NationStates Jolt Archive

Lets say you are Muqtada al-Sadr.. or another Insurgengy leader.. Somalian/Iraqi/venzuelan/Bolivian/ any insurgency.

Lets say the US gov ask you to meet them for peace negotiating..

Would you engage in peace negotiations with the US Gov?

Would you trust the US gov?

There are Venezuelan and Bolivian insurgencies against the US?

I didn't even know there were hostilities between the US and those countries.

Is there a non-violent alternative?
If you're not looking for war with the U.S then are not peaceful negotiations your only option all trust aside?

There are Venezuelan and Bolivian insurgencies against the US?

I didn't even know there were hostilities between the US and those countries.
Dickwaving aside, of course.

Yes, I would.

Do we have any clear examples of the US reneging on peace treaties?
Any examples of the US killing people who show up to peace talks?

There are Venezuelan and Bolivian insurgencies against the US?

I didn't even know there were hostilities between the US and those countries.those are scenarios.
We have not launched/supported a coup yet..
well actually actually we did -but luckily- it failed

those are scenarios.

In your fetid imagination.

Yes, I would.

Do we have any clear examples of the US reneging on peace treaties?
Any examples of the US killing people who show up to peace talks?

I can think of a half dozen domestically. How far back are you talking?

In your fetid imagination.I am sure you can feel the smell.. There is definitely something smelling. But since we are hundreds of miles apart.. it gotta be you, or something in your room.
;)

I can think of a half dozen domestically. How far back are you talking?

We're talking international relations here...

i wouldn't trust any government. that's why each side has (or should have) trained diplomats who are skilled at unravelling the lies and deceits of the opposition and weaving their own web of lies and deceits in order to gain maximum advantage from any negotiations. the trouble with non-state groups (particularly strongly ideological ones) negotiating with state diplomats is they send their leaders to negotiate. leaders of such groups are invariably ideologues. ideologues are beligerant. you can't win negotiations by being beligerant, not when the other side has professional lyers working for them.

We're talking international relations here...

Well at the time those were international, if you want to nit pick.

those are scenarios.
We have not launched/supported a coup yet..
well actually actually we did -but luckily- it failed

If you'll politely recall the facts, we were informed of the attempted coup against Mr. Chavez, our representatives in Caracas attempted to warn the Venezuelan government, were blown off as being imperialist disruptors, and ignored. As a result, we said screw you and didn't intervene one way or the other in the matter when the shit went down.

Saying that the US was behind the attempted coup is being little more than the propaganda puppet of that latin American caudillo Chavez.

And if you serious think that the US will move against either of those countries, you are a total fucking moron.

In terms of NationStates, only if I had several nukes aimed at White House, Bush's ranch and his favourite other location (can't remember the place's name).

In terms of real life, I'd be expecting a CIA assassin any second.

No I wouldn't.

In terms of NationStates, only if I had several nukes aimed at White House, Bush's ranch and his favourite other location (can't remember the place's name).

In terms of real life, I'd be expecting a CIA assassin any second.

That's why Dobbsworld sits up in the Outer Ionosphere - we can spot a CIA assassin from a mile away. In terms of NationStates, of course...

...If you'll politely...you know me, I will stay polite as long as the others stay polite.
.

..recall the facts...the facts as presented by the US Gov??
.

.. than the propaganda puppet of..you blindly trust the facts.. as presented by what Gov.. again?;)
.

.. you are a total fucking moron.like i said:
you know me, I will stay polite as long as the others stay polite.

you know me, I will stay polite as long as the others stay polite.
.

the facts as presented by the US Gov??
.

you blindly trust the facts.. as presented by what Gov.. again?;)
.

like i said:
you know me, I will stay polite as long as the others stay polite.

And you blindly support the non-transparent government of a Latin American caudillo.

You fully failed to address a single one of my points, and the known evidence that the US attempted to warn Chavez of the potential for a coup, and was ignored.

And you blindly support the non-transparent government of a Latin American caudillo.

You fully failed to address a single one of my points, and the known evidence that the US attempted to warn Chavez of the potential for a coup, and was ignored.

Ocean Drive failing to address points and attacking a strawman? Damn that's unheard of. :rolleyes:

and the known evidence that the US attempted to warn Chavez of the potential for a coup, and was ignored.evidence?
I cant wait for you to show us the "evidence"

And you blindly support the non-transparent government of a Latin American caudillo. This is the word of Bush against the word of Chavez.

