Russia Kicks Out US Peace Corps! - Page 2

DanS · December 29, 2002, 18:37

I agree. Old news. Also, that article stressed the security services' thoughts about the matter whereas most of the reason was that Russia really doesn't need the services that the peace corps was providing. In fact, it was probably taking away jobs from Russians who could provide the same services.

Nubclear · December 29, 2002, 19:06

Quote:

We are attacking Iraq because if they get nukes, they can do whatever they please in the ME. Take over Kuwait again? Sure... they have nukes.

What about Iran? Or Libya? Egypt? What about North Korea? South Africa? In fact, North Korea has recently announced.....

Quote:

We weren't funding terrorists. We were funding and training guerilla fighters, some of whom later became terrrorists.

If your going to play on words, then the suicide bombers are also "GUERILLA FIGHTERS". Technically that is. So I suppose you are correct....and remember, Al Qaeda isn't a TERRORIST organization, it is a GUERILLA organization

[QUOTE} . There is evidence is Iraq is trying to get nukes, and if it does they will be able to run rampant and undermine our power. Having a hostile power with nukes nessecarily undermines your power in a region. Not paranoia, smart foreign policy. [/QUOTE]

Where is this evidence? I surely haven't seen me...It may have slipped me by. Could you please point me to the evidence?

Also, if your goinng to attack Iraq on the basis that "If they get nukes (and theyre trying to!) then our power will decline!)", well, North Korea....We have the proof, and most experts are saying theyre just a "tad" bit closer than Iraq to actually GETTING those nukes. Also rememeber that its projected that once North Korea has it, they can hit Seoul (The capital of South Korea), Tokyo (The capital of Japan), Alaska, and the entire West Coast (Although thats being debated...). And its projected that they'll soon be able to hit the entire continental United States by the end of the year. Iraq does not even have that power. So instead of worrying about how much power we can project in the ME or Korean Penninsula (sp), we should be worrying about matters a tad closer to home.

Quote:

BY the way Tassadar, get those posts back yet?

Not yet

Imran Siddiqui · December 29, 2002, 19:09

Quote:

What about Iran? Or Libya? Egypt? What about North Korea? South Africa?

Iran doesn't have nukes and is making their plants accessable to the IAEA. Libya has nothing approaching nukes. Egypt, not even close. North Korea just broke, and there are bigger problems there (such as that is China's turf), and South Africa had them and gave them up with pressure.

Nubclear · December 29, 2002, 19:16

Quote:

North Korea just broke, and there are bigger problems there (such as that is China's turf),

Yep, it's on CHINAS turf....They'll deal with it, probably by severing all ties with North Korea and emplacing EMBARGOES! Yep

They may even INVADE North Korea because they love us SO MUCH

Hehe, thats a good one. Although a very bad excuse for basically ignoring the situation.

Quote:

Libya has nothing approaching nukes. Egypt, not even close.

According to what IVE read, their both trying to get them and Egypt is already rumoured to HAVE one.

Imran Siddiqui · December 29, 2002, 19:21

Quote:

According to what IVE read, their both trying to get them and Egypt is already rumoured to HAVE one.

You've read nothing good then.

It is even laughable to say Egypt has one! That's even funnier than humanity comes from space aliens!

Nubclear · December 29, 2002, 19:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

According to what IVE read, their both trying to get them and Egypt is already rumoured to HAVE one.

You've read nothing good then.

It is even laughable to say Egypt has one! That's even funnier than humanity comes from space aliens!

Hmm...Alright, I'll conceded that to you. Now will you respond to the REST of the debate?

Imran Siddiqui · December 29, 2002, 19:24

That North Korea is China's turf? That it is.

And we may invade. How long has it taken us to invade Iraq again? 9-10 years?

Nubclear · December 29, 2002, 19:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
That North Korea is China's turf? That it is.

Again, thats a cop out. I could easily say that Iraq is Israels turf, not ours......

Quote:

And we may invade.

Thats nice. However you may invade SLIGHTLY too late

Serb · December 30, 2002, 01:07

Quote:

Russia Kicks Out US Peace Corps!

Yankees go home!!!

Have a nice day.

David Floyd · December 30, 2002, 01:21

Oh look. Serb's back

Shi Huangdi · December 30, 2002, 01:22

"If your going to play on words, then the suicide bombers are also "GUERILLA FIGHTERS". Technically that is. So I suppose you are correct....and remember, Al Qaeda isn't a TERRORIST organization, it is a GUERILLA organization "

The Mujaheddin wasn't using terror tactics, at least not that i know of. But whatever the case is their main method of fighting was guerilla warfare against Soviet forces.

"Where is this evidence? I surely haven't seen me...It may have slipped me by. Could you please point me to the evidence?"

It's been pointed in other threads here already they have been trying to acquire nukes. Feel free to search for the thread if you like.

"well, North Korea....We have the proof, and most experts are saying theyre just a "tad" bit closer than Iraq to actually GETTING those nukes. Also rememeber that its projected that once North Korea has it, they can hit Seoul (The capital of South Korea), Tokyo (The capital of Japan), Alaska, and the entire West Coast (Although thats being debated...). And its projected that they'll soon be able to hit the entire continental United States by the end of the year. Iraq does not even have that power. So instead of worrying about how much power we can project in the ME or Korean Penninsula (sp), we should be worrying about matters a tad closer to home. "

I don't think it's too likely NK is just going to nuke the United States. The fact of the matter is NK jusn't hasn't been agressive lately, it's only act of agression was the Koreasn war and that was after being given the OK by Stalin. Iraq on the other hand has been rather agressive lately, attacking Iran, Kuwait, and threatening to attack Israel. I think for the most part Russia and China will be able to keep a leash on NK.

