16-10-2002 22:38									#91
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov You have a good point. Libya hasn't gone about invading sovereign nations over the past few years, true.

Chad

BTW, there's no (a) evidence of torture being used on the Gitmo detainees, just the whiny pro forma accusations from the left, (b) they're not our citizens, and (c) they have no right to any protection under the Geneva convention, as they fail to meet the criteria for either lawful combatants or non-combatants. There's no legal impediment under international law to simply shooting the mother****ers after a summary military tribunal.

Oh, here's a question for you, Boris? Why can't you lefties be consistent on the concept of "sovereign" nations? If it's the death penalty in the US, or some commie coup, of just a target of the US for whatever reason, the left gets all flapped up about "sovereignty." If it's civil war in Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, or tribal war in Rwanda, then the left wants imperialist intervention (with enough rules and restrictions to be able to do anything) If it's a former British colony who's boundaries were determined for the convenience of British imperial administration, then granted "independence" to be ruled first by a king then by a couple of dictators who murdered their way into power (Iraq) then there's all this whining about sovereignty again. Get consistent, will ya?

	16-10-2002 22:46									#92
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand The U.S. and allies have to learn to play by the same rules their enemies play by. Let's take assassination. Do you think for a minute all countries abhor the concept? Personally, I'd rather seen Hussein, for instance, dusted by a single shot, than have to put our young military members at risk; but since that's not currently a viable option...

Actually, it is, assuming you could get the guy. Since he assassinated his way into power, and was involved in the original assassination plot against the king of Iraq, one could presume that motivates his security planning.

The executive order prohibiting assassinations of heads of state could simply be revoked by another executive order, but that's not even necessary for Hussein - it specifically exempts heads of state who are leaders of their nation's armed forces, since they are then a legitimate military target independent of status as a head of state.

Noriega is another example of someone who could have been dusted the same way, he just made it to the Vatican compound before anyone could shoot him, then he surrendered.

	16-10-2002 22:52									#93
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara In the 1980s a train carrying military supplies for the murderous governments of Central America ran over a protestor who was clearly visible to the train conductor moving at five miles an hour.

Showing gross ignorance of physics there, che, you ovbiously have no idea on how long it take to stop a train massing thousands of tons moving at any speed (several MILES at 30 mph) several thousand yards at 5mph. Trains are rarely able to stop within their visability distance, well know to lawyers, but not to idiot peacemongering commie protesters laying on tracks. IIRC the idiot's lawsuits were dissmised, but I do not recall the fate of the driver's suit against the idiot who lost his legs. Likely something like one of my father cases, where the fool who drove in front of an SP train, and was mangled as much as you can be without dying (over 100 fractures) sued with all sort of perjured claims about defective signals and crossing (who was unluky enough that there were a couple unevoled witness to testify that the sigls were working fine before the collision). Not only does he not get a dime, but my dad recover a $1400 countercalim against to repair the signal that was damage when the train dragged his battered body across it.

	16-10-2002 23:00									#94
	Increase Your PM Length

MtG:

I can't speak for others, but I have never said I agreed with intervention in Somalia, Rwanda or Yugoslavia in terms of direct U.S. military invasion.

I think all such undertakings should be taken with international support. What I've criticized here is unilateral interference by the U.S. in sovereign countries politics and affairs. I think it's a damn shame the UN didn't do more about Rwanda, but no way in hell would I have advocated unilateral U.S. intervention. Somalia was also an obvious mistake.

Yugoslavia was a success because it was a cooperative effort with a strong mandate from the nations of the region. It was not U.S. imperialism by any means, IMO, since the operations were conducted under the aegis of NATO.

	16-10-2002 23:03									#95
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

At 60 mph, full emergency brakes, it takes about a mile to stop an average train. At 5 mph its one or two hundred feet. Either way, the protester was way to close for the crew to do anything about it.

PS: In the US, freight trains are not run by the government.

	16-10-2002 23:08									#96
	Put an end to popups!

Are You looking at current trains or 20 and thirty years ago Adam? And how many cars is an "average train" for thoses figures. They get up to over 100 cars. The biggest varibale is, however, slope ot the track.

	16-10-2002 23:19									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Adam Smith PS: In the US, freight trains are not run by the government.

Just like tanks aren't run by the Chinese government?

	16-10-2002 23:24									#98
	Got spare money?

IIRC, The track and train of the this particular incident is run by the army until the cars are transfered to a comerciall RR at a junction. It come fright out of the Armory.

	17-10-2002 00:16									#99
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Boris, all the documentary evidence we have, interviews, recordings, memos, et al., indicate that the Kennedy and Johnson administrations considered Vietnam a war against Communism. Earlier aid to the French was imperialist, but was also focused on opposing Communism indirectly, since the French CP was very influential, and we wanted to keep the unstable Fourth Republic on our side of the Cold War as best we could. If you somehow know something that no serious historian has yet been able to uncover, you shouldn't be posting here. You should be writing a book, and becoming famous for proving every other scholar wrong.

Everybody seems to be criticizing the United States' human rights record, but I can't understand why. We're not saying the US should chair the thing, just that Libya shouldn't. If there are no suitable African nations to be chairs, then the UN should be reorganized to prevent regionalist silliness like this. Nations should be judged based on thei actions, not what continent they exist on.

The human rights violations people are pulling out of their asses about the United States (Che, Puerto Rico? Please) either involve indirect US involvement, like in El Salvador and such, or no real involvement at all, like East Timor. In all cases, it was simply that the US aggravated existing human rights failings, not initiating them. We're not at fault if some wealthy landowner in Central America hires a bunch of goons to kill his political enemies. We might make things easy for him, but he is the one who made the choice.

	17-10-2002 01:04									#100
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Felch X all the documentary evidence we have, interviews, recordings, memos, et al., indicate that the Kennedy and Johnson administrations considered Vietnam a war against Communism.

The various government documents and so on that we have access to make it quite clear that the war in vietnam was a war of economic imperialism against a Communist country. The whole fear of the Stalinist model was not a fear of some mean guy not allowing people have the right to choose their leaders (USA has done quite well in violently crushing Democracies, far better than any other country out there) but the fear was of the rapid economic development that can occur in Stalinism. If Vietnam made a good example of Stalinist development, "the rot would spread" (as various government documents put it) all over Southeast Asia, and even eventually Japan. Thus, interfering with America's buisness interests in that region by removing themselves from the open sphere into a closed economic sphere.

Therefore, it was a war against a Communist country, yes. But it should be noted that the United States doesn't play favorites in that regard. Whenever a democracy arose in Latin America that began having having uppity notions such questioning the United States unrestricted access to their resources and instead using them for the betterment of their people, that Democracy was violently crushed by the USA and a military dictatorship set up. I'm not saying that the USA hates Democracy, I'm sure we would nice enough to let a Democracy exist as long as it didn't interfere with our buisness interests. But if a Democracy begins questioning our freedom to steal their resources, that Democracy should expect a short lifespan.

All this is on the public record, it doesn't take too much digging to see that no other country in the world can even come close to comparing with the murderous human rights violations of the United States, nor can any country claim to having violently put down as many Democracys as the USA.

	17-10-2002 01:41									#101
	Sometimes you just have to answer Tired of ads?

Your post might be the most distorted version of history yet posted on Apolyton, I had to answer your nonsense.

quote: Originally posted by monkspider The various government documents and so on that we have access to make it quite clear that the war in vietnam was a war of economic imperialism against a Communist country.

Nonsense, neither North nor South vietnam was anywhere near having stable economies, both lacked stablity and fiscal responsibility.
"Economic Imperialism" might be the stupidest catch phrase I ever heard.
The US was not there for the markets, how rediculous.

quote: The whole fear of the Stalinist model was not a fear of some mean guy not allowing people have the right to choose their leaders (USA has done quite well in violently crushing Democracies, far better than any other country out there)

More bull, Stalin and Communist Russia is the world leader in this, by light years, they managed to stifle ALL of Eastern and most of Central Europe for 5 decades, as well as bring it to both South America, Africa and Asia.
Unless you know history, don't try to argue it, all your posting is bunk.

quote: but the fear was of the rapid economic development that can occur in Stalinism.

HA HA HA HA HA
Stalin took YEARS to make something of a stable economy, and only by RUTHLESS explotation of European slave labor was he able to get, NOBODY was fearing THAT economic model.

quote: If Vietnam made a good example of Stalinist development, "the rot would spread" (as various government documents put it) all over Southeast Asia, and even eventually Japan.

