Salthill airshow photos

by Des Thu Jul 11, 2002 23:42

Well done, sorry I could not be there. EOIN, DES is not my real name. I am covering my ass!!!!

by pp Fri Jul 12, 2002 09:28

great job.

by Robbie Fri Jul 12, 2002 14:25

Yeah, we saw all you hippies there.
You rode in on broomsticks.

by Y Tue Jul 16, 2002 20:23

Some day the people like the protestors at the airshow will see the need for militaries to protect our interests and freedom. If Ireland take your non-military approach and isolates itself we will become a lot worse off. Some of you don't know much about aircraft or other equipment used and i havent heard where i can find information that shows me the vulcan cannon uses depleted uranium rounds which was one of your arguements.

by Sod Y Thu Jul 18, 2002 21:01

Some day we'll need a military.
We've needed one before.
We were invaded by an imperial power with little respect for democracy and humna rights. The US did sod all about that.

The Irish military does great work abroad and at home, Lebanon, East Timor, etc...
never blew up hospitals, weddings, schools anything like that.

never hid 10,000 feet up to kill anyone, never hid so far back so that it dramatically reduced the odds of hitting the target and increased the odds of killing innocent civilians.

Our military has lost its fair share of brave men and women, without making hyped movies about them.
They have to go in on the ground and deal with the people. They don't carpet bomb them. They can distinguish hospitals and schools from targets.

An airforce is great for one side in war, devestate the country, don't have to face the dead, much reduced body count for your own side while inflicting massive casualties on the population below.

By the way, when did the US ever need its military to defend itself?
The war of independence against the British was before the US was created.
They stayed out of both world Wars just long enough to make huge profits from selling arms.
and they refused to accept Japans offer of acceptance 3 days before they nuked hiroshima.
But that's not in the US history books.
They wanted to test the new nukes on real cities that they hadn't bombed with conventional bombs - clean slates - so they could see the real damage.
and they wanted to show the other world powers how big they were.
They could have ended the war without destroying Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But instead they omit this troublesome fact and tell people, they had to nuke the Japanese to save US troops in a ground war.

Our country has been colonised and terrorised and some of us remember what it means to oppose imperial hegemony and stick up for defenceless people.

By the way, are you trying to dispute that US aircraft are using DU ammunition?

DU is used because it hardens the rounds for armour-piercing attacks.

by Joe Thu Jul 18, 2002 21:58

Sod,
The reason the US gets involved is because other nations, especially the European nations, do not have the backbone to do what must be done. A case in point is that of Nazi Germany. The US became involved because Great Britain and France followed a policy of appeasement with Nazi Germany-it did not work. The only way the Allies could defeat Germany was to go on the offensive. Without the US, the Allies could not effectively go on the offensive. The US also paid a high price for this. If it was not for this high price, most of Europe would be speaking German. When it came to the situation in the Balkans, the US again became involved because the European nations did not have the backbone to do anything about it. When people were starving in Somalia, it was the US military that was called in to allow food to be sent to the starving people. It was also the US who sent troops to capture Aidid, the infamous warlord who was really responsible for the starvation then taking place in Somalia. Finally, the US military played a key role in the decline of the former Soviet Union.

by King Mob Fri Jul 19, 2002 00:39

God where to start.....

"The US became involved because Great Britain and France followed a policy of appeasement with Nazi Germany-it did not work. The only way the Allies could defeat Germany was to go on the offensive"

Em, the war was going for two years before the US wandered in. It's not like everyone else was on their arses, twiddling thumbs. In fact Roosevelt had to let Pearl Habour happen (they knew about it), to get america in the war.

The Balkans. European nations comprised the bulk of all peace keeping troops, and sustained highest casulties. Witness the effect on Danish peacekeepers. Peacekeeping efforts were hampered by the security council unwilliness to sanction what was necessary.

The US military played a key role in the decline of the Soviet Union. Oh yes in the battle of? No... The war of...? No..... The US out spent the USSR, clear and simple two miltary superpowers. Two miltary industrial countries, arming terrorists, destablizing governments, creating weapons of mass destruction, energy and money which should have been spent curing disease and hungry.

As for Somalia. US peacekeepers botched their presence and cost civilian lives. Black Hawk Down was fiction y'know. And how about Rowanda? US refused to even loan equipment to the vital relief and emergency response to the Genocide. The equipment had to be rented, from the US, even though the US owes the Un $43 billon. Quick aid might have prevented a genocide.

