Ukranians are different from Russians, I believe at the time Ukraine, Estonia and Latvia were as they are now independant states. I am being civil.

It's funny this topic has come up.

When I was living in Japan last semester with a Japanese family, my host family was communist and thought of America as being ruled by rich, greedy, blood thirsty men. My host mother asked me one day, while driving around a scenic back road in the mountains doing some flower watching, if I would defend America if we were at war and being invaded.

I told her yes, definitely, without a doubt.

Why, she asked? What is there worth defending in your country of greedy, materialiastic people?

Freedom, I said. The freedom to be greedy, or to be generous. To be miserly or a philanthropist. I told her the Japanese government could take away all of their citizens' freedoms, like during WW2, and the citizens would submit and do nothing about it. And she admitted I was right, she would do whatever her government told her to do.

This was all in Japanese, which made it doubly fun.

But, I would definitely defend our country from invaders. I kind of wish a scenario would occurr in my lifetime where I was still able to fight and it happened, because I think this country would emerge much stronger. We've been left to our own bickering for too long.

on the narrow factoid level, ustwo is right.
but it seems an interesting problem, the factoid-level correctness followed by a claim to "knowledge of world history"---

obviously the alliance that linked hitler to stalin (1939-1941) ended abruptly with the german invasion.

obviously not everyone in the ussr was equally a fan of stalin's--o what to call them---murderous policies of the 1930s--few areas felt the impact of these more fully than did the ukraine.
that this is the case should by this point be beyond doubt.
witness the famines of the early 1930s for example.

the strange thing was how this came to be understood---apparently a purely antisemitic explanation was compelling to some segments of ukranian society--something on the order of the world jewish-bolshevik conspiracy--at any rate, yes, there were ukranians who not only welcomed the nazis but who went well beyond welcoming--like the ukranian nationalist army--
these fine fellows were most enthusiastic. they demonstrated their enthusiasm by undertaking such lovely duty as accompanying the ss and mowing down jewish women and children...

because, you see, mowing down men was seen as ok, but women and children that were thought to demoralize the ss.

the onu--what great folk--you are right that they existed but obviously know nothing about them: the onu and related organizations machine gunned thousands and thousands of jewish women and children not because they thought stalin was worse than hitler, but rather because they actively agreed with the anti-semitism of nazi ideology.


you chose a really fucked up example for making the point i think you were trying to make.
i really dont know what you are trying to say by using it.
maybe you could explain rather than simply patronize?
because what i see in this argument is the work of an arrogant dilletante, an argument that at a very superficial level fits, but when you actually look at what you refer to twists everything you say through it into a place i doubt seriously that you wanted to go.

because no matter the number of arguments we have in this forum, ustwo, i do not think you actually hold the beliefs that you would have to hold for your post to obtain with any real understanding of what you are referring to historically in place.

either way, it casts your entire position in a funny light--are you really (accidentally or not) equating the collaboration of the the onu and its ilk with the nazis with iraqi collaboration with the american coalition?

i am completely opposed to the iraq adventure and even so would never--ever---have gone this far in denouncing the american occupation.

and i dont think you could have found a way to damage your own position more thoroughly than this had you set out to do it.



side note: curiously, in the fall 1945/early 1946 the command structure of the onu was protected from war crimes prosecution by the united states after ww2 on the grounds that they could form the core of an anti-communist nationalist army. same went for the romainian iron guard--lots and lots of fascists--who were among the worst--were protected by the americans---you know, those champions of democracy.

So true, thought I dont know that we need an invasion to straighten things out. I would settle for a country unifying sporting event.

This is of course open to debate, but you are cleaving rabbits.

the other color
 

/me can help out tec with his job...
interesting topic of which i am very familiar...

It'd depend on the situation. If I was going to fight, though, I'd start by going after the collaborators and Quislings first. They are softer targets, and have earned a special place in Hell for their aiding and abetting of our enemies. Somebody brought up the movie "Red Dawn". Remember the Mayor, Darryl's father? That's who I'm talking about.

And so on....