Wrong and right, it was not an example of Stalinist Communist, it was more akin to Mao, but they did fear it spreading.

quote: Thus, interfering with America's buisness interests in that region by removing themselves from the open sphere into a closed economic sphere.

Simplistic strap on answer to a complex problem.
Economics was the LAST reason for US intervention in South east Asia.

quote: Therefore, it was a war against a Communist country, yes. But it should be noted that the United States doesn't play favorites in that regard. Whenever a democracy arose in Latin America that began having having uppity notions such questioning the United States unrestricted access to their resources and instead using them for the betterment of their people, that Democracy was violently crushed by the USA and a military dictatorship set up.

More bull, does the US control Brasil?
Agentina?
Or any of the other South American democracies?
Taking one example, Chile, and appying it to a blanket condemnation is nonsense.

quote: I'm not saying that the USA hates Democracy, I'm sure we would nice enough to let a Democracy exist as long as it didn't interfere with our buisness interests.

Yet again, PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Your not going to slide by without examples that are factual, so start coming up with some.

quote: But if a Democracy begins questioning our freedom to steal their resources, that Democracy should expect a short lifespan.

HA HA HA HA HA
You sound like a 1930s Communist Newsreal!

quote: All this is on the public record, it doesn't take too much digging to see that no other country in the world can even come close to comparing with the murderous human rights violations of the United States, nor can any country claim to having violently put down as many Democracys as the USA.

HA HA HA HA HA
Stalin killed between 30 and 60 million, nobody knows for sure, Mao also wiped out millions, Pol Pot was on record as killing at least 2 million, and the US leads?
Like the rest of your "facts", pure bunk.

You need to do some SERIOUS reading into what Communist nations really did, i know the US doesn't have clean hands, but your WAY out of wack.

	17-10-2002 02:11									#102
	Re: Sometimes you just have to answer Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 Nonsense, neither North nor South vietnam was anywhere near having stable economies, both lacked stablity and fiscal responsibility.

True, but as my post later clarified, Vietnam itself wasn't a matter of great interest for the USA. But if the "example" of Vietnam spread, possibly even as far as Japan, it would create a very problematic situation for American buisness interests.

quote: The US was not there for the markets, how rediculous.

Why else would the USA be there? To spread freedom and Democracy?

quote: More bull, Stalin and Communist Russia is the world leader in this, by light years, they managed to stifle ALL of Eastern and most of Central Europe for 5 decades, as well as bring it to both South America, Africa and Asia.

What Democracies did the USSR stifle in South America or Africa or Asia? The USSR tended to allow China to handle things in Asia.
The USA has crushed democracies time and time again in latin America, killing millions of innocents in the process, all to prop military dictatorships in the name of US buisness interests.

quote: Unless you know history, don't try to argue it, all your posting is bunk.

Respectfully, I would say the same to you.

quote: HA HA HA HA HA Stalin took YEARS to make something of a stable economy, and only by RUTHLESS explotation of European slave labor was he able to get, NOBODY was fearing THAT economic

Wrong, Stalinism was successful to a large degree. There is a good reason why the Soviet Union was referred to as the second world. It took third world peasents and despite crippling civil war and two world wars, improved the standard of living for the average soviet quite considerably. Of course, when the Soviet Union whent capitalist, it took all those Russian workers back to the third world, but we're not supposed to say that. I appologize. I know any success that Stalinism had doesn't justify it. But American leaders at the time were quite concerned with the ammount of economic progress the Stalinist model can create in a short period of time. At least, up until the late 70s or so, when things started to stagnate.

quote: Simplistic strap on answer to a complex problem. Economics was the LAST reason for US intervention in South east Asia.

Despite this statement going against all offical documents and so forth to the contrary, I will go ahead and humor you: What, pray tell, was the reason for USA intervention then?

quote: Or any of the other South American democracies? Taking one example, Chile, and appying it to a blanket condemnation is nonsense.

The USA is in de facto control of a number of SA countries. Such as Columbia, where we have been propping up a pro-US government called the most corrupt in the world for years. All of this is no secret or bizarre conspiracy theory. It's all on the public record. Which is something I suggest that you make yourself more famillar with.

quote: HA HA HA HA HA Stalin killed between 30 and 60 million, nobody knows for sure, Mao also wiped out millions, Pol Pot was on record as killing at least 2 million, and the US leads?

