Why waste time, money (and lives) on the Mideast?

[Blind Pew]

Dude, the only reason there is so much violence in the middle-east is because we rushed to invade. The only reason we went over there is for money. MONEY MONEY MONEY! Over a million innocent Iraqis have been killed because we are so frickin greedy!

As long as you think there is nothing you can do and an individual cannot make a difference, you won't be able to.

Not only are you disgustingly lazy, you are uneducated and obviously a mindless acceptor of authority.

As long as we question authority, it stays fresh. As soon as we stop questioning authority, it becomes stagnant and corrupt. And because of people like you who are to lazy to get up off their fat asses and protest, we go to war so that politicians and CEOs that are already rich beyond imagination can steal a few more bucks.

As long as we continue to mindlessly follow our leaders, the world will continue to fall into the dark abyss of Conservativeness.

[nerodx]

Okay I can't ignore this.

Dude, the only reason there is so much violence in the middle-east is because we rushed to invade. The only reason we went over there is for money. MONEY MONEY MONEY! Over a million innocent Iraqis have been killed because we are so frickin greedy!

Money was A reason, not THE reason. Money is always a factor in every situation, from war, to peace. Yes, people are greedy, human nature. Honestly, do you send any money to charities or anything such as this? If you do that's fantastic, but insulting others does not fix any problems. Also, we have been in the Middle East for a very long time, I'm fairly sure that was the biggest reason for the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan. We were already there.

As long as you think there is nothing you can do and an individual cannot make a difference, you won't be able to.

Not only are you disgustingly lazy, you are uneducated and obviously a mindless acceptor of authority.

Again the insulting thing, getting us nowhere. It's not laziness, it's realism. People certainly make a difference but by themselves? No. It's rare enough for a protest group to change something, but an individual has very little influence unless they do something extremely radical (NOT RECOMMENDED)

As long as we question authority, it stays fresh. As soon as we stop questioning authority, it becomes stagnant and corrupt. And because of people like you who are to lazy to get up off their fat asses and protest, we go to war so that politicians and CEOs that are already rich beyond imagination can steal a few more bucks.

As long as we continue to mindlessly follow our leaders, the world will continue to fall into the dark abyss of Conservativeness.

Ever notice how every country has a leader of some kind? People need their leaders. Without them we can't get anything done, we just get confused and panic. Questioning authority is fine, I disagree with my government on all sorts of things. But conservativeness is not a dark abyss, it isn't that great but liberals aren't all that great themselves. Both groups have their flaws. If we start blindly following liberal leaders, then we're still screwed! We need a little bit of both. Also, please describe just how CEO's are paid through war? Do you understand or do you just listen when people blame corporations for everything?


Okay rant over now. Had to vent. Back to happy faces!

[Ragdollmaster]

Dude, the only reason there is so much violence in the middle-east is because we rushed to invade.

Completely and utterly wrong. We did not rush to invade. Other countries have been warring there for decades (Russia v Afghanistan, Iraq invades Kuwait, etc) We have been there as peacekeepers serving mainly to flush out terrorists that killed people on American soil. Said terrorists have been causing mayhem throughout recent history and enjoy killing everyone who does not agree with their extremist Muslim views, including other Muslims who don't pray fifty times a day and slaughter infidels. They alone cause the violence; our soldiers tone it down and statistics prove it.

The only reason we went over there is for money. MONEY MONEY MONEY! Over a million innocent Iraqis have been killed because we are so frickin greedy!

Bullshit. The people at the White House, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, are actually smart. Tell me; HOW DO WE GAIN MONEY FROM THIS? Secretly transporting out all the oil? All the oil in the Middle East is worth less than what we spend each day we are in the Middle East on military expenditures. Money is no reason and never has been one. Furthermore, have we killed any unarmed civilians? No, we haven't, nor have we caused their deaths. In fact, we reduced that statistic; without armed peacekeepers from the US and various allies from the UN and NATO forces, there would have been many more innocents' deaths because there would be no one to stop them from dying.