I calculate this at around 95... 95% chance the Bush Gov Lied.

well, I have one word for all of you...indians. We have renigged on almost every treaty we ever signed with the indians. Would peace talks work? maybe, unless you held something the US government wanted. Our government will do anything to get their grubby little buearocratic hands on something they want! Look at the war with iraq...any cost. The government has withdrawn itself from the international court to make way for war crimes and geneva convention violations.

evidence?
I cant wait for you to show us the "evidence"

You're creating strawmen. I've cited the article before, I'm not going to track it down again.

This is the word of Bush against the word of Chavez.

I calculate this at around 95... 95% chance the Bush Gov Lied.

Baloney, you're full of it.

well, I have one word for all of you...indians. We have renigged on almost every treaty we ever signed with the indians. Would peace talks work? maybe, unless you held something the US government wanted. Our government will do anything to get their grubby little buearocratic hands on something they want! Look at the war with iraq...any cost. The government has withdrawn itself from the international court to make way for war crimes and geneva convention violations.

Indians as in Native Americans or as in National Indians?

Lets say you are Muqtada al-Sadr.. or another Insurgengy leader.. Somalian/Iraqi/venzuelan/Bolivian/ any insurgency.

Lets say the US gov ask you to meet them for peace negotiating..

Would you engage in peace negotiations with the US Gov?

Would you trust the US gov?

As an insurgency leader... I would want whomever my enemies are to be gone (US or anyone) No I would not enter peace negotiations, no I would not try to reason with them. Doing that would only prolong them leaving.

Would you trust the US gov?

Of course not. As an American citizen I don't trust the government. Why would I if I were a foreign national?

In terms of NationStates, only if I had several nukes aimed at White House, Bush's ranch and his favourite other location (can't remember the place's name).

Sesame Street?

and the known evidence that the US attempted to warn Chavez of the potential for a coup, and was ignored.evidence?
I cant wait for you to show us the "evidence"I've cited the article before

What you have cited before is an article from a US Media site.. quoting the supposed "facts" .. as presented by the Bush Gov.
you might as well be reading the White house spokesman lines.

So i must ask you to read post #17.. again.

As an insurgency leader... I would want whomever my enemies are to be gone (US or anyone) No I would not enter peace negotiations, no I would not try to reason with them. Doing that would only prolong them leaving.

Hell no I would not trust my enemy, as an insurgent I'd barely trust the people who were fighting with me.


Did I already post int his one???

evidence?
I cant wait for you to show us the "evidence"

What you have cited before is an article from a US Media site.. quoting the supposed "facts" .. as presented by the Bush Gov.
you might as well be reading the White house spokesman lines.

So i must ask you to read post #17.. again.

I give up. You have no contact with rationality or reason, your only method of combating information counter to your beliefs is to charge that it's biased or lies. You reject commonly acceptable sources out of hand. God knows I've tried, over the past several years I have posted plenty of evidence to show that the United States had no direct interaction with the coup planners, and that it was opposed to the coup throughout. You exceed skepticism to the point of paranoia. There's no point in trying to argue with a your ilk.

I think you want to be involved in, and wrapped up in some sort of cause, some sort of Che-like campaign against the "big bad US," creating a bogeyman when there really is no cause for you to claim its existence.

I wouldn't trust the US in a peace negotiation even if I was the lawfully elected Prime Minister of Canada.

Lets say you are Muqtada al-Sadr.. or another Insurgengy leader.. Somalian/Iraqi/venzuelan/Bolivian/ any insurgency.

Lets say the US gov ask you to meet them for peace negotiating..

Would you engage in peace negotiations with the US Gov?

Would you trust the US gov?

Why am I leading an insurgency against the US....I need a background story....

The unasked question...

Would the US trust you? After all you're the ones declaring that God has ordered you to conquer the world.

The unasked question...

Would the US trust you? so far in the scenario you are the leader of an Insurgency.. Fighting US occupation troops (and a local Gov installed with the help of the US occupation army)

The US Gov has proposed you to personally meet with the General.
For "peace negotiations."

In all honestly, probably not. If I were going to negotiate peace, it would be with the government of the country, not the United States.

Would you trust the US gov?

No govt is to be trusted just like that. US govt is no exception.

Lets say you are Muqtada al-Sadr.. or another Insurgengy leader.. Somalian/Iraqi/venzuelan/Bolivian/ any insurgency.

Lets say the US gov ask you to meet them for peace negotiating..

Would you engage in peace negotiations with the US Gov?

Would you trust the US gov?
a) It worked for the VietCong.
b) Hell no!

I wouldn't trust the US government with any sort of agreement, the back-stabbing lot they are.