Cop on nutjob. This isn't Captain America and this isn't an Axis of evil, good, v bad.

by Delusional Fri Jul 19, 2002 02:12

Hi King Mob,
This is Delusional. It did take the US a little while to get involved in World War II because it was felt, and rightly so, that it was a European affair. France and Great Britain gave into Hitler's demands, such as the Sudetenland, and Hitler figured that they would do nothing if he invaded Poland. They gave into Hitler because they thought if they didn't, there would be a war. If the US did not get involved, Hitler would not have been defeated.
Yes, there are peacekeepers in Kosovo-because there is peace, however fragile. This fragile peace exists because the Yugoslavs are no longer in Kosovo-thanks to NATO, especially US, bombing in the form of B-1s, B-52s, and F-16s. Again the US became involved because the Europeans, including the Irish did nothing.
While there was no particular battle that won the Cold War, it was a long struggle in which Communism was proven to be a failure. As for Somalia, about 500,000 Somalias were saved by the US intervention according to the British Economist. The raid on October 3, 1993 was not a botched a raid. The Rangers and Special Forces
set to capture some of warlord Aidid's men, which they did. Unfortunately, two helicopters were lost, resulting in a costly battle for both sides.
Only the Malaysians and Pakistanis, not the Irish, were there to assist the US

Thank you

Delusional

by King Mob Fri Jul 19, 2002 10:59

What I do love about arguing with you is that you conviently ignore any argument which doesn't help your worldview.

Your anaylsis of the second world war is staggeringly one sided? How about the Russians. A critical part of world war two was the bleeding dry of German troops at Stalingrad, and the shameful waste of life. However this whole front bleed german manpower and resources dry. But hey that involves giving the ruskies credit and you'd never do that.

The 98 bombing of the former Yugoslavia cemented Milosovik in power for two more years. Did you not see the pictures of human shields standing on miltary and civilian targets.? It shored him up, made him seem like a tiny figure fighting againist the mighty US and silenced many dissent voices. It took two years for democractic elections to take place, because of your amazing bombing campaign. You never bring peace by bombing.

And how exactly did the US miltary prove communism was a failure? Cause see I'm confused about that. It wasn't a struggle fought by your troops. It was a shameful hateful chapter in this planets history. But it made your miltary industrial complex a buckload o cash, right?

As for Somalia (and I noticed you avoided Rowanda utterly). Somalia was a botched chaotic mess, no matter what TV tells you. Gun ho US ranger tactics botched and messed up. While I do not doubt the necessity and morality behind them being their, and mourn the loss of life, there are better ways to carry out peacekeeping operations. Look at Angolia for example.

Your worldview is blinker into the US is the brave and noble, us Europeans are cowards who scream for your help, and the rest of the world needs you to lead us into the light.

This isn't about US hating, it's having issues with the manner in which you see and relate to everyone else on the planet.

In another argument you've got ongoing you talk about the terrorists on september 11th. Don't take your presidents view that they're evil men, or they hate freedom, (and this is not a justification of their crime) but rather take this a chance for introspection of how the US is viewed in the world, and why people have developed this hatred. It's not irrational.

by Kommy Fri Jul 19, 2002 17:19

The US continued doing business in Germany right up to when they declared war, well into the conflict. 2 of granddaddy Bush's companies were struck off the companies register for doing business with the enemy.
The policies of Hitler were tolerated by the US and UK because they reflected, albeit exageratedly, the policies of those countries. It was only when they twigged that Hitler was a direct threat to them that they took any action.

by Joe (aka Delusion, Joe Boy) Sat Jul 20, 2002 03:23

Hi Guys,
It is Joe Boy. King Mob, the fact is it was the US who played the key role in taking the offensive to Germany. It was the daylight bombing of the German oil industry that lead ultimately to the defeat of the German War machine. Basically, it was the US military industrial complex that defeated BOTH Japan and Germany. This is not to suggest that the Allies just sat on the sidelines. The British and Russians fought bravely, the British especialy during the Battle of Britain. The Russians of course plyed a key role in the Eastern Front. Stalin was warned about the possibility of an invasion, but was ignored.
The fact is the 1999 (not 1998) NATO bombing did play a key role in the fall of Milosevic. He ruled with an iron hand, like most dictators do. Unfortunately, it took a 78 day bombing campaign to bring him down. Once again the US became involved because the Europeans, including the Irish and English, failed to act. Had the bombing not occured, elections would not have taken place.
The US military in and of itself did not prove Communism was a failure-the former Soviet Union did. No it did not necessarily make the "military industrial" complex rich. It provided an obstacle to the expansion of Communism by the Soviet Union, just like it played a key role in the defeat of Germany and Japan.
As for Somalia-it was not botched Gung ho (not Gun ho) Ranger tactics. It was simply bad luck.
In Rwanda (not Rowanda), it must be remembered that the horrible Civil War occurred there only a few months after Somalia. The American public did not have confidence in former President Clinton and really wanted nothing to do with Africa shortly after Somalia. The former President is still criticized for his inaction in Rwanda. Also, if Black Hawk Down is fiction, like you mentioned, I suggest you write to the author Mark Bowden and point out where he is wrong.
Kommy, to say that Hitler's policies reflected the US and UK's is pure nonsense.

