Saudi Ambassador attack...thwarted

Chaos said:
Which part of "fundamentally" is so damn hard to understand that you decide to ignore it completely?

If you wish to argue that the difference between the Kennedy administration and ANY other US administration of your choice at ANY time in US history is as drastic as the difference between the Hitler regime and the current German government, please, by all means, go ahead and do it.
Click to expand...

This is unreasonable. You're intentionally denying meaningful debate by imposing a "Hitler Standard" on the question. If a nation's governance hasn't swung all the way to to the Hitler Extreme and back again, then it doesn't count. This is a textbook example of the Godwin corollary--intentionally using Hitler to end debate and ignore alternate viewpoints.

The fact is, no Western nation has gone Full Hitler since 1946 (although several in Eastern Europe went Full Stalin). But this doesn't mean their governance doesn't change significantly over the years. Setting Hitler as the standard by which government evolution should be judged is unreasonable.
 
theprestige said:
This is unreasonable. You're intentionally denying meaningful debate by imposing a "Hitler Standard" on the question. If a nation's governance hasn't swung all the way to to the Hitler Extreme and back again, then it doesn't count. This is a textbook example of the Godwin corollary--intentionally using Hitler to end debate and ignore alternate viewpoints.
Click to expand...

It wasn´t me who brought Hitler into the debate; that was Wildcat.

It wasn´t me who insisted that change less drastic than from Hitler to not Hitler must mean I think the US did not change at all; that was Wildcat.

So, if you think that the comparison of Hitler Germany to post-Hitler Germany does not add anything to this debate, take it up with Wildcat, not me.

The fact is, no Western nation has gone Full Hitler since 1946 (although several in Eastern Europe went Full Stalin). But this doesn't mean their governance doesn't change significantly over the years. Setting Hitler as the standard by which government evolution should be judged is unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Fine. What standard would you replace it with? Perhaps "whatever standard is needed in order to deny any link between the attempts on Castro and the current USA"?
 
Chaos said:
It wasn´t me who brought Hitler into the debate; that was Wildcat.
Click to expand...
You decided to go 50 years back in time to support a claim you're making about the present. Why can't I go back 61 years? And hell, I can go back 25 for the eastern half of Germany. If the US is still responsible for the Kennedy response to Castro then you get to take ownership of the Stasi and Hitler.

Chaos said:
Fine. What standard would you replace it with? Perhaps "whatever standard is needed in order to deny any link between the attempts on Castro and the current USA"?
Click to expand...
The current USA certainly does not have a hit pending on Castro, and you'd have to half a century back to find a time it did.

Do you want to guess who built Saddam's bunkers? How about who supplied 52% of Saddam's chemical weapons equipment? Oh look, the DDR and the Bundesrepublik Deutschland cooperating to arm and protect Saddam, years before reunification! Post-WWII Germany's hands are far from clean.

Now about the Iranian attempt to assasinate the Saudi ambassador in the US and also bomb the Israeli embassy, that's pretty much the wrong thing to do in 2011, don't you think so? Unless you can explain how an attempt to kill Castro 50 years ago has any bearing whatsoever on this topic or somehow makes the current US government hypocrites maybe we should stick with relevant facts.
 
WildCat said:
You decided to go 50 years back in time to support a claim you're making about the present. Why can't I go back 61 years? And hell, I can go back 25 for the eastern half of Germany. If the US is still responsible for the Kennedy response to Castro then you get to take ownership of the Stasi and Hitler.
Click to expand...

Which, again, is not the same Germany as today. "Das Deutsche Reich" is not the same "Bundesrepublik Deutschland", and neither is "Deutsche Demokratische Republik".

Whereas, last time I checked, Kennedy was president of the same USA as Bush II and Obama.

The current USA certainly does not have a hit pending on Castro, and you'd have to half a century back to find a time it did.

Do you want to guess who built Saddam's bunkers? How about who supplied 52% of Saddam's chemical weapons equipment? Oh look, the DDR and the Bundesrepublik Deutschland cooperating to arm and protect Saddam, years before reunification! Post-WWII Germany's hands are far from clean.
Click to expand...

I love how you conveniently ignore that this happened at a time when Saddam was still best buddies with the US on account of him opposing those evil folks in Iran. Germany and France did nothing for Saddam that the US didn´t approve of, or at least couldn´t care less about. Only when Saddam got greedy and tried to swallow some of your other best buddies did you suddenly discover that - SURPRISE - the guy was an evil dictator.
 