If I get to be in the same room with Condy, I'll take the risk ;)

If I get to be in the same room with Condy, I'll take the risk ;)

That sounds like trouble ...

so far in the scenario you are the leader of an Insurgency.. Fighting US occupation troops (and a local Gov installed with the help of the US occupation army)

The US Gov has proposed you to personally meet with the General.
For "peace negotiations."

On YOUR end.

On their end you're a jerk that's got a Chip on it's shoulder against the US and you're deciding to make EVERYONE suffer for it.

I'm sure they would be thinking that you've got a carbomb lined up for the meeting.

Hey Oceandrive why aren't you ranting on how Lebanon is killing Palestinans?

*sigh*

If I was the 'leader' of an Iraqi insurgency, I doubt that I'd be entering into peace negotiations with the United States. I would not be interested in peace negotiations, because my goal would be to cause the American people to believe that the war was un-winnable, and to convince their leadership to leave. I would not do that by entering into peace negotiations.

Furthermore, I (in this case, myself rather than the hypothetical terrorist leader) would submit that the insurgents in Iraq do not have a unified leadership, and saying that they do is ignoring the plain facts of the case. Insurgent fights insurgent just as much as insurgent fight American. Furthermore, the insurgency seems unconcerned with the killing of Iraqi civilians, who have borne the brunt of the conflict. Iraq Body Count (http:/www.iraqbodycount.org), a volunteer organization with anti-war leanings, estimates that the minimum civilian death toll in Iraq is 63,929, compared to 3,422 American dead as estimated by Iraq Coalition Casualty Count (http://icasualties.org/oif/), another (more coalition focussed) organization. Check out their 'methodology' section to see how they track the counts, it's pretty rational.

In any case, if the insurgency aimed to throw out the US, why are the vast preponderance of deaths caused by the insurgency civilian ones? Rather, the insurgency (speaking broadly, each facet has individual goals) is trying to destabilize the democratically elected government of Iraq, and in doing so has chosen to target civilians. Their reasoning is a bit hazy to me, and I'm not prepared to provide reasoning. However, I would challenge the entire basis of this thread.

As for trusting the US Government? Depends. If I were the leader of, say, France, I would. I would trust the US Government if I were the leader of China. If I were heading up an insurgency, or advocating for said nation's destruction as 'the great Satan', I probably wouldn't trust that nation's government to treat me like an equal.

The US hasn't slaughtered people en-masse for a while, especially not at peace talks. We have committed various crimes (I challenge you to find a single major nation that hasn't), sure. Should we be judged, over a hundred years down the line from Wounded Knee, on those actions? No, probably not.

Why am I leading an insurgency against the US....I need a background story....Ok.. This was not originally for role-playing fun..
I am not very good @ Role-palying scenarios.. buy I am willing to give it a try :D
I propose 4 different scenarios.

2 role-play: Venezuela and Bolivia.
2 Real time: Iraq and Somalia.
and... feel free to add your own with your own Country.

Lets start with the Venezuela one..
Lets say The 2005 Coup had succeded, and Chavez was killed on the coup..
Chavez had been preparing for this.. several tens-of-thousands of peasants/college students had been trained as militias/insurgency and armed accordingly.. The New illegal Gov is under siege by these insurgents.. and eventually they have to be evacuated in US helicopters.
The US sends the Army to re-establish the "peace" and the flow of Venezuelan Oil.
...

hmm..
I think this is not good enough scenario.. feel free to add some "body"

Lets say you are Muqtada al-Sadr.. or another Insurgengy leader.. Somalian/Iraqi/venzuelan/Bolivian/ any insurgency.

Lets say the US gov ask you to meet them for peace negotiating..

Would you engage in peace negotiations with the US Gov?

Would you trust the US gov?

Nope.
Uncle Sam's word aint worth a shit.

In terms of NationStates, only if I had several nukes aimed at White House, Bush's ranch and his favourite other location (can't remember the place's name).

In terms of real life, I'd be expecting a CIA assassin any second.You are raising an interesting point.

Venezuela/Bolivia/Algeria/Iran/Iraq/Servia/Vietnam/etc cannot afford to assassinate the Leader of the US. or the leader of France.

Lets say you are Muqtada al-Sadr.. or another Insurgengy leader.. Somalian/Iraqi/venzuelan/Bolivian/ any insurgency.

Ah-ha. So, you acknowledge that the US are occupying Venezuela and Bolivia...


Would you engage in peace negotiations with the US Gov?

