Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > USA > The Trailer Park
Reload this Page >

More American hypocrisy

More American hypocrisy

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 27th 2015, 2:02 am
  #61  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Sally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

We find ourselves in an Orwellian cycle of war against shifting opponents. The true causes are largely economic.

I think people have to ask themselves whether they want to get sucked into it all.

Regarding "What should have been done about Germany in 1938?" some measure of blame lay with the heavy war reparations demanded after WWI. Keep pushing people and extremism will arise.
Sally Redux is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 2:08 am
  #62  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,876
Giantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by Lion in Winter
Why is it impossible to have a discussion on political matters on BE without resorting to red baiting?

And why do none of those that do it supply any sort of definition of what they mean by "leftist"? It's meaningless as used and detracts from the discussion.

I mean, it is just possible that there are independent thinkers on here who do not find it necessary to adopt any official "stance" across all issues.
That is that poster's modus operandi. Best to ignore people of his ilk and concentrate on discussing the input of others.
Giantaxe is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 2:24 am
  #63  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Sally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond reputeSally Redux has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by robin1234
Well, let me defend Chamberlain. The British were rearming in the face of the German threat from about 1936 on, just not single mindedly enough, because of opposition in parliament, conflicting budget priorities etc. But by 1939 the UK were on the way to having their fighter defenses in place, and their heavy bomber capability was being developed. The army was being beefed up by 1937. (My father joined up in 1937, presumably thousands of others did too.). Yes, Britain should have made Czechoslovakia the line in the sand, and Hitler would have backed down. However, the Second World War would still have happened, just that events would have unfolded in a slightly different order.

As for the dodgy dossier, I (an ordinary member of the public who read the news) knew that the dodgy dossier was complete lies, and there were no WMDs. So, the U.S. government knew that too. Their excuse for going to war was as flimsy as Germany's excuse for invading Poland in 1939.
Lancet estimate of cost of Iraq War:

"more than 116,000 civilian lives in the space of eight years and cost the US about £530 billion"

I used The Telegraph as it is not 'leftie'.

Iraq war 10 years on: at least 116,000 civilians killed - Telegraph
Sally Redux is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 6:14 am
  #64  
BE Forum Addict
 
FlaviusAetius's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA USA
Posts: 1,206
FlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by robin1234
Well, let me defend Chamberlain. The British were rearming in the face of the German threat from about 1936 on, just not single mindedly enough, because of opposition in parliament, conflicting budget priorities etc. But by 1939 the UK were on the way to having their fighter defenses in place, and their heavy bomber capability was being developed. The army was being beefed up by 1937. (My father joined up in 1937, presumably thousands of others did too.). Yes, Britain should have made Czechoslovakia the line in the sand, and Hitler would have backed down. However, the Second World War would still have happened, just that events would have unfolded in a slightly different order.

As for the dodgy dossier, I (an ordinary member of the public who read the news) knew that the dodgy dossier was complete lies, and there were no WMDs. So, the U.S. government knew that too. Their excuse for going to war was as flimsy as Germany's excuse for invading Poland in 1939.
This has always been the debate - and there are two sides. The one says the years of Chamberlain's appeasement policies bought time to rearm (my father joined the RAF in 1936 and wasn't de-mobbed until 1945).

The other, and very intriguing view is that if Chamberlain had encouraged Poland to accommodate Germany on Danzig, with railway rights across the Corridor, WWII might have been avoided, at least for a while. Germany was talking about a military alliance with Poland aimed at the USSR. That would certainly have been much more in Poland's interest than in relying on an Anglo-French guarantee that bought it what it bought it until 1991.

