Chinese / Russian Joint Statement on the "New World Order"

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by marcmc99, Jul 16, 2005.

  1. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Alright that is better, amigo. it is a supporting document, but not very convincing, nor the work of a proper historian.

    This is a South Vietnamese viewpoint from 1977 and he puts an awful lot of spin on it. He is blaming everyone for the recent fall of South Vietnam, except for the main reason. One which both you and I have overlooked so far, but can probably agree on.

    The South Vietnamese failed miserably to defend their own country, were undependable, poor soldiers, and corrupt. They allowed the VC to hide among them and couldn't manage any effective offenses against the NVA despite American help, even though the NVA was less well-equipped and trained. We carefully turned over the war to them (Vietnamization it was called) unit by unit and province by province and as soon as we finally left, they just gave up and let themselves be conquered. Didn't even put up a fight.
     
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Right.

    No, not likely, but now we aren't even doing that. But the enemy is in Pakistan, right? I'm saying we go get him and then leave when we've gotten him. Not hang around and try to install democracy at our expense when the locals don't want it or us. Fine we don't want them either. Just give up Osama and we'll go back to Picayune.


    No, anything that is a waste of time and resources--avoid it. And who said anything about treaties? I said stay focused on the problem, fight the right enemy when the odds are in our favor, and avoid becoming enmired in nation-building at point A when the enemy is at point B.

    I have mentioned neither Yemen nor Iraq in this thread.
     
  3. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
    So once we have bin Laden it's over? Red, there's terrorists in Yemen where the Cole was blown up, in Africa, in Syria, in Saudi, in Britain....everywhere. So we drop in, find bin Laden and in the process lose a few thousand.....that's to say he's still alive. Then what? I don't want any of these places but to keep their asses off us here, I'm for going in and taking them over if need be. It doesn't help alot to go in take Saddam out and then let his sons take it over and continue business as usual. It had to be redone.

    One of the reasons I'm so for the Iraq deal is we (democracies in general) need a democracy run by Arabs over there to show the freedom loving young in Iran that it can work and then let them apply pressure.

    Lay-out the Red plan for fighting the war on terrorism? In Pakistan, in Palestine, in Yemen, and what to do with Iran and N. Korea? Realistically, not some if we have them outnumbered or if we can win, we fight, if not, we leave alone.

    I mean "The Art of War" is cool and everything but they didn't have nuke's when that was written......or a country with nuke's who would give one to an anonymous terror group to level say, L.A.
     
  4. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    In Iraq our strategy is basiclly the same as it was in Vietnam. We are fighting a war of attrition. We are trying to kill all the bad guys. The thing is, never in history has a war of attrition ended in a victory. It ends in the stronger power pulling out. The Chechnyans is Russia, The Afgans against the Soviets, the guerilla wars in South America on and on and on.
     
  5. LsuCraig

    LsuCraig Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    55
    Work very hard to get these people close to ready to defend themselves and get out. Then it's up to them what happens next.
     
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Not at all. There will always be a small threat somewhere. But Bin Ladin and his organization are the only ones that have made us their number-one enemy. They are the ones who are responsible for 9/11! Everybody knows this. Do we have any higher priority than getting this job done?

    We can worry about mopping up the rest of the highly fragmented jihadist groups when we are done with the Al Qaida leadership. Most islamic radicals are just being nationalistic or their beef is with Israel or each other. It is the Bin Ladin faction of Al Qaida that is our biggest enemy.

    Geez, that would be great if it worked, but it doesn't seem likely. These bunch of doofuses celebrated the fall of their dictator by ransacking their own country. They just don't get it. Tribal considerations override even their fervent nationalism or their islamic radicalism. I don't think we can go in there in 5 years or 50 and impose democracy on that kind of a third-world people. They must develop the courage to take it for themselves. I don't think they are ready ... or worthy.

    I know you're kind of new to FSA, but I've commented at length on all of these subjects before. Try the search feature for red55 on these topics for the long versions. In short:

    1. Korea -- be prepared for war. The little bastard running the place is certifiable. He has nukes and understands nothing about the real world.