As long as you think there is nothing you can do and an individual cannot make a difference, you won't be able to.

An individual can make a difference when they know what they're talking about and/or are not 8 years old. Sadly you do not fulfill either, or at best, fulfill the latter.

Not only are you disgustingly lazy, you are uneducated and obviously a mindless acceptor of authority.

The irony in this seems to escape you. Have you ever done anything politically major concerning the war in the Middle East? No? I thought not. I also think you could use a reeducation before you go about claiming that people are being 'mindless acceptors of authority'; the thing is, you are just as 'mindless', if not moreso, than he is. Believe it or not there's an entire hardcore demographic that always opposes the government. YES, YOU ARE SO GENIUS AND INDIVIDUAL, NO WORRIES MATE, IGNORE THE 10 MILLION PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THE SAME THING, THEY MUST BE COPYING YOU.

And because of people like you who are to lazy to get up off their fat asses and protest, we go to war so that politicians and CEOs that are already rich beyond imagination can steal a few more bucks.

Your protests won't do jackshit anyways. To oppose an action of Congress is a pretty fucking hard task, one whose difficulty that you don't seem to even remotely comprehend. You either have to be the President so you can veto (and even a veto can be overridden) or you have to write to a member of Congress who will suggest a repeal and then have to convince 2/3 of Congress to go along with you before you do ANYTHING. Protests just give the government justification for keeping things from you. It's almost like a political form of tit-for-tat. They'll be good at first, but if you start fucking with them, they'll do the same thing to you. And it is counterproductive to fuck with them, so unfortunately, to 'get up off (your) fat ass' and do something would only hinder the efforts of intelligent people who are going about it in a better way, so way to go; not only are you failing, you're actually pushing everyone else who feels like you two steps backwards.

As long as we continue to mindlessly follow our leaders, the world will continue to fall into the dark abyss of Conservativeness.

Do I even need to say anything to this?

TOO LONG; DIDN'T READ: In this post I thrashed an ignorant moron who clearly doesn't know what he's talking about and who is trying to pass off the fact that he can write a few big words as a sign of intelligence. Said moron believes that realism is a sign that we, as realists, are morbidly obese failures at life who ultimately don't have a flying shit about what they're talking about, which is pretty ironic and hypocritical. Furthermore, said moron spouts out sheep-like arguments that have little if any relevance to the topic, once again proving just how smart he is.

TOO LONG; DIDN'T READ 2: Blind Pew has more or less proven himself to be a fairly dumb individual based upon his latest response.







No, go on, try to refute my argument. I'll just sit back and make some popcorn and watch you make a fool of yourself. Then I'll wash my hands of the salt and type up another response that will knock you out a fifth story window and onto your fat arse, you moronic neanderthal.

(And yes, I do act like a dick toward idiots. Have you all not noticed that yet?)

[Untadaike]

Wow, you seem pretty hung up about the whole thing, Ragdollmaster. Maybe you should make yourself some popcorn. You need it.

[Ragdollmaster]

Popcorn and a martini (or six, considering my faith in humanity dropped a few notches)

[Grayswandir]

[Ragdollmaster]

Dammit, Grayswandir clearly wins.

[Endoperez]

Dude, the only reason there is so much violence in the middle-east is because we rushed to invade.

Completely and utterly wrong. We did not rush to invade. Other countries have been warring there for decades (Russia v Afghanistan, Iraq invades Kuwait, etc) We have been there as peacekeepers serving mainly to flush out terrorists that killed people on American soil. Said terrorists have been causing mayhem throughout recent history and enjoy killing everyone who does not agree with their extremist Muslim views, including other Muslims who don't pray fifty times a day and slaughter infidels. They alone cause the violence; our soldiers tone it down and statistics prove it.