Well I was speaking more in terms of the post war world. But Stalin, according to most accepted estimates, killed no more than one million people. These various 60 million estimates are preposterous and come from cold war period pieces attempting to demonize the USSR by any means nescarry. That would have been such a huge percentage of the population the USSR would have collapsed in a week.
In any event, if you look at the USA's record of intervention. You will find millions and millions of innocents dead. 4 million in vietnam alone, and a few million here and there in various latin american or third world countries. The post-war USA would put Stalin to shame, for sure.

quote: You need to do some SERIOUS reading into what Communist nations really did.

Respectfully, I suggest that you do the same in regards to what the USA has done. I am fully aware that Stalin was a bastard and I don't try to deny this. Stalin was no better than the USA, and set back the cause of socialism for years. As a christian, I find any kind of mass-murder deplorable, and that applies to the actions of the USA as well. Simply because it is my home country doesn't mean I should try to turn a blind eye to it's actions.

	17-10-2002 03:47									#103
	Support Apolyton

quote: Yes, we ran over our citizens with tanks when they wanted a better life...no wait that was China.

I hope your not referring to Tianemen Square. Nobody was run over with Tanks.

Kent State Shows how the U.S. reacts after a mere six days, and a couple thousand people.

Tianemen lasted for 3 months, and had 200,000 - 300,000 people.... and the students were beginning to get luny in their claims. As if 200,000 student think they can voice what China wants, a country of 1,000,000,000+

quote: And then we arrested a bunch of them because they created a new religion...oh, that was China, sorry.

No, we killed the Branch Davidians.

quote: Well, we do attck unarmed recon planes in international airspace...no wait, that was China.

I am sure we would if China were arrogant enough to fly recon planes 12 miles off our coast.

	17-10-2002 03:56									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by NeOmega As if 200,000 student think they can voice what China wants, a country of 1,000,000,000+

Damn student agitators. How dare they protest for democratic reforms!

http://www.time.com/time/asia/asiabuzz/2000/05/29/

	17-10-2002 04:04									#105
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Damn student agitators. How dare they protest for democratic reforms!

First mistaken assumption..... Democracy is not necessarily the best form of government. It really matters on the people running the country.

Second Mistaken Assumption.... The students did not show up to protest Communism. They were there to protest corruption.... the communist leaders straying from communist principles and enriching themselves.

Third mistaken Assumption.... when a girl gets up, in the later stages of the protests, and begins yelling "I am commander and chief of the new peoples Democracy of China!" and has a following of 35,000+, although, obviously, nobody elected her, and in fact another factional leader has sprung up.... things are getting a little crazy..... Luny.

Fourth Mistaken assumption...... your link leads anywhere but to a blank page.... or that I want the cookies from your link.

	17-10-2002 04:05									#106
	Put an end to popups!

Any defense of Tiananmen Square is pretty ridiculous, come on.

	17-10-2002 04:10									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

If you could imagine for one moment, 300,000student protestors on the Washington D.C. mall for 3 months, protesting they want communism......

How do you think the U.S. government would have reacted?

Honestly.

	17-10-2002 04:52									#108
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by NeOmega If you could imagine for one moment, 300,000student protestors on the Washington D.C. mall for 3 months, protesting they want communism...... .

First, by the time the PLA troops entered the square on June 3, the crowd had dwindled to possibly as few as 5000, and was nowhere near 300,000

Second, your "protesting they want communism" statement contradicts your assertion that the students were merely protesting corruption.

	17-10-2002 05:20									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I agree that Tianamen Square is indefinsible under virtually any standards, but his point that the US would have reacted violently in a similar situation is valid.

	17-10-2002 06:23									#110
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Second, your "protesting they want communism" statement contradicts your assertion that the students were merely protesting corruption.

To your first point I will capitulate.

To the second. 300,000 had shown up to protest corruption. Perhpas the last 5,000 were the ones there wanting democracy.

I am of the belief, if I was born and raised in communist China, I would make a damn fine communist, and I would be a great asset to my country.

