Author Topic: Syria(sly?) (Read 8085 times)

AceHigh · « **Reply #240 on:** September 18, 2013, 03:14:43 AM »

So now Obama acts like that passive aggressive room mate than nobody likes...

Gh0st93 · « **Reply #241 on:** September 18, 2013, 03:37:03 AM »

Quote from: Tiffanys on September 18, 2013, 03:01:27 AM

What the actual fuck? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jJnCwN94NE

Obama lifted a ban that prevented arming terrorists...

Apparently the EU ended their arms embargo on Syrian rebels almost four months ago.

lololitas · « **Reply #242 on:** September 18, 2013, 06:55:30 AM »

True, but germany is not making any money out of it.

I remember that one deal of selling quite a few leopard 2A6 tanks to saudi arabia bursting a few months ago too, due to resistance from our population. Heck our economy must be in the dumps by now

Quote from: Tiffanys on September 18, 2013, 03:01:27 AM

What the actual fuck? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jJnCwN94NE

Obama lifted a ban that prevented arming terrorists...

Anyone remember the story about bush and the bin-laden family being good friends?

AceHigh · « **Reply #243 on:** September 18, 2013, 06:25:59 PM »

Well, who in their right mind would sell one of the most advanced tanks in the world to a corrupt absolute monarchy, that is promoting the most extreme religious sect and the only country in the world named after it's own ruler? I can't believe Germany was even considering it in the first place.

lololitas · « **Reply #244 on:** September 18, 2013, 07:22:36 PM »

Well we need money to pay the debts of the countries that are complaining about us selling weapons ^^ I remember a certain irish banker scandal, where they made fun of the german government paying them, that was around the same time as the debate about the tanks. Anyway, with some leopards down there, there won't be anymore rebellions and civil wars right? Well, at least they'd end fast and we'd have stable tyrannic governments, what else do we want as antagonists. They should be just right for teh US patriotism too.

Osmo · « **Reply #245 on:** September 20, 2013, 08:01:00 PM »

Quote from: AceHigh on September 18, 2013, 06:25:59 PM

Well, who in their right mind would sell one of the most advanced tanks in the world to a corrupt absolute monarchy, that is promoting the most extreme religious sect and the only country in the world named after it's own ruler? I can't believe Germany was even considering it in the first place.

The religious aspect is just a smokescreen on all sides.

jaybug · « **Reply #246 on:** September 20, 2013, 11:20:09 PM »

http://www.france24.com/en/20130920-tunisian-women-waging-sex-jihad-syria

And just think, if Tunisia is like France, all those single moms on the dole.

I think Tiffs idea has met its match. This is quite the opposite of zero population growth. I had a terrible thought, but after reading this article, I think it must be a viable countermeasure to this new front in this war against civilization. You are going to have to guess.

Gh0st93 · « **Reply #247 on:** September 21, 2013, 12:07:07 AM »

Wow that's some really..... I mean.... Just wow

So just out of curiosity is that whole "giant fireball them to whatever god they want" idea still on the table?

Tiffanys · « **Reply #248 on:** September 21, 2013, 07:16:46 AM »

What the fuck.... really?

jaybug · « **Reply #249 on:** September 22, 2013, 09:36:53 PM »

it's one way to ensure victory over the long haul. By out-breeding all other competitors for any and all resources, you win, if by no other means than by default. You can't have it all, if you leave no one behind to continue your ideas.

FluffyPanda · « **Reply #250 on:** September 24, 2013, 07:48:35 AM »

i don't see whats the point of sending in hundreds of solders to another country to either kill or be killed... take out the leader, and you take out the army.. Obama and Syria Pres. should just have a punch on :3

Xycolian2332 · « **Reply #251 on:** September 24, 2013, 11:04:58 AM »

Quote from: FluffyPanda on September 24, 2013, 07:48:35 AM

i don't see whats the point of sending in hundreds of solders to another country to either kill or be killed... take out the leader, and you take out the army.. Obama and Syria Pres. should just have a punch on :3

O...k...?

Tiffanys · « **Reply #252 on:** September 24, 2013, 12:56:46 PM »

Quote from: FluffyPanda on September 24, 2013, 07:48:35 AM

i don't see whats the point of sending in hundreds of solders to another country to either kill or be killed... take out the leader, and you take out the army.. Obama and Syria Pres. should just have a punch on :3

Sending soldiers was never even on the table...

lololitas · « **Reply #253 on:** September 24, 2013, 12:58:43 PM »

True, only rockets filled with roses and drone-envoys of peace, probably guarded by those pork-bullets I saw on another thread

VicViper573 · « **Reply #254 on:** September 25, 2013, 05:20:11 PM »

Quote from: FluffyPanda on September 24, 2013, 07:48:35 AM

i don't see whats the point of sending in hundreds of solders to another country to either kill or be killed... take out the leader, and you take out the army.. Obama and Syria Pres. should just have a punch on :3

Actually, the easy way to settle conflicts is to send the politicians and their own children to fight the other countries' politicians and children.

I bet the war would end really quickly when its their own asses being shot at. Notice how these wars drag on and on when it's not their kids in the thick of it...

I'm all for that strategy. In fact, we should make it a constitutional amendment!

lololitas · « **Reply #255 on:** September 25, 2013, 05:47:04 PM »

That's a great idea: forced consctiption of politicians. "You want to represent the country and it's citizens, then also do so in war!" The problem with that'd be that we'd go even further away form a technocratic government and instead will be governed by idiots that'll scream one of the words that killed the most people in the world.

AceHigh · « **Reply #256 on:** September 25, 2013, 06:25:54 PM »

Like Prince Harry?

Oh wait, he volunteered. I guess that is the difference between noblesse oblige versus the assholes of the human kind we know as politicians.

Tiffanys · « **Reply #257 on:** September 25, 2013, 07:36:08 PM »

That's a really stupid idea. A lot of the politicians served back in their days anyways... sending a bunch of doddery old men into battle wouldn't do much good to begin with.

The problem with "our leader fights your leader to the death" things is that a leader isn't necessarily the best fighter and they'd be far better served as the greatest thinker, as such it would only be the savages that would win those battles without fail. That said, even if nations involved in conflicts could choose a champion to fight on their behalf and settle it that way, it's only one very small piece of what makes a nation. One nation may have soldier per soldier far better soldiers but overall they could be at a significant disadvantage due to wealth, technology, or other things.

War is not a game that can be played with only one piece upon the board. Many different ones are needed and if a people are so fervent in their beliefs that they would go to war it goes to suggest that they may not so readily accept the results of such duels and prefer to use the full extent of their collective might. Most people involved in conflicts tend to believe they're right otherwise it's a rather pointless war.

That said, while such scenarios are amusing to picture... they don't really have much place in the real world today.

lololitas · « **Reply #258 on:** September 25, 2013, 07:52:51 PM »

Actually I don't think most of germanies politicians served in the army, but then again germany can't go calling wars anymore, we can't even denounce certain ethnic groups without being removed from any influential position (poor günther grass). It's true that your leader fights my leader is stupid, but I'm not saying they should fight by themselves, I'm just saying that they have to join the army, so that they have to experience wars first hand.

(click to show/hide)

AceHigh · « **Reply #259 on:** September 25, 2013, 08:02:17 PM »

Quote from: Tiffanys on September 25, 2013, 07:36:08 PM

That's a really stupid idea. A lot of the politicians served back in their days anyways... sending a bunch of doddery old men into battle wouldn't do much good to begin with.

The consul of Rome was usually on the battlefield. Leading, but on the battlefield.

Anyway you missed the point, politicians shouldn't be sent to war because they are great fighters or not, but because it would make them think twice about waging war. Is the necessity of war so high that the leader would put his life on the line? Then there is a good chance it is a justified war.