US helped, trained and armed Afghans against Russians, and dethroned Iraq's first democratically chosen government.
It's not recent history, and blind pew was also wrong, the violence absolutely did not start with the invasion, but it might explain 1) why the terrorists are so good and 2) why many people in the area don't like US.
Also, Afghanistan isn't Middle-East, but I'll discuss it too since you brought it up (again?).

The only reason we went over there is for money. MONEY MONEY MONEY! Over a million innocent Iraqis have been killed because we are so frickin greedy!

Bullshit. The people at the White House, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, are actually smart. Tell me; HOW DO WE GAIN MONEY FROM THIS? Secretly transporting out all the oil? All the oil in the Middle East is worth less than what we spend each day we are in the Middle East on military expenditures. Money is no reason and never has been one. Furthermore, have we killed any unarmed civilians? No, we haven't, nor have we caused their deaths. In fact, we reduced that statistic; without armed peacekeepers from the US and various allies from the UN and NATO forces, there would have been many more innocents' deaths because there would be no one to stop them from dying.

I agree that the leaders most probably thought they were doing what they had to. The reasons might not have been money. Controlling oil probably was one of the reasons, though. I also agree that armed peacekeepers are necessary to keep peace, and that their presence helps save civilian lives. I disagree with the rest, especially these two claims:

1) All the oil in Middle East is worht less than what the US spends each day in military expenditures.

http://www.iags.org/futureofoil.html
This study is based on 2001 information.
Of the 1000 billion barrels of oil reserves, 66% are in the Middle East. That's about 660 billion barrels of oil. I believe the billion used is "milliard" to the rest of the world, which translates into 660 000 000 000 barrels of oil, please correct me if I'm wrong. Let's say that one barrel costs 65 US dollars, a conservative estimate especially since the price will keep on climbing for decades. That makes 42 900 billion dollars.

42 900 000 000 000 - that's a lot of money.
Much more than the 1 289 - 1 721 billion dollars the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are estimated to cost between 2001-2018.
http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications ... Wars_i.pdf

2) US (does this include allies?) hasn't killed or caused any deaths of unarmed civilians.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSGEE5B10I0 - 88 civilians, total, died in Iraq last month. It's the lowest thus far since the invasion began in 2003. They weren't killed by US troops, but during a war started by the US.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/world ... rmany.html - German minister resigns because he claimed he didn't know civilians died in a bombing in Afghanistan.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=11 ... =351020403 - "The rally was staged to denounce the US forces' operation in Laghman province, where 15 civilians were killed on Monday."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =104061892 - "The team from Kabul also announced the official death toll from the battle in Farah province, saying 140 innocent people were killed, along with 25 Taliban fighters."
http://cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm - ""What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties -- 3,000 - 3,400 [October 7, 2001 thru March 2002] civilian deaths -- in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan?"
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/rawanews.php?id=959 - "The demonstrators were condemning an early morning raid in Khost province that killed four people and wounded two"

(And yes, I do act like a dick toward idiots. Have you all not noticed that yet?)

Must be hard to be you, then.

[Untadaike]

Go on picking the posts apart. Considering Blind Pew's unresponsiveness, looks like he doesn't care much.

[Endoperez]

Go on picking the posts apart. Considering Blind Pew's unresponsiveness, looks like he doesn't care much.

I tend to waste WAAAY too much time on silly posts and threads. And discussions, but there people have the chance to stop me. They don't matter, but I can't let them go. "I think he's wrong" -> "I'll check if he's wrong" -> "I guess I'll post few links so he can check them himself" -> "oops, I ended up writing an essay. Well, I better check it for typos"...

Also, I quoted Ragdollmaster's post, and he quoted Blind Pew in his post.

[Untadaike]

I should have used quotations, I guess. I was referring to Ragdollmaster. It doesn't really matter, though.

[Grayswandir]

My duck already ended this discussion as it is.

[TheBigCheese]

Why is it that arguments are sometimes more entertaining than videogames?