Joe

by Prof. Tom Nagy - George Washington University Sun Jul 21, 2002 02:49 nagy at gwu dot edu Mgt Sci Dept, GWU, Washington , DC 202/994-7090

Dear Friends in Ireland,

I salute your decency and sanity in
oppossing military actions and the ugly theatre of military air shows to kill the conscience and common sense. Killing even more of "their" children endangers rather than safeguards "our" children and your children.

The ugly secret of modern war is that despite the propaganda about "smart" weapons, it is the children, not the military, who die in the largest number because modern war operates by destroying infrastructure like water purification. The military can hide and hoard its infrastructure, but civilians can't so the civilians die, starting with the children.

If killing people is such a brilliant response, then here in the U.S. we, the world's sole superpower, (as we endlessly proclaim) should be sitting pretty. Instead we are angry but even more we are scared and gloomy.

We need the Irish and the rest of the world to remind us that peace is ultimately achieved by creating a just world not by setting up a domestic spy corps and launching more wars.

For a real peace bought by real justice,

Tom

by Spider Jerusalem - phillyimc Mon Jul 22, 2002 08:46

How 'bout an American voice that doesn't agree with you, then?

King Mob: from one fictional character to another, well met. Hahh.

Joe - like a thoughtvirus, your points have developed a resistance to reconstruction. One by one, as they are taken apart and analyzed, i see you verbally squirm to the side and raise another erronous "point." Points are frequently more effective when they have at least a vague grounding in reality, old son.

Your, um, analysis of WWII is positively fascinating. I rather wish the polysci prof above me would have commented on it, but seeing a note of support from a (non-anonymous, yet) GW prof - two blocks from the white house and whose faculty tended to include ex-CIA, if i recall - is heartening, nonetheless.

Joe, this talk of "backbone" is troubling. If what you mean is no one thought to take up arms against Hitler's policies, gradually more and more insane as they became throughout the late 30s, until it was too late, then someone should start taking up arms against our own illustrious leadership right now. There, now you've made me set off all the NSA's scanners...

But more to the point, a simple Google search on your favourite "facts" ought to prove illuminating to you. Ferinstance a recent, buried report on how the "food drops" in Afghanistan were a load of useless PR might carry more weight to you when you find out who wrote it. I'll let you figure that out for yourself. Because if you can't be bothered to find things out for yourself, then you can hardly claim to be a participant in Democracy - which seems to important to you to defend.

"it was a long struggle in which Communism was proven to be a failure"

really? funny, have you taken a look at wall street lately? The soviet union had about as much to do with the original concept of communism as the US goes with a true free market or, for that matter, democracy or even a reasonably accountable Republic. Or do small exceptions like slicing up the constitution and ignoring it because the Resident says so simply minor abberations to you?

And about the resident - you might want to ponder how the man supposedly in charge got there by having a state court overturn a federal law. In a state where the button-pusher to get this done worked his campaign. And where his brother was governor. And pay no attention that on 9/11, Junior was happily reading to schoolchildren (in florida, hah!) for at least half an hour after notification of the attacks, while Daddy actually went to the white house and took the security briefings.

But hey, that's all right. A couple of strong political allies of the candidate loudly stated that he won and we would now ignore the federal law that covers precisely this situation. No big deal. Everything's fine. Go back to sleep.

But I'll believe he's president, and that everything done since he took office isn't blatantly illegal, if you answer me one question:

how many votes did he win by?

by Joe Mon Jul 22, 2002 17:21

Spiderjerusalem,
Israel, like it or not, exists because of the United States. If it was not for the US, the Holocaust would not have ended. This is a fact. The United States put its oil supply on the line for Israel during the Yom Kippur War, in which the Arabs completely surprised Israel. if it wasn't for rushed shipments by the US, under President Nixon, the Egyptian SA-6 Surface to Air Missiles would have defeated the Israeli Air Force.
George Bush may have won by a few votes, but he nevertheless won-mainly because people could not read a ballot. Yes, the Soviet Union did display how much of a failure Communism was. After all, the US still exists, the Soviet Union does not. As for the recent woes on Wall Street, we are looking at a factor known as greed, which, unfortunately, exists everywhere in the world.
As for 9/11, at first it was thought to have been an accident. It was only after the second attack that it was realized it was not-it was a terrorist attack. Also, NATO sent aircraft to the United States to patrol its airspace-Israel did not.

Joe