 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Well, Tony did manipulate Bush to try to get a second resolution through the UN. Clinton never bothered with such trivia and just went to war. (Clinton never even asked Congress.) One can rightly say that Bush bent over backwards for Blair, something that Clinton never did. |
Which war excactly did Clinton go to? AFAIR Clinton was a confirmed draft dodger.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
You know: Haiti, Kosovo, et al.
He didn't bother with the UN in the case of Kosovo b/c of a certain Russian veto. I only wish Blair and Bush had been more wise b/c a French veto of a second resolution was a forgone conclusion.
As to Vietnam, not only did he dodge the draft, he also said at the time that he hated the military -- so much for supporting the troops. He, like Fonda and Kerry, actively supported a communist victory which is a little bit more than just being against the war. |
I'm deeply shocked - are you really claming that the Brits wasn't to blame for those wars that Clinton was fighting ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Saras
--"The US is. But, I can only hope we behave better."
Read Colossus by Ferguson. You should be MORE like Britain, not less. |
Is this the story about two supercomputers ? It's decades since I read it but it was quite fun.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Molly, nice post.
In all these affairs, we see the hand of Britain acting in a way that ineluctably lead to future wars, including WWII.
|
You said Great Britain/The British Empire was 'responsible' for those ethnic/national conflicts.
Let's look at facts, and not baseless assertions, shall we ?
You have this bizarre (unproven & unsupported) notion of Woodrow Wilson as the American innocent abroad dupe of the wily Europeans at Versailles. Well, whilst it might show a familiarity with the American literature of the 19th Century (Twain and Henry James) it bears little resemblance to what happened at Versailles.
One wonders how he managed to get the 'machiavellian' British Empire and the French and the Italians to accept his ideas about nationalism and self-determination for ethnic minorities. Slipped it in when they were all out at a lavatory break ?
Do me a favour.
Now you repeatedly go on about Britain responsible for Japan's enmity with China.
Odd, then, that Japan managed to invade Korea and got to war with China by itself. Then go to war with Imperial Russia, and then annexe Korea- all by itself.
Then attack Imperial German colonies, on its own initiative.
Then be granted those former German colonies by the League of Nations- not the British Empire.
In fact the Chinese President asserted that Japan would take advantage of the outbreak of WWI to increase its territory at the expense of Germany- and place itself in a more advantageous strategic position with regard to China.
Those are hard facts, Ned, not assertions, or illusions, or wishful thinking on my part.
Now an Arab scholar and historian mentions growing hostilities between immigrant European Jews and Arabs in Ottoman Palestine, prior to WWI and you just ignore it. How surprising. I mention 19th Century Zionism and the difference between the Jews already in Ottoman Palestine and the incoming Jews- and you just choose to ignore it.
Far easier then to simply blame the power given the Palestine Mandate by the League of Nations for all Arab-Israeli problems based on a wilful ignorance of history.
And again, with the division of India, I've mentioned the Muslim League and Mohammed Ali Jinnah, and you've shown no awareness or indeed willingness to accept that Partition might just possibly have been the only solution to the problems of a substantial Muslim minority within modern India and a substantial Muslim majority in modern day Bangla Desh and Pakistan.
Perhaps you think that a perpetual civil war in India would have been a better solution, than accepting what was in fact a reality, a larger Muslim population in the lands closer to Muslim dominated territories of Afghanistan and Iran, and in the Bengal.
Exactly where do you stand on self-determination and nationalism Ned ?
Fine if you like the results (South Viet Nam, South Korea), but not if it interferes with your one man tirade against the iniquitous Evil Empire ?
Now as for Poland- had you paid any attention to Polish or European history, you'd know that successive attempts were made by Napoleon, by the Congress powers and by Polish patriots to establish a free, independent Poland, but prior to the 20th Century, they had not succeeded.
So Versailles gave a bad solution to the establishment of a Polish state and left Poles in Germany, Germans in Poland and so forth. You still haven't indicated how Polish-German enmity was the fault of Great Britain (since Great Britain hadn't divided historic Poland between Prussia, Russia and Austria-Hungary for instance).
You still ignore Hitler's rabid anti-Slav sentiments and his express desire to aggrandize Nazi Germany at the expense of its neighbours.
Instead, you carry on repeating something that is groundless- that Great Britain was responsible for the German attack on Poland, and that it was responsible for German-Polish enmity.
This claim has no basis in fact or history.
Now as to who divided or who had the right to divide up lands after WWI- why, the victorious powers of course.
You know, Japan, America, Italy, France, Rumania Greece Belgium and oh, yes,- Great Britain.
It's an old, old principle- one applied by the German Empire in France at the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian War, and by the Prussian kingdom at the expense of Denmark and Austria-Hungary- and by Nazi Germany to Austria, and Czechoslovakia prior to WWII.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Who?
Actually, I consider Adolf a socialist. |
That could be why you are considered the rightest. You are possibly the most deluded, in that regard.
Last edited by Kidicious on 02-06-2005 at 16:52
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-05-2005 23:43
|