Turkey |
|
|
|
|
|
Iraq urges Turkey withdrawal
|
| 30. |
25 Feb 2008 Mon 05:45 pm |
|
Quoting teaschip1: While people in America are often critical of how we treated losing countries after wars by being so humane so to speak imagine post world war 1 Europe had Wilson's 14 points been given more serious consideration especially points 9-12 which cover the areas of Iraq and Kosovo:
quote:
#9 A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.
#10 The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity to autonomous development.
#11 Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.
#12 The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.
Not very far off of what SHOULD have been done, but wasn't.
Woodrow Wilson was a visionary when it came to a just ending to the war but I guess the Europeans thought that this American was too presumtuous to be given any consideration in "European" matters. Then we had to go bail them out of another World War - a product of their "peace". I know Woodrow is saying from somewhere "I told you so!" |
Not quite....he is probably very proud that most of his design is being carefully executed !
|
|
| 32. |
25 Feb 2008 Mon 06:40 pm |
|
Quoting peace train: Quoting AlphaF: What is this Polly shit?
Be serious and polite, if you want decent replies...or get lost ! |
I have been both decent and polite my dear Alpha. I obviously misjudged your tone when you referred to me as a missionary  Polly is short for politician . . . I thought you would appreciate that. What can I say . . .I was wrong . . .
btw Try not to use ugly words . . . they don't go too well with peace keeping strategies. |
Mmmm....I have been following this conversation with interest, but I have to say you must have known calling AlphaF Polly would be provocative, didn't you?
|
|
| 33. |
25 Feb 2008 Mon 07:04 pm |
|
Quoting alameda: Quoting peace train: Quoting AlphaF: What is this Polly shit?
Be serious and polite, if you want decent replies...or get lost ! |
I have been both decent and polite my dear Alpha. I obviously misjudged your tone when you referred to me as a missionary Polly is short for politician . . . I thought you would appreciate that. What can I say . . .I was wrong . . .
btw Try not to use ugly words . . . they don't go too well with peace keeping strategies. |
Mmmm....I have been following this conversation with interest, but I have to say you must have known calling AlphaF Polly would be provocative, didn't you? |
Well, yes and no. I risked being provocative yet hoped that he would take it in good spirits because he gives people pet names. I've never complained about names given to me, I thought Alpha would be the same. I've messed around with his name before and it never bothered him.
|
|
| 34. |
25 Feb 2008 Mon 07:42 pm |
|
Quoting peace train: I've messed around with his name before and it never bothered him. |
But not with a feminine name like Polly ..have you? 
|
|
| 35. |
26 Feb 2008 Tue 11:07 am |
|
Quoting teaschip1: Then we had to go bail them out of another World War - a product of their "peace". |
Don't go there Teas! The USA had its own business joining the WW II. Hadn't the Japanese given you a good licking in Pearl Harbour, you'd never have joined the war and leave it all to us, and watch us being slaughtered. Oh, sorry, you were supplying us weapons (business is business, right?). And it's true that the Europeans seem to be more "peace loving" than you. Nukes in Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved it beyond doubt. As for your mediating skills - you gave Poland away to Stalin, which was a really great move. You had no problems with USSR anymore. Well, your decision cost us, Poles, 50 years more of war but you could finally focus on what you do best - trade "democracy" for oil. Whether these countries want it or not 
|
|
| 36. |
27 Feb 2008 Wed 01:49 am |
|
Quote:
Promises may not be the only solution to a problem but they can be part of a solution "package".
|
They can be part of the solution package AFTER paying the peace price PT,i wish things were different,and easier also,like putting sense in leaders minds,but im afraid that is fancy,and things dont happen this way.