I was born in the United States of America. I make a damn fine American in my opinion. I hold our free market and bill of rights as religiously as a christian holds the Bible.
I do not believe the majority, (as a democracy would require), of Chinese, want a Democracy. I believe most of them hold Communist ideals dear to themselves and their identities.... and by most I mean more than 51%. I have met a few exchange students from high school. Believe me, I have had at length conversations with them... and once past the culture shock, it was quite amazing how, (in American terms), "blindly" they accept communism with Chinese characteristics.

I am no communist, only because I find the philosophy completely un-American. But I see no reason why communist and capitalist nations cannot live side by side in peace and harmony.

Besides humanity's incessant want to preach.

	17-10-2002 19:01									#111
	Re: Re: Sometimes you just have to answer Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by monkspider True, but as my post later clarified, Vietnam itself wasn't a matter of great interest for the USA. But if the "example" of Vietnam spread, possibly even as far as Japan, it would create a very problematic situation for American buisness interests.

Which is a DIFFERENT answer from your intial answer.

quote: Why else would the USA be there? To spread freedom and Democracy?

You just contridicted yourself, YOU sated the reason was "economic Imperialism", when shown this was incorrect, you replied with lol smiley.
No anwser at all.
The US was there as part of the Truman doctrone, attempting to stop the spread of Communist states, and the South's government wasn't as unpopular as many revisionist historians now like to claim, as the NLF found out during the TeT offensive.

quote: What Democracies did the USSR stifle in South America or Africa or Asia? The USSR tended to allow China to handle things in Asia. The USA has crushed democracies time and time again in latin America, killing millions of innocents in the process, all to prop military dictatorships in the name of US buisness interests.

I notice you didn't bother to comment on Europe, but you also show a lack of vision in the far east.
North Korea was a Russian puppet, China commited forces on Stalin's urging, as Mao was an ardent follower of him, the break between the two came after Stalin's death, and he was denouced, Mao took exception to this.
Also, North Vietnam was a RUSSIAN puppet, Ho didn't trust nor like China, he felt and feared they would invade on the slightest pretext.
Russia spent a lot of time subverting South West Africa, as well as Ethiopia and Somalia.
I might also add that the US never toppled a democratic South American governemnt, rigged elections followed by a Communist government is not a "Democracy", your entire model is flawed and incorrect.

quote: Respectfully, I would say the same to you.

WHich is why I do, and you should not.

quote: Wrong, Stalinism was successful to a large degree. There is a good reason why the Soviet Union was referred to as the second world.

It suceeced at the point of a gun, and only on that backs of millions of virtual slaves.

quote: It took third world peasents and despite crippling civil war and two world wars, improved the standard of living for the average soviet quite considerably.

A standard far below the lowest western nation, hardly an achievment.

quote: Of course, when the Soviet Union whent capitalist, it took all those Russian workers back to the third world, but we're not supposed to say that. I appologize. I know any success that Stalinism had doesn't justify it. But American leaders at the time were quite concerned with the ammount of economic progress the Stalinist model can create in a short period of time. At least, up until the late 70s or so, when things started to stagnate.

Things stagnated because more and more dissadents were formenting rebellion against the Soviet system, led by men such as Andrei Sakharov and many others began a wave of protests that reached the west, and showed the cracks in the Soviet sysetm.

quote: Despite this statement going against all offical documents and so forth to the contrary, I will go ahead and humor you: What, pray tell, was the reason for USA intervention then?

Again the silly lol from the silly communist.
You had it right when you alluded the the Trumen doctrone.
You have it WRONG when you attempt to tie this into an economic stratum.

quote: The USA is in de facto control of a number of SA countries.

A bombastic statement not supported in any fact.

quote: Such as Columbia, where we have been propping up a pro-US government called the most corrupt in the world for years.

As opposed to a giany drug cartel that has been subverting it for years with cocaine money.
Obviously the concept of cause and effect doesn't register on you.

quote: All of this is no secret or bizarre conspiracy theory.

You saying it doesn't make it so, no matter how much you want it to be so.

quote: It's all on the public record.

My turn...
There are NO SUCH "public" records that state the US controls puppet regimes, they exisit only in the minds of looney leftists.

quote: Which is something I suggest that you make yourself more famillar with.

Sorry, "The Dailey Worker" isn't the most interesting thing in the world to read.

quote: Well I was speaking more in terms of the post war world. But Stalin, according to most accepted estimates, killed no more than one million people.