Chaos said:
I love how you conveniently ignore that this happened at a time when Saddam was still best buddies with the US on account of him opposing those evil folks in Iran. Germany and France did nothing for Saddam that the US didn´t approve of, or at least couldn´t care less about. Only when Saddam got greedy and tried to swallow some of your other best buddies did you suddenly discover that - SURPRISE - the guy was an evil dictator.
Click to expand...

Everyone makes mistakes Chaos. Like electing a Fascist dictator and killing twenty million people.

Letting Saddam keep Khomeini busy is not much different than letting Stalin keep Hitler busy. When Germany elected a fascist dictator and killed twenty million people.
 
Chaos said:
I love how you conveniently ignore that this happened at a time when Saddam was still best buddies with the US on account of him opposing those evil folks in Iran. Germany and France did nothing for Saddam that the US didn´t approve of, or at least couldn´t care less about. Only when Saddam got greedy and tried to swallow some of your other best buddies did you suddenly discover that - SURPRISE - the guy was an evil dictator.
Click to expand...

In Saddam's defense, (if we are to exclude the historical mumbo-jumbo) Kuwait was siphoning crap loads of their oil and practically harassing them. This certainly doesn't justify his behavior, but Kuwait practically begged for Saddam to invade.
 
Pardalis said:
It's "à propos". Mess up your own language.
Click to expand...


99074d54b459448e8.gif


24101
 
Last edited:
L.Y.S. said:
In Saddam's defense, (if we are to exclude the historical mumbo-jumbo) Kuwait was siphoning crap loads of their oil and practically harassing them. This certainly doesn't justify his behavior, but Kuwait practically begged for Saddam to invade.
Click to expand...

Proof.
 
L.Y.S. said:
In Saddam's defense, (if we are to exclude the historical mumbo-jumbo) Kuwait was siphoning crap loads of their oil and practically harassing them. This certainly doesn't justify his behavior, but Kuwait practically begged for Saddam to invade.
Click to expand...

It is well known in the oil industry that this stealing oil was nonsense. They would have needed foreign firms to do it and they say it was Iraqi fantasy.

They were openly exceeding OPEC quotas with little consequences and that affected Iraq quite severely.
 
funk de fino said:
It is well known in the oil industry that this stealing oil was nonsense. They would have needed foreign firms to do it and they say it was Iraqi fantasy.

They were openly exceeding OPEC quotas with little consequences and that affected Iraq quite severely.
Click to expand...

Really? My economics teacher was the one who told me this. Now I'll have to double check.

ETA: Your story checks out. Looks like I'll be having a chat with my Econ professor about this, thank you.
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Now about the Iranian attempt to assasinate the Saudi ambassador in the US and also bomb the Israeli embassy, that's pretty much the wrong thing to do in 2011, don't you think so? Unless you can explain how an attempt to kill Castro 50 years ago has any bearing whatsoever on this topic or somehow makes the current US government hypocrites maybe we should stick with relevant facts.
Click to expand...

Stick with relevant facts. That's rich. If they did that, they wouldn't even be able to Amerika-bash in every stinking thread. If they couldn't Amerika-bash in every stinking thread, they'd have no reason to live.

Besides, I've never seen that happen. Ever. In any thread. Sticking to relevant facts. It doesn't happen. These are not rational debates. These are biased, politically charged cat fights.

It is to laugh. But you and Virus are doing good jobs. Carry on.
 
Chaos said:
Which, again, is not the same Germany as today. "Das Deutsche Reich" is not the same "Bundesrepublik Deutschland", and neither is "Deutsche Demokratische Republik".

Whereas, last time I checked, Kennedy was president of the same USA as Bush II and Obama.



I love how you conveniently ignore that this happened at a time when Saddam was still best buddies with the US on account of him opposing those evil folks in Iran. Germany and France did nothing for Saddam that the US didn´t approve of, or at least couldn´t care less about. Only when Saddam got greedy and tried to swallow some of your other best buddies did you suddenly discover that - SURPRISE - the guy was an evil dictator.
Click to expand...

I think everyone discovered he was an evil dictator when he started doing evil dictator things. Which was when most of the world stopped dealing with him as much as they could.

Oh and about this:

Whereas, last time I checked, Kennedy was president of the same USA as Bush II and Obama.
Click to expand...

Could you please convince all the various protest groups that want to "take back America" of this because they are awfully annoying.
 
Do you believe the attack on the Saudi ambassador was a Jewish plot Empress?
 
Last edited:
L.Y.S. said:
In Saddam's defense, (if we are to exclude the historical mumbo-jumbo) Kuwait was siphoning crap loads of their oil and practically harassing them. This certainly doesn't justify his behavior, but Kuwait practically begged for Saddam to invade.
Click to expand...

How was Kuwait "practically harassing" Iraq?

How was Kuwait "practically begging for Saddam to invade"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom