user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Why didn't we try harder to get their support for the war in Iraq? Nevermind the fact that they were making billions in bribe money from saddam and never would have consented to removing him, but just look at what they could have offered.
Why with thirteen tanks we could have rolled over this insurgency in a week, and then moved on to take on Iran, syria and lebanon at our leisure.
Surely this, the most powerful armor every deployed by the UN, clearly represents their ability to really make a difference in international conflicts.
Herzog, you really, really shouldn't talk about bribe money from Saddam? It was the AMericans and the British who sold Saddam weapons used on the Kurds. It was rummy who shook hands with Saddam. I know that it gets repetive, but really, everytime you bash the U.N. on this, don't forget history. And as for the most powerful armor deployed by the U.N, you guys are the most powerful military and are still struggling in Iraq.
by aya on Wed Sep 13, 06 8:16am
[+]
Only an idiot would suggest that was the entire peacekeeping force. And the number of troops committed to the mission is actually several thousand, not one thousand, as mistated by herzie.
And, mark my words, as soon as the U.N. does develop a fully functioning military, the weenie neocons will be whining about THAT.
This ballot is especially ironic since the ballotmaker wouldn't recognize a tank if he saw one.
Aya:
The U.S. isn't struggling in Iraq. America is days away from total victory in Iraq AND total victory in the "War on Terror." Just ask Karl Rove and Fox News.
(herzie ballot category: UN Bashing)
Change the record for fucks sake if it's not Europeans its the french or the UN and Muslims!!!!
by isay on Wed Sep 13, 06 9:41am
[+]
'Europeans its the french or the UN and Muslims'
If they'd stop screwing up I'd stop lambasting them for screwing up. Do you likewise bitch about whistle-blowers always going after evil CEOs? Or are the ceos wrong for needing whistleblowers to point out their mistakes?
Besides which I also go after the democrats, communists, enviromentalists, animal rights activists and the media.
And PS: french are often considered european, no need to mention both as if they were seperate.
But this is a classic case of attacking the messenger to avoid dealing with the message.
Isay: are 13 tanks and a thousand or so men enough for the situation, or are more peacekeepers demanded if they're to make a real difference?
And doesn't the fact that 13 tanks is the largest force ever deployed by the UN make it seem, well a little weak?
Why don’t you copy and paste the rest of the article Herzog? It may look different to what you want it to be. Why only pick bits out to suit your belittling attitude?
You did well mocking the French and the UN all in one ballot, you’re getting good at this.
by isay on Wed Sep 13, 06 3:57pm
[+]
Well Isay because the rest wasn't really relevent. But if you like you can type the first paragraphy in to google search along with the name of the company and get the rest.
I'd post the exact link but LCD makes it a bitch to do.
And I can't take credit for making the french and UN look bad, they do a wonderful job all by themselves, far better than I could ever hope to.
Isay you've got to ask yourself, which is worse? Sending this paltry force that will accomplish nothing, or bringing this to everyones attention? Which is the greater crime?
It's a start, at least.
And it says "most powerful armor." This does not mean that this is the most powerful force ever deployed in a UN peacekeeping operation. Wars aren't only fought with tanks. While the UN is indeed doing a lackluster job at keeping the peace, it seems to me you're twisting the words of the article to fit your needs.
Tanks alone won't do the job I see you forgot to leave out the other troops following totalling 15,000 and the maritime patrols, the French are just the 1st contingent to bolster up the UN presence.
by isay on Wed Sep 13, 06 6:15pm
[+]
You simply took the chance to warp the whole article by selectively reading and copying and pasting the parts that make the French and the UN to look silly in an attempt to just mock them.
by isay on Wed Sep 13, 06 6:21pm
[+]
No no Isay, they've promised 15,000 troops, just as they've promised to stop Iran from developing nukes, and end the genocide in Sudan.
And just like in those other two cases they haven't actually come through with their promises.
They've actually turned up about a thousand troops with possibly 2000 more on the way.
Promised troops and actual troops aren't the same thing. I've never heard of an army that was promised by never materialized ever winning a war.
You're being disingenious if you actually quote their fictitious number as fact while ignoring the real stats.
|
|