Do you all not realize that we ARE living under a government that rapes, steals, murders, tortures, ect., ect,. A government is like a parent or a spouse - you don't truly see the faults until you have all the information and an outside perspective. State, local, and federal governments all across this country are incredibly corrupt. I know that thousands of dollars in my tax money are being laundered to the mob and various other political buddies. I know that many of my states' congressmen have committed felonious acts in order to stay in government. I know that the federal government routinely silences those that may cause harm to it. Does this bother me? Not too much. I still would happily and bravely give my life for the nation that I love and that protects me.

What I'm saying is that no government is perfect. If this was posted on an Iraqui message board, or a Japanese one, or a North Korean one, or a Argentinian one, or an Indian one, or a Pakistani one, then the responses would all be very similar. For the most part, we inside a country support our government. This is part of the problem with Iraq - the insurgents LIKED what they had before, because it was the only government that they knew.

We go all high and mighty thinking that America is un-corruptible, that the government is just squeaky clean and nothing nefarious ever goes on. Well, you're wrong. Taken out of context, our government could look as bad as Saddam's (this is part of what the Iraqui people are force-fed, and part of the reason they hate us).

In the end, no government is perfect. Politics and government is dirty. However, this is still MY country, and I love it and am in support of the way they run the show. I would never stand to oppose the United States government, and I would fight off any invader wishing to change the government that I know and want. The same reason we defend the US is the same reason many living under a dictator join his army - it is the only thing that they know and the only thing that they know to support.

Yes, our government sucks. Compared to the alternatives, however, I choose to stick with it. It's not perfect, but it's light-years ahead of every other form of government out there.

A few weeks ago, I watched law enforcement officers "torture" a subject. To be honest, it made me shake my head and chuckle. why? Because the LEOs didn't particularly want to "torture" this guy, but he wouldn't take "NO" for an answer, so they had no other choice. Throughout the entire thing, he kept screaming "Why are you doing this to me?" He just couldn't understand that it was his actions that made them respond the way they responded. All they wanted was for him to calm down and sit or lay down peacefully on a bench for a half hour without restraints on. He knew this, but refused to comply. In many other cultures, and under many other forms of government, he'd have been severely beaten or even killed. Here, he was roughed up enough to get him properly restrained, and then he was put into a hospital.

It's all about context. Who would invade the US? Mexicans? Zee Germans? Heck, if we could get the Dutch to invade, I might even turn my coat, and if it were the Canadians, I'd welcome them as a liberating army.

Flip side of that: Honest to god Chinese invasion, storming Long Beach, hand me that RPG, like a good fellow.

In the Land Down Under, we're used to the idea that one day we're going to piss Indonesia off really badly and wind up with a good million or so troops swamping our northern borders. I think we're counting on the huge numbers of poisonous animals and unfriendly terrain as much as we are our small defence force, but if neither of those do the job, I'd be there with a sharp stick and bad attitude helping out.

If anyone had the balls to attack this country, they'd be dead far before they reached Denver. But if they did reach Denver, fuck yeah, I'd fight back. And so would every person that I know. Obviously this thread is in relation to us being in Iraq. But there is no comparison in reality.

I wouldn't have to fight back, because I live in the US, and before I even knew what was happening, it would be over.

Bring it on. I know those Canadians are just chomping at the bit to come down and take our prime real estate!

You say that not in the context of living in that society. Life under Saddam, Castro, etc would be normal as far as you're concerned and you wouldn't know any different from your countries situation and what it's like to live somewhere else like America. Cubans, N. Koreans, and others aren't taking up arms to oust their dictators so either they like how they're living or they're just not interested in change.

I wouldn't worry about it. I'm sure the outback would do them in. With the majority of everyone on the southern half of the continent, they'd be dead from thirst or venom before they even got there.

ok another question....

say a person from an allied country..(say australia, japan, britain etc) came and wanted to defend your country from this invasion, and they were caught by the 'invading army'. would they be granted protection under the geneva conventions and international law? or would they be granted 'illegal combatant status' since they were not fighting for the US army, but rather as some sort of mercanery or freedom fighter.

p.s. hell yes id fight for my country!

I guess we could do without Cairns, Darwin and Brisvegas. That was the thinking during the Second World War, anyway. I don't know if anybody discussed the plan with Queensland or the Northern Territory, though.