The end of war

[bobevenson]

He's lucky he can fit into tasteful clothes. It must be awful to be your size and have to wear a parachute and safety pins.

If you are unable to submit an intelligent post, you might want to consider a Philosopher Explorer thread.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

He's lucky he can fit into tasteful clothes. It must be awful to be your size and have to wear a parachute and safety pins.

If you are unable to submit an intelligent post, you might want to consider a Philosopher Explorer thread.

I tried to buy your game, but there doesn't seem to be any way to do that, not even online.
You are from Mississippi? Oh dear, talk about the Bible Belt of the Bible Belt. No wonder you are such a racist.

[bobevenson]

He's lucky he can fit into tasteful clothes. It must be awful to be your size and have to wear a parachute and safety pins.

If you are unable to submit an intelligent post, you might want to consider a Philosopher Explorer thread.

I tried to buy your game, but there doesn't seem to be any way to do that.

That's true since it hasn't been manufactured yet. As "The Ouzo Prophecy" says, "The Ouzo Game Company will sell no game before its time. After all, it's been two thousand years in the making." Hopefully, that time is coming very soon, and the cost, direct from the manufacturer, will be an Ouzo dispenser at $59.50, a roll of 3,000 tickets at $12.50, and shipping anywhere in the world at $2.95, for a grand total of $74.95.

[Hobbes' Choice]

"Do not fight a war you cannot win" Sun Tzu

The West neither has the will to win a war, nor any interest.
Winning is expensive; winning means the military/industrial complex stops making money.

[bobevenson]

"Do not fight a war you cannot win" Sun Tzu. The West neither has the will to win a war, nor any interest. Winning is expensive; winning means the military/industrial complex stops making money.

I believe ouzo would be the most cost effective way for you to achieve greater wisdom -- not the game, the drink.

[Obvious Leo]

Winning is expensive; winning means the military/industrial complex stops making money.

You pre-empted a possible direction I was considering for this thread. Wars are very good for business but only for the countries that lose them.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Winning is expensive; winning means the military/industrial complex stops making money.

You pre-empted a possible direction I was considering for this thread. Wars are very good for business but only for the countries that lose them.

Bush snr failed to win in Iraq, and left it so that the second war was inevitable, and Bush jnr left the place in such a disorganised state that ISIL was inevitable.
From 1918 to the present an objective observer might think that the West's policy in the middle east was specifically designed to maximise instability. From Balfour to Sykes-Pichot to the end of the British mandate of Palestine, the fall of the Iran government in the 1950; support of Saddam against Iran.. the list is long. Add to that the funding of dictatorships and the arbitrary abandonment of their support by vicarious and capricious western leaderships, anyone would think that we wanted them to keep fighting.

[Impenitent]

Bush snr failed to win in Iraq, and left it so that the second war was inevitable, and Bush jnr left the place in such a disorganised state that ISIL was inevitable.
From 1918 to the present an objective observer might think that the West's policy in the middle east was specifically designed to maximise instability. From Balfour to Sykes-Pichot to the end of the British mandate of Palestine, the fall of the Iran government in the 1950; support of Saddam against Iran.. the list is long. Add to that the funding of dictatorships and the arbitrary abandonment of their support by vicarious and capricious western leaderships, anyone would think that we wanted them to keep fighting.

no, bush jr left it somewhat stable ... comrade Obama pulled the us troops out which caused Iraq to collapse

but have no fear, comrade Obama's chamberlain move with iran will bring peace everywhere

-Imp

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Bush snr failed to win in Iraq, and left it so that the second war was inevitable, and Bush jnr left the place in such a disorganised state that ISIL was inevitable.
From 1918 to the present an objective observer might think that the West's policy in the middle east was specifically designed to maximise instability. From Balfour to Sykes-Pichot to the end of the British mandate of Palestine, the fall of the Iran government in the 1950; support of Saddam against Iran.. the list is long. Add to that the funding of dictatorships and the arbitrary abandonment of their support by vicarious and capricious western leaderships, anyone would think that we wanted them to keep fighting.

no, bush jr left it somewhat stable ... comrade Obama pulled the us troops out which caused Iraq to collapse

but have no fear, comrade Obama's chamberlain move with iran will bring peace everywhere

-Imp

WTF? INVADING it caused it to collapse. Is your entire country on drugs?

[Hobbes' Choice]

Bush snr failed to win in Iraq, and left it so that the second war was inevitable, and Bush jnr left the place in such a disorganised state that ISIL was inevitable.
From 1918 to the present an objective observer might think that the West's policy in the middle east was specifically designed to maximise instability. From Balfour to Sykes-Pichot to the end of the British mandate of Palestine, the fall of the Iran government in the 1950; support of Saddam against Iran.. the list is long. Add to that the funding of dictatorships and the arbitrary abandonment of their support by vicarious and capricious western leaderships, anyone would think that we wanted them to keep fighting.

no, bush jr left it somewhat stable ... comrade Obama pulled the us troops out which caused Iraq to collapse

but have no fear, comrade Obama's chamberlain move with iran will bring peace everywhere

-Imp

Duh no Snr. failed to finish the job left the country under sanctions for a decade.
Obama did the smart thing and pulled out of a complete fuck up, because Bush did not have the balls to WIN.
I doubt if anyone is smart enough to see the potential- least of all YOU. But detente with Iran could be the best thing to come out of this.

[Obvious Leo]

Obama did the smart thing and pulled out of a complete fuck up, because Bush did not have the balls to WIN.

I think this is right. Neither Bush should have gone in there at all but once you commit to such a thing you commit to at least a 50 years commitment, as the allies did in Germany and Japan after WWII and the US did after Korea. You can't just go in and beat the place up a bit and then walk away again as the US did in Vietnam and both the Soviets and US did in Afghanistan. War is not a game and there'' no such thing as a draw in war. You either win it or you don't fucking do it. How wise was it do blast Qaddafi out of Libya? Ask the Europeans dealing with the tide of refugees streaming across the Mediterranean.