WHAT?????????
A blatent lie on your part.

quote: These various 60 million estimates are preposterous and come from cold war period pieces attempting to demonize the USSR by any means nescarry.

Yes, the bastards resorted to the truth, damn them!

quote: That would have been such a huge percentage of the population the USSR would have collapsed in a week.

More bull, between the late 20 and early 50s, excluding WWII, millions of Soviet citizens simply vanished, never to be seen again, the dissidents speak of the millions murdered quite forcefully.

quote: In any event, if you look at the USA's record of intervention.

This ought to be fun.

quote: You will find millions and millions of innocents dead.

Where?

quote: 4 million in vietnam alone, and a few million here and there in various latin american or third world countries.

More pure bullsh*t, the NLF istself, from it's own sources claimed the total number of civillians killed in 10 years of war with the US was less then 400,000, NOWHERE near 4 million.

quote: The post-war USA would put Stalin to shame, for sure.

More lies from you.
As I suspected, you would just say something, and expect the gullible to pick up on it.
That is the Stalinist way.

quote: Respectfully, I suggest that you do the same in regards to what the USA has done.

I can quote chapter and verse every intervention, force level, and end result, and back it with source material.
Can you?

quote: I am fully aware that Stalin was a bastard and I don't try to deny this.

First correct thing you have said.

quote: Stalin was no better than the USA, and set back the cause of socialism for years.[/qoute]No better...HE WAS A MILLION TIMES WORSE! [quote] As a christian, I find any kind of mass-murder deplorable, and that applies to the actions of the USA as well.

To bad you failed to provide a SINGLE example.

quote: Simply because it is my home country doesn't mean I should try to turn a blind eye to it's actions.

You should try and find some factual accounts, and work from there.
There are quite a few, but in no instance are 'millions' of deaths involved, dispruse yourself of these silly notions.

	17-10-2002 22:07									#112
	Re: Re: Re: Sometimes you just have to answer Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 Which is a DIFFERENT answer from your intial answer.

What?! It's essentialy the same thing I have been saying all along.

quote: You just contridicted yourself, YOU sated the reason was "economic Imperialism", when shown this was incorrect, you replied with lol smiley.

??? America's role in Inochina was Economic Imperialism. It was an attempt to keep the majority of Asian nations in the open sphere of economics. All of this is common knowledge repeated time and time again in various government documents. I'm honestly a bit taken aback that you still try to argue with me on this point.
No anwser at all.

quote: I notice you didn't bother to comment on Europe, but you also show a lack of vision in the far east.

Incorrect, it is you who are showing a blatant lack of vision by confusing our economic interests with benolevent intentions of spreading democracy and freedom.

quote: Russia spent a lot of time subverting South West Africa, as well as Ethiopia and Somalia.

Yes, but in virtually all cases, these third world countries were never democracies to start with, which is what we were talking about initially, America has toppled numerous democracies in it's pursuit of it's economic interests.

quote: I might also add that the US never toppled a democratic South American governemnt,

Incorrect, America has overthrown democracies in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga., Dominican Republic, Grenada. In some cases, these countries have had their democracies overthrown multiple times. For example, 1954 we managed to overthrow guatemal's one attempt at Democracy. There was a new-deal style, reformist-capitalist democratic regime which we managed to overthrow, leaving a veritable hell on earth. And we have repeatedly intervened to keep it that way.

quote: A standard far below the lowest western nation, hardly an achievment.

Well, things in the Soviet Union by the 60s or 70s weren't that much lower than that of the west. In fact, the average Soviet had a higher gross anual income than I did growing up. And I'm an American, if that tells you anything. It really is pretty impressive considering Russia used to be a country of third world peasents.

quote: Things stagnated because more and more dissadents were formenting rebellion against the Soviet system, led by men such as Andrei Sakharov and many others began a wave of protests that reached the west, and showed the cracks in the Soviet sysetm.

Well, things are infinitely more complicated than that. I supose it is the natural patriotic response to assume that our protests led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and I'm sure they affected things to some degree. But in reality, there was much more to it.

quote: A bombastic statement not supported in any fact.

You should read at least the next sentence following one of my statements before dismissing it as not being supported by fact.

quote: You saying it doesn't make it so, no matter how much you want it to be so.

The same holds true for you, friend.

quote: There are NO SUCH "public" records that state the US controls puppet regimes, they exisit only in the minds of looney leftists.

Incorrect, I am fairly suprised that you disagree with me on this point. There are interesting government documents in this vein that exist in vast quanities. It is no fault of your own that you haven't encountered them yourself though, I suppose you are busy with your flag-waving and so forth. But without trying to dig through too much material, here is quick quote from a US congressional paper describing the conditions in El Salvador, a democracy the USA was taking action against.

"The refugees describe what appears to be a systematic campaign conducted by the security forces of El Salvador to deny and rural base for guerilla operations in the norrth. By terrorinzing and depopulating villages in the region, they have sought to isolate the guerillas and create problems of logistics and food supply....The Salvadoran method of "drying up the ocean" involes, according to those who have fled from it's violence, a combination of murder, torture, rape, the burning of crops in order to create starvation conditions, and a prorgam of general terorism and harassment."

Here were strategies remarkably similar to what we employed in Vietnam. And to give you a little bit of background, the US stopped the press from covering this story any further after attrocties started taking place. So the congressional delagate which investigated was quite shocked by what was going on. Which was interesting because the story of El Salvador having a Democracy gained a great deal of press coverage. But government officals didn't want a repeat of the "vietnam syndrome", that is, where the people protest their country taking place in mass murder, and genocide, and so on and so forth. It's interesting that the government had an actual name for it, but I suppose that's another topic.

quote: Sorry, "The Dailey Worker" isn't the most interesting thing in the world to read.

No one needs publications like the "Daily Worker" if you're willing to look below the surface of mainstream news a bit.

quote: More pure bullsh*t, the NLF istself, from it's own sources claimed the total number of civillians killed in 10 years of war with the US was less then 400,000, NOWHERE near 4 million. More lies from you.

[/QUOTE]

Incredible, even the most conservative estimates include around 2 million civillians killed. The most widely accepted numbers are 2,000,000 in the north, and 2,000,000 in the south. Military casualties were 1.1 million killed and 600,000. I'm not sure where you get your estimates, but I'll have to assume it was but a mere folly on your part. I suggest you make sure you are absolutely right in the future before dismissing one's claims as "pure bullsh*t".

	17-10-2002 23:21									#113
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

This is all we need address:

"No one needs publications like the "Daily Worker" if you're willing to look below the surface of mainstream news a bit."

In other words, you believe what you want to without a shread of proof.

I could continue the post by post thing, but to what end?
We are both convinced we are right, so we leave it at that.

	17-10-2002 23:39									#114
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Fair enough Chris. But I don't see how my willingness to look beyond what the mainstream press publishes equates to me "believing what I want to without a shred of proof."

Godspeed, old friend, godspeed.

	18-10-2002 02:43									#115
	Tired of ads?

I don't know how this turned into another "evil" US diatribe. The question was about the UN and the absurdity of assigning Libya to head the human rights commission. What does that have to do with the United States? It wasn't our idea. I guess we just get the blame by default now...

	18-10-2002 03:16									#116
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Incorrect, America has overthrown democracies in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga., Dominican Republic, Grenada.

I know for a fact that the government in Grenada was not a democracy. I think the chances are better than average that the rest of your examples are also bullshit. Still think that America was involved in East Timor?

	18-10-2002 03:38									#117
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

See above Drake.
As for East Timor, the USA supplied over 90% of the war material as well as crucial diplomatic aid in an Indoneisan invasion of Timor in 76. They continued to supply military aide even when the attrocities taking place were well known, and even blocked UN attempts to try to deter aggression on Indonesia's part.
In 1977 when the death toll was well over 200,000, Jimmy Carter approved increased military aide to Indonesia to drive it even higher.
In government telegrams, UN ambassador Daniel Moynihan bragged about the American-backed indonesians killing 10% of the population of East Timor.
It was a classic example of American hypocrisy on the issue of human rights and a terrible tragedy.

	18-10-2002 03:42									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: In 1977 when the death toll was well over 200,000, Jimmy Carter approved increased military aide to Indonesia to drive it even higher.

Ahh, yes. We all know that Jimmy Carter is a butcher....

BTW, you didn't deal with Grenada. How exactly was Grenada a democracy?

	18-10-2002 06:50									#119
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

i got banned for making A un is a joke thread wonder why this thread wasnt closed Ming are you biased againest me.