If I'm Iraqi, yes, because they occupy my country. If I'm Venezuelan, Bolivian or Somalian, no, because it's none of their businesses, unless they want to claim that the US government is intervening against the legitimate governments of those countries, hence, admitting they've gone to war without a formal declaration or even an ultimatum.

Would you trust the US gov?
No. Never. I would keep very alert, and call as many international observers and journalists (not US-military-embedded ones, of course) as witnesses of the talks, the treatise, and the respect of it.

You are raising an interesting point.

Venezuela/Bolivia/Algeria/Iran/Iraq/Servia/Vietnam/etc cannot afford to assassinate the Leader of the US. or the leader of France.

Servia? What's that country?
And... Vietnam on the Baddies list? Still aching from that, neh?

And excuse me, who can afford to assassinate openly any world leader? Even having the iraqi shiites hanging Saddam wasn't quite a smart move.
Let's say a CIA operative is caught after having killed Sarkozy or Angela Merke. I'd say that the US would be in serious trouble. That's why political assassination are usually carried out secretly.

hell no i wouldn't trust the u.s. government. or any other self interested super power. i would think my best hope, the best hope of any nation, would be to avoid drawing its attention in the first place.

on the other hand, if it actually wanted to negotiate with us, in anything remotely resembling honesty, that would be flattering, but still nervousmaking.

it seems to me that american forign policy, and the international corporatocracy it supports, has put every government on the face of the planet, outside of the e.u., and even it isn't totally unscathed, in the kind of catch 22 position, that if they try to protect their environment and people from destructive, even fatal, corporocratic exploitation, they face the real probability of being demonized by that policy, and even violently overthrown at the irrisponsible whimsy of its so called 'conservative' 'leaders'.

i believe i would actually seek to AVOID, and avoid attracting, forign development investment. and instead develop human scale infrastructure with whatever resourses, however limited they might be, already existed domesticly.

by that i do not mean i would attempt to isolate our borders from unarmed civilians or their trade goods, but would always be seeking a ballance of avoiding dependence upon them, and upon the poison pill of i.m.f. loans and other forms of super power 'largesse'.

but also anything else that would call even our very existence to their attention. as much as is possible, without buying into what they keep trying to force on everyone.

=^^=
.../\...

Servia? What's that country? Yugoslavia. my mistake.
.

And... Vietnam on the Baddies list? Still aching from that, neh?there is no such a thing as "Baddies".. or "Bad guys".. that lingo is for kids taking Hollywood too seriously.
.


And excuse me, who can afford to assassinate openly any world leader?Does not have to be openly.
and we are talking about small countries president/Leaders, not "World leaders"
.

Even having the iraqi shiites hanging Saddam wasn't quite a smart move. You are calling Saddam a World Leader?
.

Let's say a CIA operative is caught after having killed Sarkozy that would mean the destruction of the US and France..

Yugoslavia. my mistake.
Never mind. Or Serbia, anyway.


You are calling Saddam a World Leader?

Sort of, he was. Many arabs, expecially in the right-wing side (remember that the Baath is a nationalistic trans-arab movement), thought of Saddam as a champion in the fight against the western influence over ME after the war in 1991. This doesn't mean he wasn't a fucking bastard; but how many fucking bastards have been world leaders? Just to name one, well, Hitler was a sonuvabich World Leader.

(Bush favorite place?) ... Sesame Street?LOL

This is the word of Bush against the word of Chavez.
I calculate this at around 95... 95% chance the Bush Gov Lied.

Ahh, you're too soft on Bush Gov... make it 99.9% and I'll agree. :D

Why am I leading an insurgency against the US....I need a background story....

*psst* You're a top-notch CIA agent sent to cause civil unrest in said country. *shifty eyes* You never heard this from me...

Hey Oceandrive why aren't you ranting on how Lebanon is killing Palestinans?

Maybe he's not ranting about that because everyone is killing (or wanting to kill) Palestinians... >_>

Let's say a CIA operative is caught after having killed Sarkozy or Angela Merke. I'd say that the US would be in serious trouble. That's why political assassination are usually carried out secretly.

Two words: cyanide capsule.

And to elaborate, said operative would of course deny any involvement with USA Gov, and the Gov would do the same thing. Undeniable truth thwarted by lack of solid evidence. I doubt they'd be carrying any official letter signed by Bush that it's okay to kill the president/dictator/king/whatever of the opposing country. Even Bush isn't (probably) that arrogant. :p

"Never do business with a religious son of a bitch, his word ain't worth shit. Not with the 'Good Lord' tellin' him how to fuck you on the deal..."
William S. Burroughs