    2. Iran -- do nothing. Iran is just posturing to be a regional power now that Pakistan, India, and Israel have nukes. The last thing they want is war with America and they really don't threaten us. Another revolution is coming there and we can best make that happen by staying out of it.

    3. Pakistan -- be prepared for war. They have nukes. If Musharrif falls we will soon be at odds with Pakistan. If they openly back Osama, then its going to bust wide open.

    4. Yemen -- just another patch of muslim desert. Their government has already been intimidated by us and has cooperated in special ops to go after terrorist cells. We can deal with these minor annoyance countries as we go along. Sudan and the north African countries are similar.

    5. Palestine -- I'm getting sick and tired of the Palestinians and the Israelis both. It's time to end this crap because it has spilled onto us and the rest of the world. Palestinians have to acknowledge that Israel isn't going anywhere and give up the guerilla war and terrorism. Israel has to give up all of the land they took in 1967, except for Jerusalem. Old Jerusalem becomes an open city, Neither Israel nor Palestine, protective of all holy sites, and supervised by a council of Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

    6. Iraq -- We've done about all we can do there. Saddam is captured, the WMDs don't exist. Start turning over responsibiities to the Iraqis, province by province, agency by agency. Force them to assume control by a specified time and get their act together or we are just going to leave it to them. Staying there indefinitely gives them no incentive to take charge of their own lives and get about rebuilding and establishing security. Why not just let the Americans do it while we sit around and bitch about them?

    They want us to go home and we want to go home. This would be easy if the Iraqis had any sense of responsibility or some semblance of a work ethic. They make no sense at all. The best, cheapest, and quickest way to get the Americans to leave would be to cooperate. But they did not do that and they are not going to do that. We are going to have to force them to take repsonsibliity for their own welfare by giving them deadlines and then just leaving if they don't get with the plan.

    A democracy is unlikely to be the result. They will probably continue to fight each other ethnically until a new strongman takes charge. But that ain't our fight.
     
  7. col reb

    col reb Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    387
    Seems familiar. Didn't we try that in Nam? Bye gooks....No No ---US number one...We go with you...give VN to RNV. And I swear, I believe some of them were here before our guys.
     
  8. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    I think that would be acceptable, but that is not what the administration is doing. They have stated many times they are going to stay the course in Iraq until there is a stable democracy there. I think that is a bad idea. It took the west over 1000 years to escape barbariainism and turn to Democracy after the fall or Rome. These people are only 60 years removed from being nomads. They have a long way to go before they accept civilization and democracy.
     
  9. marcmc99

    marcmc99 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    31
    Once again, you have completely missed the point. This country may be equally balanced between the left and right, but it is not 50/50, and I have not compared half my fellow citizens to the enemy. I have compared roughly 10 - 15 % of Americans to the enemy. This is a definite minority, but they are the ones who echo the sentiment of this so-called "statement" issued by the Chinese and Russians. They somehow believe that the US is primarily to blame for the problems of the world, from terrorism to the Aids epidemic in Africa. This group of Americans desire a global equality which means weakening this country and giving away what our ancestors have been working and fighting to gain for the past 200+ years.

    If someone believes a weaker America is what we need, then I have no problem grouping that person with the enemy. These people are a small percentage, yet they are often heard. And futhermore, you are incorrect when you say we are all needed in this fight. The true liberals I speak of will never "line up" beside you, me, or any one else who favors keeping America strong and free. Rather than wasting time attempting to get these Americans to line up, we'd be much better off attempting to get the 40 - 50% of indifferent Americans, both Republican and Democrat, to wake up and realize exactly what is going on in the world.

    If it is my "neo-conservative policy" that once again forces you to side with the liberals on the global strength and position of America in the world, then perhaps you should take a closer look at yourself and attempt to find out exactly what it is you believe.

    Your thinking has become so flawed that you immediately take the opportunity to take a conservative statment and use it as a rant against the current administration. Is this a typical moderate stance? (That was a rhetorical question, by the way. No need to go into another explanation of how "moderate" you are.)
     
  10. USNavyTiger

    USNavyTiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,783
    Likes Received:
    6
    OORAH RED!
     

Share This Page