There is much into it than just pride
There are political interests to many parts,not only to the parts in fight,and they sure want this to continue this way !
|
|
| 37. |
27 Feb 2008 Wed 04:19 pm |
|
Quoting Daydreamer: Quoting teaschip1: Then we had to go bail them out of another World War - a product of their 'peace'. |
Don't go there Teas! The USA had its own business joining the WW II. Hadn't the Japanese given you a good licking in Pearl Harbour, you'd never have joined the war and leave it all to us, and watch us being slaughtered. Oh, sorry, you were supplying us weapons (business is business, right?). And it's true that the Europeans seem to be more 'peace loving' than you. Nukes in Hiroshima and Nagasaki proved it beyond doubt. As for your mediating skills - you gave Poland away to Stalin, which was a really great move. You had no problems with USSR anymore. Well, your decision cost us, Poles, 50 years more of war but you could finally focus on what you do best - trade 'democracy' for oil. Whether these countries want it or not |
Well daydreamer you are misguided as to why the U.S. entered into World War II. Mainly as the Japanese were misguided enough to attack Pearl Harbour and it gave Americans the incentive they needed. Great Britain had been standing alone for some time and if Hitler had gained Atomic warheads he would have launched long range V2 weapons against American cities so,they would have been involved sooner or later. Great Britain have been paying for it ever since especialy in time of strife (Kuwait,Iraq etc.) when they are called upon by America because their military skills are second to none.
A lot of people are stating that we got into the war because of Pearl Harbor, but you my want to look further back as to why Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Japan had been aggressive towards China and so the US halted any trade with Japan in November 1940. Japan saw this as a hostile act towards them. About a year later, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. This was only part of there reason for going to war against the Germany, Japan and Italy. In March 1940, the Lend-Lease act was passed stating Roosevelt could direct aid to whoever he wanted. This meant that the US was no longer neutral. The US ended up contributing 42 billion dollars to the war effort by 1945. With Hitler taking over Europe, FDR saw fit to aid the British and French troops with arms, etc. Once again you tend to point the finger at the U.S. for all of Polands problems.. You actually crack me up with all of your talks about oil..boy how uneducated you sound right now.
|
|
| 38. |
27 Feb 2008 Wed 05:32 pm |
|
Quoting teaschip1:
Well daydreamer you are misguided as to why the U.S. entered into World War II. Mainly as the Japanese were misguided enough to attack Pearl Harbour and it gave Americans the incentive they needed. |
That's exactly what I meant. Hadn't it been for Pearl Harbour, you wouldn't have joined in or you'd do it later than 2 years after the war has started (because it did start in 1939). Who knows, maybe you'd join WW II a year before it finished, just like you did in case of WW I. Or, did you rather wanted to say that the USA entered the WW II because they wanted to save the world from the bad bad Hitler?
Quote: Once again you tend to point the finger at the U.S. for all of Polands problems.. |
Not all of them, you're not THAT mighty. But it is surely your fault (together with GB) that Poland was given to Stalin and his regime.
Quote: You actually crack me up with all of your talks about oil..boy how uneducated you sound right now.
|
I am not going to pretend I have a degree in history or political science, like I'm sure you do. Also, I have not studied in your wonderful country that gives the only right and correct education. Perhaps I miss your intelligence and skill - I have no will to argue this point. However, I am more than happy that I am do not display the logic that would make me justify invading Iraq instead of the Taliban hiding place - Afghanistan or openly admitting to having nukes Korea. What's the reason for that? Nah, don't feel obliged to answer - we know you are just about helping the world as you're the best and greatest country ever (mostly according to your own opinion but still...)
Best regards
|
|
| 39. |
27 Feb 2008 Wed 06:23 pm |
|
Iraq has no ability to own itself and it's very funny to urge Turkey to stop the PKK operation. Turkey is using its international rights and protecting its boundaries from a terrorist organization and not doing illegal activities.
I also think that this operation must have done at least 10 years ago so as to finish the activities of PKK exactly. so it's too late now.
Iraqi people is searching their leader, Saddam Huseyin, with candles now. they must own themselves otherwise the bastard American imperialism will mode on forever and ever...
|
|
| 40. |
27 Feb 2008 Wed 10:16 pm |
|
Quote: Iraqi people is searching their leader, Saddam Huseyin, with candles now. they must own themselves otherwise the bastard American imperialism will mode on forever and ever |
I don't think Saddam will be returning anytime soon Adonis..
|
|
|
