Backup Brain
Tom Negrino, on Backup Brain:
That's baloney. There are people from Canada, Britain, Norway and Germany (at least) fighting alonside the Americans in Operation Anaconda, and they've been there for quite a while previous to that.
I don't know the number of people from Canada, but I know there's at least 750 in Afghanistan, probably over a thousand, and well over 2 thousand in total including the naval forces and other operations.
What an insult. What do you expect NATO to do, start detaining people without charges, bomb the shit out of other countries and start throwing out insults towards other countries like "axis of evil" and "evildoers" at every opportunity?
If the USA isn't happy with NATO, and Americans don't appreciate our help, maybe NATO should just kick the USA out rather than wait for their resignation. We don't need that kind of ally either.
PS: I don't think that should happen, it's just a counter-insult. I've heard American colonels and generals stand up and say how much they appreciate the Canadian involvement, that they're doing a great job and are a major asset.
--
Okay, now I read the article Tom's pointing to and I'm even more insulted. America hasn't even declared WAR on anyone... the idea of military alliances isn't to just go take out whatever political regimes you don't like, unless you want the world to be in a perpetual state of mass war.
And that bullshit about America saving Europe in WWII? Fuck off. (not directed at Tom, directed at the USS Clueless guy -- what an appropriate name) It wasn't until Pearl Harbor that America even gave a shit about WWII... Canada and Britain and the rest of Europe was involved in trying to repel the Nazis for over two years before the Americans came in. To say the war was won only because of the USA is enough to make me want to puke, and to say the war wouldn't have been won without them is just as vitriolic.
Bah.
About Jim Roepcke
No description. Please complete your profile.Roepcke Computing Solutions
Archive Calendar
Blogroll
Saved Searches
- WebObjects on Twitter Tweets about WebObjects (without all the iTunes store tweet spam)
Willing to Fail
WebObjects book
Badges
Recent tweets
- @bubbafat as far as I know, no, so we're putting links on a separate implicitly-related object to keep doc size manageable. in reply to bubbafat 7 hrs ago
- the #riak team is bold to put comparisons with similar systems on their wiki. they're inviting criticism but it's important to discuss this. 1 day ago
- @kazempour http://bit.ly/9KOnBp enjoy :) 3 days ago
- More updates...
March 8th, 2002 - 19:07
At 09:52 PM 3/8/2002 -0500, Jim wrote:
>”We’ve seen, in starkest terms, that the rest of NATO will not fight
>alongside the US after the US was attacked, as they were sworn to do.”
>
>That’s baloney. There are people from Canada, Britain, Norway and Germany
>(at least) fighting alonside the Americans in Operation Anaconda, and
>they’ve been there for quite a while previous to that.
But, that’s what they’re complaining about — the war was already over
before foreign troops made it to Afghanistan. Operation Anaconda’s just a
mopping up operation — those forces have to be eliminated, but they are
not a realistic threat to retake Afghanistan. Though, I’m not sure they are
correct that the lateness in deploying troops was due to foot dragging on
the part of those countries.
And more importantly, it’s clear that NATO isn’t going to be much help in
the coming war against Iraq, though I still don’t quite understand why and
how we’re going after Saddam Hussein.
Frankly, NATO was intended to provide a bulwark in case of a Soviet
invasion. It no longer serves any meaningful purpose except to piss off
Americans when NATO countries offer tepid support for proposed military
actions. It’s probably time to mothball NATO.
March 8th, 2002 - 21:56
Good points, all: U.S. citizens who wanted to fight in WWII before our involvement had to join Canadian regiments. I believe this is now illegal on all sorts of levels; you’d probably have to renounce your citizenship. But people of conscience who were not pacifists headed north to join our brothers and sisters.
March 8th, 2002 - 20:21
On Friday, March 8, 2002, at 07:07 PM, Brian Carnell wrote:
> At 09:52 PM 3/8/2002 -0500, Jim wrote:
>
>> “We’ve seen, in starkest terms, that the rest of NATO will not fight
>> alongside the US after the US was attacked, as they were sworn to do.”
>>
>> That’s baloney. There are people from Canada, Britain, Norway and
>> Germany
>> (at least) fighting alonside the Americans in Operation Anaconda, and
>> they’ve been there for quite a while previous to that.
>
> But, that’s what they’re complaining about — the war was already over
> before foreign troops made it to Afghanistan.
Wrong. Canadian troops were there long before Anaconda. So were
british troops. Remember that some of the first shots fired against
Afghanistan were by British ships. And don’t say the Americans have
been doing all the dirty work, because they’ve been playing the Afghan
soldiers like pawns the whole time.
> Operation Anaconda’s just a mopping up operation — those forces have
> to be eliminated, but they are not a realistic threat to retake
> Afghanistan.
But they are a threat to causing chaos and keeping things unstable. But
yeah it’s mopping up.
> Though, I’m not sure they are correct that the lateness in deploying
> troops was due to foot dragging on the part of those countries.
Who said that? If that was the reason, then they’re saying they needed
those troops and those troops are making a meaningful difference,
otherwise they wouldn’t have waited… so I don’t see where this USS
Clueless guy gets off saying other nations haven’t helped.
No other country spends anything close to what the US does on
military… sheesh!
> And more importantly, it’s clear that NATO isn’t going to be much help
> in
> the coming war against Iraq, though I still don’t quite understand why
> and
> how we’re going after Saddam Hussein.
Me either, and that’s why NATO wants to know first. This isn’t John
Wayne stuff, this has to be done carefully. And it’s easy for the USA
to bitch when they’re half way around the world… Europe is right next
door!! They have terrorist problems too, it’s not like it’s only the
US’ problem.
> Frankly, NATO was intended to provide a bulwark in case of a Soviet
> invasion. It no longer serves any meaningful purpose except to piss off
> Americans when NATO countries offer tepid support for proposed military
> actions. It’s probably time to mothball NATO.
And piss off non Americans when the Americans want the rest of the world
to be war-mongering criminals… plotting to kill foreign leaders,
detaining prisoners against the geneva convention, etc.
But I agree that it might be time to mothball NATO, just not because of
what that Clueless guy (what a dumb name) said.
Jim