[By the way, I would be interested in knowing how you KNEW that Powell's presentation to the UN on Iraq was a pack of lies before HE knew it. Was Powell stupid, uninformed, or a totally unprincipled liar? Did you have better information available than the highest levels of our government? Don't forget, intelligence is seldom absolutely correct, and policymakers have to decide on whether act on the best information available or not, and face consequences either way.]
FlaviusAetius is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 6:46 am
  #65  
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,130
CelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Refresher debate of the times:

http://publish.dvlabs.com/democracyn...n2013-0206.mp4
CelticRover is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 7:12 am
  #66  
He/him
 
kimilseung's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: WA
Posts: 18,931
kimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond reputekimilseung has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
Was Powell stupid, uninformed, or a totally unprincipled liar?
I think he (Powell) says that he was misinformed and misled. A little look across history told us to question the presentation. Do you remember it, fuzzy pictures of Taji with claims given in a not very confident manner. A number of voices from inside the administration (Greg Thielmann) and the UN team (Scott Ritter) that made statements to the contrary before the invasion.
kimilseung is online now  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 7:14 am
  #67  
Heading for Poppyland
 
robin1234's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: North Norfolk and northern New York State
Posts: 14,686
robin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
This has always been the debate - and there are two sides. The one says the years of Chamberlain's appeasement policies bought time to rearm (my father joined the RAF in 1936 and wasn't de-mobbed until 1945).

The other, and very intriguing view is that if Chamberlain had encouraged Poland to accommodate Germany on Danzig, with railway rights across the Corridor, WWII might have been avoided, at least for a while. Germany was talking about a military alliance with Poland aimed at the USSR. That would certainly have been much more in Poland's interest than in relying on an Anglo-French guarantee that bought it what it bought it until 1991.

[By the way, I would be interested in knowing how you KNEW that Powell's presentation to the UN on Iraq was a pack of lies before HE knew it. Was Powell stupid, uninformed, or a totally unprincipled liar? Did you have better information available than the highest levels of our government? Don't forget, intelligence is seldom absolutely correct, and policymakers have to decide on whether act on the best information available or not, and face consequences either way.]
I think Powell and colleagues, including Rumsfield, Cheney etc. were unprincipled liars. The U.S. and UK governments must have known there were either no WMDs, or only degraded, older, legacy WMDs.

OK I didn't "know" but the indications pointed strongly. Scott Ritter, UN weapons inspector, came to the college where I worked for public seminars and classroom invitations etc. I met him and found his evidence and narrative compelling. This was an interesting case of actually meeting an expert witness and being convinced, rather than just reading about an issue and soon forgetting....I believe the US government tried to implicate him in a child sex case but not sure of the details of that.
robin1234 is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 7:15 am
  #68  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,876
Giantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by kimilseung
I think he (Powell) says that he was misinformed and misled. A little look across history told us to question the presentation. Do you remember it, fuzzy pictures of Taji with claims given in a not very confident manner. A number of voices from inside the administration (Greg Thielmann) and the UN team (Scott Ritter) that made statements to the contrary before the invasion.
Powell has subsequently admitted that giving that speech was the worst moment of his political career. He knew that the evidence was at least partially fabricated, but chose to give the speech anyway. It's a tragedy that he didn't have the guts to resign instead.
Giantaxe is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 7:23 am
  #69  
Heading for Poppyland
 
robin1234's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: North Norfolk and northern New York State
Posts: 14,686
robin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
This has always been the debate - and there are two sides. The one says the years of Chamberlain's appeasement policies bought time to rearm (my father joined the RAF in 1936 and wasn't de-mobbed until 1945).

The other, and very intriguing view is that if Chamberlain had encouraged Poland to accommodate Germany on Danzig, with railway rights across the Corridor, WWII might have been avoided, at least for a while. Germany was talking about a military alliance with Poland aimed at the USSR. That would certainly have been much more in Poland's interest than in relying on an Anglo-French guarantee that bought it what it bought it until 1991.

]
I hadn't read that, about Germany contemplating an alliance with Poland. I'd be sceptical about it working out for Poland long term, since we know Hitler despised Poles as much as he hated and feared Jews. And if Poland had thrown in their lot with Germany, presumably France and the UK would no longer have felt bound by their earlier guarantees to Poland (although, as you say, they weren't worth a lot to Poland anyway. ) I'd be interested to read more about that, though.
robin1234 is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 9:01 am
  #70  
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,130
CelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

I was aware of a German/Polish non aggression pact from 1934, even although Germany had been planning to invade Poland as far back as the 1920's, but not aware of any mutual military alliance.

The Avalon Project : The British Bluebook
CelticRover is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 10:49 am
  #71  
Heading for Poppyland
 
robin1234's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: North Norfolk and northern New York State
Posts: 14,686
robin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond reputerobin1234 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by CelticRover
I was aware of a German/Polish non aggression pact from 1934, even although Germany had been planning to invade Poland as far back as the 1920's, but not aware of any mutual military alliance.

The Avalon Project : The British Bluebook
Well, apparently in 1938, having annexed Czechoslovakia, Germany proposed a renewal of the 1934 pact with Poland, with the addition of a German road and rail corridor at Gdansk, so the Germans could easily move troops and materiel from Germany proper into East Prussia, presumably in preparation for invasion of the Soviet Union. Poland declined, and the rest is history.
robin1234 is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 10:56 am
  #72  
BE Forum Addict
 
zzrmark's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Location: Lauren's Co. SC by way of Palmetto, Florida
Posts: 3,267
zzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond reputezzrmark has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by robin1234
Well, apparently in 1938, having annexed Czechoslovakia, Germany proposed a renewal of the 1934 pact with Poland, with the addition of a German road and rail corridor at Gdansk, so the Germans could easily move troops and materiel from Germany proper into East Prussia, presumably in preparation for invasion of the Soviet Union. Poland declined, and the rest is history.

Somewhat ironic that, after all the 'kerfuffle', Germany is now the economic powerhouse of Europe
zzrmark is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 11:34 am
  #73  
BE Forum Addict
 
FlaviusAetius's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA USA
Posts: 1,206
FlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond reputeFlaviusAetius has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by robin1234
I think Powell and colleagues, including Rumsfield, Cheney etc. were unprincipled liars. The U.S. and UK governments must have known there were either no WMDs, or only degraded, older, legacy WMDs.

OK I didn't "know" but the indications pointed strongly. Scott Ritter, UN weapons inspector, came to the college where I worked for public seminars and classroom invitations etc. I met him and found his evidence and narrative compelling. This was an interesting case of actually meeting an expert witness and being convinced, rather than just reading about an issue and soon forgetting....I believe the US government tried to implicate him in a child sex case but not sure of the details of that.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion regarding the former SecDef and VP.

As someone who worked in Army Intel for several years in the later 1960s, I can tell you that Intelligence gathering and interpretation is an inexact thing. Handlers have their agents (and so do journalists, for that matter) whose sources of information may have greater or lesser veracity. People take sides with their sources and these debates continue up the line.

If you read the background to Powell's presentation to the UN, you will see that there were huge disagreements within the Administration as to where the truth lay. No one knew for sure - and no one could. If the Iraqis had the capability of reconstituting biological or chemical agents in a short period of time, did they "have" WMD? If - as they did - they refused to allow the inspections required of them under UN mandates, could we responsibly walk away from that potential danger?

As for Ritter, after he wasn't given the green light for his more aggressive inspection routine in Iraq he did a 180 and became the antiwar hero who did the college tour and wrote a lot of books on the subject before he went out of circulation in 2011.
FlaviusAetius is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 12:26 pm
  #74  
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,130
CelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

WMD or not, the U.S. was going into Iraq come hell or high water. The notion of ruining Powell's sterling record and credibility was of no concern to the cadre who hatched and carried out the invasion.
CelticRover is offline  
Old Jan 27th 2015, 12:40 pm
  #75  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,876
Giantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond reputeGiantaxe has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: More American hypocrisy

Originally Posted by CelticRover
WMD or not, the U.S. was going into Iraq come hell or high water. The notion of ruining Powell's sterling record and credibility was of no concern to the cadre who hatched and carried out the invasion.
Vanity Fair did a pretty good (and long) job of exposing the White House's lies on WMD and how they threw Joe Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame over a bus after Wilson debunked the Niger yellowcake "intelligence":

Craig Unger on Yellowcake Uranium | Vanity Fair

Last edited by Giantaxe; Jan 27th 2015 at 12:48 pm.
Giantaxe is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.