Serb · December 30, 2002, 01:25

You can't hit or even touch?
Still... I don't think he likes you much.
Heaven knows what George can do,
Heaven knows what he wants to prove.

I think he's paranoid,
It's complicated...

I think he's paranoid,

manipulated!

...

He can take you, rape and terminate you
As long he want's oil baby it's allright.
He cant take you, anyway he needs you
As long he want's oil baby it's allright.

(c) Garbage. Paranoid. (Serb's re-make

)

Nubclear · December 30, 2002, 01:29

Imagine, if I moved to Pittsburg we could do this every day

Quote:

The Mujaheddin wasn't using terror tactics, at least not that i know of. But whatever the case is their main method of fighting was guerilla warfare against Soviet forces.

Same with the suicide bombers against Israel. It's "guerilla warfare". Same with Al Qaeda against the US. I've already given you this point.....

Quote:

It's been pointed in other threads here already they have been trying to acquire nukes. Feel free to search for the thread if you like.

No thanks. I'm not going to go search other threads for something you should be proving yourself.

Quote:

I don't think it's too likely NK is just going to nuke the United States.

Has a higher chance of attacking us than Iraq does, I can surely tell you that.

Quote:

The fact of the matter is NK jusn't hasn't been agressive lately, it's only act of agression was the Koreasn war and that was after being given the OK by Stalin.

And violating the cease fire...

Quote:

Iraq on the other hand has been rather agressive lately, attacking Iran, Kuwait,

Yep. Nowhere does it mention the United States.

Quote:

and threatening to attack Israel.

And lets think for a moment: Will it attack Israel if we DO attack or if we DONT attack? Hmm.....

Quote:

I think for the most part Russia and China will be able to keep a leash on NK.

Unless NK believes its going to either be anniahlated economically or politically. And hey, then we have the matter of North Korea and its generosity towards certain....people whom are opposed to us

But then again, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are also very giving countries as well....

Serb · December 30, 2002, 02:00

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
Oh look. Serb's back

I've heard somebody said the magic word "Russia" here.

Serb · December 30, 2002, 02:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi

The Mujaheddin wasn't using terror tactics, at least not that i know of. But whatever the case is their main method of fighting was guerilla warfare against Soviet forces.

Then you know nothing about them.
Never heard about camel-bomb? I doubt you heard. It's camel loaded with explosives and left near shop, market or in any place where explosion will cause maximum damage among personel.
Your, AMERICAN instructors showed such tricks to those guys. You created them, you educated them, you armed them.
Nice work.

DinoDoc · December 30, 2002, 12:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Serb
Then you know nothing about them.

Attacking civilians makes one a terrorist. Attacking the Russian army, on the other hand, is fully justified. They knew the risks before invading another country.

Imran Siddiqui · December 30, 2002, 14:09

Quote:

I could easily say that Iraq is Israels turf, not ours......

Israel's turf is our turf, since Israel is in our sphere of influence

. They aren't a superpower, so they don't get a 'turf'.

And since the fall of the USSR, the Mid East has become our 'sphere'.

Arrian · December 30, 2002, 14:45

I heard about this on NPR this morning, and it sounded like this was mostly a pride thing: "we can handle this ourselves, thank you very much." I must have missed the part of the story regarding the spying allegations. The Peace Corps workers they interviewed didn't seem all that upset.

You may now continue your regularly scheduled threadjack.

-Arrian

Nubclear · December 30, 2002, 17:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

I could easily say that Iraq is Israels turf, not ours......

Israel's turf is our turf, since Israel is in our sphere of influence

. They aren't a superpower, so they don't get a 'turf'.

Are you saying that CHINA is a superpower?

Imran Siddiqui · December 30, 2002, 18:26

Of course they are. Why wouldn't they be

.

Nubclear · December 30, 2002, 18:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Of course they are. Why wouldn't they be

.

That is the first time someones actually said that to me...

/ \ *

Imran Siddiqui · December 30, 2002, 18:56

There just not a US like or USSR like superpower... but they'll probably get there soon.

DanS · December 30, 2002, 19:54

Oh dear. Not one of these boring definitional arguments again.

Imran Siddiqui · December 30, 2002, 19:56

Who was arguing?

DanS · December 30, 2002, 19:58

You're begging for one. But this one's just silly. Even if true, it would just degrade the meaning of supermodel.

Imran Siddiqui · December 30, 2002, 20:13

I'm begging for one? What did you turn mindreader all of a sudden

?

I'm not saying them and the US are the only superpowers. I'm saying Britain and France deserve to be there as well (or at least in the argument.. probably France more than Britain though). But only the US goes beyond superpower

.

After all, superpower is a colloquial definition. It isn't anywhere in IR (which only speaks of great powers and hegemons), and is adequately explained by dictionary defintion.

Nubclear · December 30, 2002, 21:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
France deserve to be there as well

You've gone MAD! MAD I SAY!

Anyway, but I completly agree that China will soon be..."coming over the mountain"

It's just a matter of time.

Serb · December 30, 2002, 22:22

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Attacking civilians makes one a terrorist. Attacking the Russian army, on the other hand, is fully justified. They knew the risks before invading another country.

Oh really?

Then explain to me please how in the hell a camel loaded with bags full of explosives and left on MARKET square could be attack vs. army? You know, only crazy would call market a military target.
Or perhaps you could explain to silly Russian, why those guys made bombs inside of various things- photo cameras, pack of sigaretes, etc and quite often inside childish TOYS and thrown them everywhere and when someone piked them up...boom. This isn't a terrorism right?

Just to make you fell a bit better, I'll change one word in your claim.

Quote:

Attacking the Russian army, on the other hand, is fully justified. They knew the risks before invading another country.

It should be:
Attacking the US army, on the other hand, is fully justified. They knew the risks before invading another country.