503
iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patronus86 View Post
the intent however has remained consistent throughout the last several decades: promote democracy and keep major foreign powers (used to be USSR) from interfering.

Bush didn't take any military action against Russia, if that is what you are getting at...but then again, everyone including Bush himself, knew that would be entirely unrealistic and irresponsible, especially considering that our military was heavily engaged in the Middle East and Afghanistan.

However, Bush did send strong messages to Russia about our commitment to Georgia's national sovereignty: in addition to strongly condemning Russia's actions, he used military aircraft to deliver humanitarian supplies the Georgians; he initiated US military training missions on Georgian soil and also incorporated Georgian military units into our operations in Afghanistan.

The US, South America, Middle east and numerous other places could easily satisfy Europe's energy requirements...

What is your reference for the claim that Ukraine is evenly split between pro-Russian and pro-European groups? I have read that there are numerous pro-Russian citizens in the eastern Ukraine (mostly because they are more ethnic Russian than they are Ukrainian), but I have not seen that the country is evenly split in terms of population numbers.
Our intent has been pretty far from supporting democracy many times. Among other things, we've systematically undermined and even overthrown democratically elected governments in Central and South America. To say nothing of the fact that we strongly supported Saddam before we opposed him. One of our most egregious actions was supporting the coup that removed (and killed) the democratically elected President of Chile Salvador Allende, replacing him with the incredibly brutal dictator General Pinochet. To claim any of this was support of democracy is the worst kind of historical revisionism. One that perpetuates mistakes and downright evil.

Bush's support of Georgia was no stronger and no more effective than Obama's support of Ukraine. Once again, historical revisionism at its' worst. You may not like this source. But attacking the source will not change the facts they cite.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/03...ade-fox/198322

"Easily supply Europe's energy needs"? You have to be kidding. The US can't even remotely supply its own energy needs now, nor will it ever without moving away from fossil fuels. The Middle East and South American countries are pumping almost at their max rate. We can do better, but not easily or fast at all. Natural gas alone won't do it, oil is a dead end. We'll need to develop alternative sources.

And the political will for that is not there. The oil companies make the government dance their tune.

As for the relatively division in Ukraine, once again, you might not like the source, but this is simply a factual statement. One could post many sources, or painstakingly look up election results, but this statement is simple and clear.

"This divide has been a challenge for Ukraine since it won independence in 1991. Elections have been near-evenly split between the two halves, pulling the country in opposite directions. As the Ukraine-focused political scientist Leonid Peisakhin put it, Ukraine "has never been and is not yet a coherent national unit with a common narrative or a set of more or less commonly shared political aspirations."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...rassed-to-ask/

Last edited by 128Convertibleguy; 04-20-2014 at 04:05 PM.
128Convertibleguy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:32 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST