Iraq or USA, which side you stay [Archive]

Elizabeth

01-17-2003, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by Shadeless

To be realy honest, usa starts to get a pain in the butt. First war with afghanistan, now iraq,

Ok I was trying really hard not to enter this conversation, however...
Have you people forgotten a little thing called 9/11? Where almost 3000 innocent men, women and children perished at the hands of a true madman Bin Laden???! Hence the issues with Afghanistan. So sorry if we were such a big pain in the butt to maybe want the dude to pay for a little thing like that.

And gee... let's think... who released the Afghan people from the tyranny they were under for so many years? And who sent $100 million in aid to the Afghan people to help rebuild their country and government? Yes, the USA.

Secondly, I guess it just must be me but I kind of appreciate the fact that NO ONE COUNTRY is allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction (USA included) and I'm glad there is some sort of watchdog out there. If you all want to blame Bush for being the bad guy then so be it. However, when Hussein decides to use those "nonexistent" weapons and half the human race is wiped out, then it will be the USA's fault for not doing something sooner.

with a madman as bush at charge... omg.. world let's attack usa befor the crazy man starts using it.

I didn't vote for Bush, but I would hardly call him a madman. We do not have a dictatorship over here and there are always high-ranking people ready to challenge every decision the man wants to make. It's the basis for our entire governmental system. It's called checks and balances, people - so no ONE PERSON has too much control. I mean, let's face it - regardless of what he does, there is always criticism. He can never make everybody happy. It's the nature of the job. But to call him a "madman" well I think that is just a little over-the-top, don't you?

I mean think about it logically- if Hussein had nothing to hide and no weapons of mass destruction, then why did it take 14 tries for the UN weapons inspectors to be let in? It's like the drunk guy who won't take the breathilizer or the guy with drugs in his car who refuses to let the cops search it. IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE THEN WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL?!

Just my $.02
-Elizabeth

mitakadai

01-17-2003, 08:29 PM

I support the US's stance against Iraq, if Saddam isn't forced to give up his weapons and hopefully forced out of government he's a big danger. How will Iraq give their chemical and biological weapons to? Think of the consequences of a biological terrorists attack in a big city.

I can't help wondering though if there were no oil wells in Iraq would the same pressure be put on Iraq. The USA and Western governments in general seem to base their foreign pollicy on economic and political expediency. Over 3 million people have died in the Democratic Republic of Congo over the last five years, surely that warrants UN intervention. After Ruwanda there were lots of fine speeches saying something like it would never be allowed to happen again but now it's happening and I don't hear any of the western goverments talkings about intervening. Since western companies started making money in China there is very little mention of the occupation of Tibet. No one is putting any pressure on Russia to find a political solution in Chechnya now that their vote is needed in the UN security council, this dispite regular reports of atrocities against Chechnian civilians commited by Russian troops. It would be nice to see our governments do the moral right thing as well as the financial right thing.

Elizabeth

01-18-2003, 11:48 PM

Mitakadai, you make some excellent points - I wholeheartedly agree!

-Elizabeth

Mark Nordstrom

01-19-2003, 02:08 AM

Heres my opinion. Iraq has used Chemical weapons on there own people. Iraq has nuclear weapons, Iraq has chemical weapons. Also they will use them without thinking twice.

I do agree Bush is war hungry but Iraq is the one who attacked kawait when they did. Iraq is the one who kicked the inspectors out 2 years ago. NOT US. Oh yah 12 chemical warheads found that were empty that iraq did not declare on there 12,000 page weapons list. TWELVE THOUSAND PAGE.
The US is right in making iraq listen to the world. Sadam needs to be taken out of office and let the iraqi people elect a real leader.

On another note the US does have nuclear weapons, chemical weapons. BUT we do not use them on are OWN PEOPLE.

Shadeless

01-20-2003, 03:48 AM

hmm yes elizabeth my word choises are not very good, to say it softly, but pls my english is not that good, and my vocabulary is limited.

Ok madman maybe a bit to much, so crazy man sounds better? In my opinion he isn't much crazier, then Sadam, only Bush is on the "good side" and Sadam is on the bad side. What i mean is Bush in an other enviroment, not watched by how he is watched now, would probaly not differ to much. Hmm Bush ain't my favourite man :D

Anywayz tried to stick it with bush, but since others start to say usa, i will start with usa myself.

none country should have mass destruction weapons u say Elizabeth, i think it's a fact that usa has most of them, after that russia, china and n. korea and some other small country's.

9/11, yes that happened, what ur point there? Bombs hitting wrong spot killing innocent people is right ???

9/11 yes i remember that, i remember watching the t.v and thinking, will this be the start of ww3? And heck, bush went to Afghanistan to get that Bin Laden. AND OF COURSE i support bush with that action.. only if he actualy would have gotten bin laden that is, but he didn't. I guess every1 forgot that..

Like i said befor, once usa had the change to get rid of sadam, but they didn't right?, because they ought it was saver to let Sadam on the leadership. I guess every1 forgot that to.

Hmm or did the usa just attack iraq, to draw people's attention to something else. Maybe just so people forget that they where after bin laden in first place. Or maybe it's a tactic to to get bin laden.

Iraq attacks kuweit :/ there are so many wars and litle wars in the world..But like some1 stated beform those aren't interfered by other country's.

And what's the difference between a bullet and chem. gass... they both kill so they are both wrong!

$SuperString

01-20-2003, 05:37 AM

Well I don't really agree with this topic, but as its not been removed, here is my thoughts.

OK, Bush is from a country that consider themselfs as that world leaders and the country that know best (not to mention the ego he tries to live upto - his father). Saddam is from a country that has pretty much always been at war and has been brought up in that environment.
So lets look at it - they both are representing there countrys, both have very strong believes and large egos, both want to be better than previous leaders (or at least remebered for something big), and both are from very different cultures. Taken this its clear not one will back down, unless they have something to gain. Its like stubborn school children who dont understand what a compromise is (or dont see it as an option under the circumstances). Its basically the same thing but on a much larger scale.
So, I beleive the US (and UK for that matter) have much more to loose if war breaks out. Fair enough the US will take control of the oil fields and all that, but is that worth the chance of major cities being destroyed ?? not in my opinion.
And sure, I dont agree with they way Saddams country is run and beleive something must be done. But were are all these intelligence folks, you know the Jams Bond types ??, cant they solve the problem ??, or maybe thats what the real game is all about, maybe a huge undercover operation has been strategically planned and underway !!!

Bunkermaster

01-20-2003, 09:23 AM

everytime intelligence agencies trained people to overthrow a government, the trained troops turned around after a few years and biti off the trainer's hand.

Example :
vietnam (ack spelling) trained by OSS advisors during WW2 to stop the japanese (kicked the **** outta french and american troops)
Afghanistan trained in the late 70s early 80s to stop the russians (although on this account some of them were still on our side to clean up afghanistan)
Congo trained by green berets in the 60s and 70s to keep katanga from falling in russian/chinese advisors hands... Against us in the 90s
...

The list goes on and on...

We are living the aftermath of the cold war and of colonial freedom wars...

Things have to settle down, will prolly take a century but it eventually will... If someone has the balls to start cleaning up that is.

$SuperString

01-20-2003, 10:48 AM

Well I suppose thats the reality of it Bunkermaster, you cant trust anyone. These type of things have been happening since time began, and I really dont see things ever changing. Its just the way mankind is !!
Sad but true..... (one of my favourite songs btw)

Shadeless

01-20-2003, 11:01 AM

true, mankind likes to fight.. or at least the fighters always get on top and make others fight.

As long humans always want more and more, then war and stuff like that won't stop either. Humans are selfish anoying creatures.

heck me is glad that me is an alian
:D :D

Elizabeth

01-20-2003, 12:07 PM

Originally posted by Shadeless
heck me is glad that me is an alian
:D :D
Hey, Shadeless - LOL - I thought I was the only one! :D

-Elizabeth

Shadeless

01-21-2003, 03:16 AM

yea well my parents from zzlllssstuiiiutttepoeiopoe dropped me on this planet when i was small ;)

perhaps we can keep an alien meeting sometime

ratass2002

01-21-2003, 05:06 PM

Bush is trying to start a war obviously(as his dad he will not get re-elected(he knows that), so he says screw it I am going "war nut";lol). He's just waiting for some kind of excuse to start this inevitable war(I predict before April, 2003). They have enough spyware to know what Iraq is hidding(in fact they should know all army bases, weapon installements and probably all underground entrance). It's really a cat and mouse game. No one is truly wrong or right. In abstraction it's like two mobs killing each other for some personal interest. We should just watch and enjoy the show. Unless someone is powerful enough to get rid of both clowns.

Then there is another clown at North Korea trying to take advantage of the situation to get some benefit. Basically give me some more rice(http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/nkorea.html) and I will stop the nuke program(analogy;)

Shadeless

01-22-2003, 04:03 AM

korea just takes advantage of the situation. With usa forces established near iraq, and a war wich almost certainly will come.. prolly next month. Korea won't have to worry about a war the coming months.

Korea knows it will be pretty hard for usa to risk a war with them after they are finished in iraq.

[fictive to some]
Usa has to do maintenance to the equipment, they have to make reports of how there new in the field tested play thingies work and lots of other reports.
(guess afghanistan was not sufficient to test them)
A well making adjustments en stuff on the tested materials..

it will takes months befor bush can go to war again, ofcourse the force needs a break after such a training trip
[reality to those who know]

:D :D :D

Anyways it's time that europe build up it's united army, and start to investigate usa bases, in europe to start with and disable the few 100 missiles sites with the o so forbidden mass destruction weapons

then we move the few 100 builded plane carriers to usa and start attacking usa because we know they have mass destruction weapons.... (*whole world exept usa and some lucky other country's die because some crazy people in some underground usa base would push a red button wich say's launch missiles)

Who is more dangerous.. a madman from whom u know he is a madman, and with a few weapons where he can do some damage to country's near him.

Or a country with an attitude bigger then the himalaya
and enough weapons/mass destruction weapons to blow up the whole world?

ow yes [edit] i do not mean usa :rolleyes: nope i don't :rolleyes:
c''mon just believe me.. i realy don't ok? i mean... eeeeehmm.. uuuhmm... The Netherlands.. yea they are very dangerous we have at least 1 base with short missiles nukes.. yea ... aimed at russia.. yea.. ow.. damn they are not from us.. i forgot from wich country those nukes are.. but not us.. yea.. [edit]

usa doesn't need to be usa but can be a speculative nation.. like aliens from blebsibup. (just in case some people get stepped on their toes again..)

jaddy

01-23-2003, 07:07 AM

I agree that this war is purely interest war. No one can ignore the strong relationship between USA and Israel (The real only country which has destruction weapons in the area).

USA is considering that if Iraq and Iran has destruction weapons, then this may effect on the existence of Jewish country. USA don't want Israel to be in danger since many US leaders and chairmen are Jewish, so they really will loose their investments and their interest in Israel, that's why those people considered the pushing groups on the USA government leaders.

Sadly, this is very true. USA is now controlled by those rich Jewish people who do effect on their decisions. USA never blamed Israel for having destruction weapons or for occupying lands, and blaming instead Iraq and Iran.

Unfortunately, the Iraqi civilian will be the only victims.

NoFear

01-23-2003, 10:22 AM

So many people talk about how other countries have NBC weapons, but I think sometimes they fail to realize that these countries are not a direct thread to our safety the same as Saddam is. This is what people have to realize when they ask "why aren't we so concerned with other countries' developing nuclear technology?"

Saddam hates us. He will try and harm America. He already has. THAT is why we are trying to stop him.

Bunkermaster

01-23-2003, 11:01 AM

not only America, the whole world could be his target, he's spent around 30/40 years killing his own people how can we sure he won't do the same for the whole planet?

Monkee Of Evil

01-23-2003, 12:41 PM

I'm an american, and i could give a rats ass if we go to war. If we do, **** happens. as long as they dont draft me, or call my dad back into the service. And at the same token, if we don't go to war with iraq, great. Less people die, sadam doesnt get a balistic missle planted firmly up his ass and everything goes on.

now, this however DOESNT mean I agree with Iraq on many issues. They are a member of the united nations, and therefor bound (loosley) by its regulations which were "created to ensure peace". This doesn't really mean anything seeing as how they refuse to abide by UN regulations, and when asked to allow weapons inspectors in t he country they refuse. Whats the point of having a United Nations when its members undermine its authority, if someone doesn't stand up for what the U.N. stands for, then we're just wasting a lot of money on it. I'm sure that every single person on this board has had to help pay for the U.N. even if they like it or not, since everyones government uses this horrible thing called taxes to suck the money out of us ;) . I'm not saying that that somebody has to be, or even should be the U.S. In fact, i think the U.S. should lay off for a while on all the policing it does "on behalf of the u.n.".

Still though, I've met gov...err..i mean, president Bush several times (when he was Governer of texas) at various events through my college, and other things in the community. And i'm STILL wondering htf he got elected. Don't get me wrong, i like the guy (minus all this war he wants to throw at already wartorn countries in the name of freedom), but i don't see why everyone voted for him.

Also, I don't see why the U.S. has to be so involved internationaly. prior to world war 1/2 the U.S's view on other countries was very much isolationist. We didn't bother "them" and "they" dont bother us. Which, i sometimes wish the U.S. could go back to that, but ya know how things go i guess....

riffy

01-23-2003, 01:30 PM

interesting topic guys...i've recently become a regular user of phpbuilder and it's forums and all the great help you guys have provided...before this, i was posting to www.tek-tips.com...i still do sometimes...they have alot of beneficial help too for all other languages and computer related stuff, not just php..

anywayz, about this whole war thing...i think really jr. bush is trying to take over where sr. bush left off...i was watching leno last night and he was mentioning something about bush was sayin that this is a "bad movie re-run" and leno's like ya well bush is in office, the economy is horrible and we're about to fight iraq, i've seen this movie somewhere...hehe, i thought that was funny...

seriously though, most countries are against this whole war i think but only france and germany have really stepped up to say that they will not support no matter what...i mean they had a HUGE rally in washington d.c last weekend protesting it, now i don't know how much these rallies help but close to a million people showed up which is pretty impressive...figures bush was resting at camp david when it was happening...it's a war for power and for greed i think, just like the war in afghanistan was...ya supposedly bin laden attacked america, but america STILL has provided no proof for it...don't get me wrong, it was a horrible act that no one should do and should be taken into account for but where's the justice??? america went to get bin laden and mullah omar supposedly but they only killed more people than died in the attacks...what's up w/that???...

saddam is a horrible man and we all know what he did 12 yrs ago but why didn't america finish him then??? do u really think they couldn't find him?? just like they can't find bin laden?? this whole war on iraq is to take americans' mind off of bin laden and afghanistan...as for what the majority of the world thinks, bush doesn't care, he'll attack iraq regardless...whether they comply or don't comply, he's set his mind to attack and he will...he's got israel ( which gets like $3 billion in aid from US) and he's got UK on his side and he doesn't even need them but some support is better than none...

my point is that yes saddam should be taken care of but not at the expense of a WHOLE country again....and think about it, 9/11...the attackers, whoever they were...attacked the financial might and the military might of this country, not some town or village that they felt like...they were going to attack the white house when the plane was brought down...anywayz i could go on forever and i think this is long enuff..

sorry if i offended anyone...it was an open forum...i know most or all of you don't know me, but i'll be willing to share info :)

take care of ureselves

ahundiak

01-23-2003, 08:22 PM

Does anybody here actually take the time to research any of these issues? Forming one's opinions by watching late night comedy shows can lead to silly conclusions.

Just ask the women of Afghanistan if the U.S. invasion was a good idea. Where are all the rallies to get the American servicemen out of Afghanistan?

Wait until Saddam is gone then ask the Iraqi people if it was worth it.

mkarabulut

01-24-2003, 09:45 AM

Is anyone convinced that USA government attacks just for the good of Iraq people ?I don't think so..

Bush is trying to justify what he will have done in near future. He will probably attack to iraq regardless of whether or not iraq really deserves it.

I can see that only loser will be innocent people of iraq. I hope someone stops it soon.

sneeze

01-24-2003, 03:41 PM

1: USA is acting as the 'world Police'.
Doing so is not allways 'good', but in this matter, it is!

2: Saddam should be deleted at ALL costs...

They should have done it properly the last time they made them f***kers burn... but i assume they had to save them 'to be used before 2003-03-01' bombs and had to choose another time and occation to use them.

CIA knows Saddams whereabouts, so killing him wouldnt be
'hard work', but the world-bank (wich owns the weapon-industry)
probably wants USA to use them old ones so they can buy new ones... simple, innit?

Its either Iraq or Korea.... sadly eneugh, innocent people is gonna die... that makes me sad...

:(

simulant

01-25-2003, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by Shadeless
9/11, yes that happened, what ur point there? Bombs hitting wrong spot killing innocent people is right ???

Analysis

9/11
Terrorists deliberately and indiscriminately targeted innocent civilians, with the intent of inflicting maximum casualties.
Errant Bombs
Malfunctions in laser-guided bomb, incorrect intelligence, and/or human error that causes an accident that results in civilian casualties. The intended target was a group of enemy soldiers or an enemy installation. Mistakes can and will happen in war.

Shadeless.......there is a HUGE difference here.....do you see it?

james2010

01-30-2003, 07:08 PM

I have to say I don't agree with this topic being here, as it is sure to degrade the friendliness of this community:(, maybe a link to a more appropriate discussion forum is in order.

Shadeless

01-31-2003, 04:30 AM

Originally posted by simulant

Analysis

<==his story==>

Shadeless.......there is a HUGE difference here.....do you see it?

duh,

i see the difference, but i do not see the difference between 1 human life and the other, each is same valued. (talking bout innocent people)

So u actualy say; punishing innocent people for something what others have done is ok?

Shadeless

01-31-2003, 04:32 AM

james, i think the people have been realy friendly during this discussion... so why not discuss then...

anywayz the war will soon begin, so then there won't be much to discuss in this way anymore.

james2010

01-31-2003, 02:59 PM

I agree so far from what I've seen it hasn't been too bad. But all it takes is one bad apple to ruin the bunch. And I've seen lots of other forums turn completely bitter over this subject.

simulant

01-31-2003, 05:22 PM

So u actualy say; punishing innocent people for something what others have done is ok?

Of course not. What I am saying is that to deliberately punish innocent civilians means that you will most likely do it again without hesitation and without remorse. What kind of human beings are these?

At least for respect's sake, the errant bomb incidences are followed by investigations, apologies, and court-marshalls in some cases. I'm sure some have slipped through the cracks.....the justice system is definitely not perfect.

As an analogy......let's say two gunfighters (George Bush vs. Osama bin Laden) are about to have a duel, and there's a crowd of people standing around watching. Since bin Laden is a terrorist, he starts opening fire on all of the people in the crowd. Bush, in his efforts to protect them, fires his gun at bin Laden......but he's a terrible shot, and ends up shooting someone else in the crowd. Now, who do you respect more in this instance??

james2010

01-31-2003, 09:09 PM

ok then...

Star Wars Spoof (http://www.canadaka.net/cka/modules.php?op=modload&name=My_eGallery&file=index&do=showpic&pid=2297&orderby=dateD)

mpirvul

02-06-2003, 01:40 AM

I agree and see the points made in many of the posts....isn't it not easiest to sit back and stay quiet, but when all is said and done, Saddam has been a nuissance since the early 90's, maybe sooner, and do you really want this guy having hordes of chemical and nuclear weapons, whether it is right for us to stop him by force or not? I say stomp his ass now, before it is too late and he is chemicalling his undefended neighbors. I also say stop North Korea too. They thaw out these rods that were frozen in 94' as a part of a peace agreement, breaking this agreement. Coincidental that it is about the same time we are dealing with Iraq....I think not. Tactically scrub them both, let the rest of the morons think long and hard about it.

shawon22

02-07-2003, 04:29 AM

u missed ISRAEL :-(

juschillinnow

02-07-2003, 03:42 PM

We should just watch and enjoy the show. Unless someone is powerful enough to get rid of both clowns.

Hey ratass2002,

That ain't funny man. I'm an american and proud of it. Do I agree with everything that Bush has set into action?....NO. But there are many things that I do support.

I have many opinions that I will leave out in this post, but as for your comment.....

China is probably the only power in the world (little known) that has the power, army, and weapons strong enough to over take the US.

This is one war that I would never wish upon this world now, or in the future to come.

wscreate

02-11-2003, 07:56 PM

Bush has moral fortitude and he has principals -- traits which Saddam Hussein (And many Europeans, I am sad to say) do not.

Bush has the support of the American people. Europe, just get out of the way and let Daddy spank the bad boy.

wscreate

02-11-2003, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by simulant

As an analogy......let's say two gunfighters (George Bush vs. Osama bin Laden) are about to have a duel, and there's a crowd of people standing around watching. Since bin Laden is a terrorist, he starts opening fire on all of the people in the crowd. Bush, in his efforts to protect them, fires his gun at bin Laden......but he's a terrible shot, and ends up shooting someone else in the crowd. Now, who do you respect more in this instance??

Good analogy. I get it. :cool:

wscreate

02-12-2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by Shadeless
I do not support the war hunger from the usa (madman bush)

i do not support the untrustworthyness of madman Sadam

To be realy honest, usa starts to get a pain in the butt. First war with afghanistan, now iraq, and heck if the whole world wásn't starting to get anoyed by usa, they probaly would go for north korea to.

usa mumbling things bout those weapons those country's have.. ffs... look at all the nucleair **** usa has... and with a madman as bush at charge... omg.. world let's attack usa befor the crazy man starts using it.

i dun support any violent solutions.
Americans do not care what the rest of the world thinks. The rest of the world is full of politicians that are weak and powerless. Why should we listen to them?

For your info, North Korea will be next, at least I hope so. Maybe South korea too and then, maybe France and Germany and Belgium.

wscreate

02-12-2003, 06:57 PM

usa mumbling things bout those weapons those country's have.. ffs... look at all the nucleair **** usa has... and with a madman as bush at charge... omg.. world let's attack usa befor the crazy man starts using it.

i dun support any violent solutions.

What are you, a liar or a moron. You say "world, let's attack usa", and then you say you "dun support any violent solutions".

You are weak and powerless just like the rest of the Europeans.

edshuck

02-15-2003, 08:38 PM

There is a bit of confusion between leadership and strength.

Being able to bomb another into oblivion is not a demonstration of leadership.

There is all the talk of UN 1441. What about UN 242?

wscreate

02-15-2003, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by edshuck
There is a bit of confusion between leadership and strength.

Being able to bomb another into oblivion is not a demonstration of leadership.

There is all the talk of UN 1441. What about UN 242?
Wow, another anti-American American.

edshuck

02-15-2003, 08:48 PM

No, just a Vietnam Vet and a life member of the VFW.

wscreate

02-15-2003, 09:37 PM

I respect you as a vet for making a sacrafice for this country, and I thank God for Americans like you, but it does not give you any particular moral superiority in the matter of the pending Iraq war.

I think many Anti-War protestors are not being honest. If they were, they would tell us how they really feel-- that they are anti-American and this pending war just gives them a forum to espouse their anti-American views just as Socialist Europe is doing. It is a disgusting display.

God Bless the United States of America and to hell with her enemies, including the Socialist French.

edshuck

02-15-2003, 10:29 PM

I respect you as a vet for making a sacrafice for this country, and I thank God for Americans like you, but it does not give you any particular moral superiority in the matter of the pending Iraq war.

What sacrafice? I did not die. I was not wounded. I was not even drafted. I volunteered. In fact, I was a watch supervisor in the Combat Information Center of the USS Ticonderoga CVA 14, during the Gulf of Tonkin Incident.

I claim no moral superiority and until Patriot II becomes law, I will lawfully express my view.

You, on the other hand identified me as un American. Perhaps that is not assuming a moral superiority. :confused:

I think many Anti-War protestors are not being honest. If they were, they would tell us how they really feel-- that they are anti-American and this pending war just gives them a forum to espouse their anti-American views just as Socialist Europe is doing. It is a disgusting display.

I have never been in a protest. You are stuck in a rut with the logic that all who do not line up with Shrub are un American. You might recall that that proud 'merican spent his time in the Texas air national guard.

From the rheoteric anyone not directly aligned in thought, politics and religion has cause to worry.

This will be the last term for Shrub.

It is very American to have a view. But everything has gone downhill since Rush Limbaugh became the thought guru for the Bush Administration.

France (and Germany, Russia and the rest of the world are not the enemy). Nor, thank God is Bush the enemy.

The replies that you have made are much the same as mine on 9/11. I want bin Laden found and he and his group erased from the earth.

But I am not convinced that it has a link to Sadaam. The case that the US has presented to the UN has been very weak - so far.

If there is confusion about my reference to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, I will be happy to elaborate.

There also was no reply by you to UN 242. UN 242 is a resolution passed some years ago by the Security Council. One of the dictates is that Israel will return to the pre 1967 borders. The American policy of favoring Israel over all others is shown in the following link to extend beyond the life and safety of Americans. Please visit the site at USS Liberty (http://ussliberty.org/).

Regardless of the UN 242, the Bush administration has chosen to go for the gusto with UN 1441.

If the US wants to be the enforcement arm of the UN. Why not start with UN 242.

wscreate

02-16-2003, 02:58 AM

It is very American to have a view. But everything has gone downhill since Rush Limbaugh became the thought guru for the Bush Administration.
Wow, are you a little paranoid???

What sacrafice? I did not die. I was not wounded. I was not even drafted. I volunteered. In fact, I was a watch supervisor in the Combat Information Center of the USS Ticonderoga CVA 14, during the Gulf of Tonkin Incident.

Serving your country in military service, draftee or volunteer, is considered a sacrifice by many, including myself.

wscreate

02-16-2003, 03:05 AM

There also was no reply by you to UN 242. UN 242 is a resolution passed some years ago by the Security Council. One of the dictates is that Israel will return to the pre 1967 borders. The American policy of favoring Israel over all others is shown in the following link to extend beyond the life and safety of Americans. Please visit the site at USS Liberty.

I know exactly what UN 242 is. I chose not to reply because it has NOTHING to do with my arguement. You are doing what your liberal brethren have taught you to do -- you try to confuse the issue by tossing in "what ifs", and "we've got to do that first" types of arguements. They are meant to "paralyze" our leadership into "inaction". Fortunately, we have a principalled leader in the White House for a change who does not take his orders from Socialists in Europe, nor from Socialists here at home and definitely not from the "Make Love Not War" crowd in San Francisco and Berkley (who are definitely Socialists).

wscreate

02-16-2003, 03:11 AM

There also was no reply by you to UN 242. UN 242 is a resolution passed some years ago by the Security Council. One of the dictates is that Israel will return to the pre 1967 borders. The American policy of favoring Israel over all others is shown in the following link to extend beyond the life and safety of Americans.

I am NOT an anti-semite and will defend Israel in my heart and in my mind. They are a great an noble people. I have immense respect for them and support their war against the animals who kill their people.

All clear thinking individuals know that implementation of UN 242 would result in the death of the Jewish state. But then again, that is the goal of Socialism, isn't it?

By the way, I am not Jewish. You don't have to be a Jew to recognize right and wrong in their struggle.

edshuck

02-16-2003, 12:54 PM

I know exactly what UN 242 is. I chose not to reply because it has NOTHING to do with my arguement. You are doing what your liberal brethren have taught you to do -- you try to confuse the issue by tossing in "what ifs", and "we've got to do that first" types of arguements. They are meant to "paralyze" our leadership into "inaction". Fortunately, we have a principalled leader in the White House for a change who does not take his orders from Socialists in Europe, nor from Socialists here at home and definitely not from the "Make Love Not War" crowd in San Francisco and Berkley (who are definitely Socialists).

Your support of the presidents position brings into question the constant repetition of compliance with the will of the world community. The world community has dictated UN 242. It is your argument. Nothing confusing there. So Israel needs to get into compliance bbefore we are done in Iraq. Maybe they are next!

The president has acted. With no regard for the outcome and this will become a major problem.

Bush is neither a leader or principled. My god, wake up. Take a look at why we are having a problem with Korea. He (Bush) decided to build a new radar installation in Alaska. This after a treaty with Korea that we would not if they did not produce Plutonium. So they fired up the enrichment plant. They have fired up the plants to get food and trade concessions.

Actually, I am a redneck from Oklahoma. How 'bout you?

I am NOT an anti-semite and will defend Israel in my heart and in my mind. They are a great an noble people. I have immense respect for them and support their war against the animals who kill their people.

They are not a great and noble people. They are a great relegion. But as a country did not exist until the British and the French drew some lines on a map in 1922. "Animals". My reply to that was contained in a respect comment in an earlier post. I would venture that you do not know any Moslems, certainly, no Palestinians. So hatred and bigotry must follow that they are less than your definition of 'human'.

All clear thinking individuals know that implementation of UN 242 would result in the death of the Jewish state. But then again, that is the goal of Socialism, isn't it?

By the way, I am not Jewish. You don't have to be a Jew to recognize right and wrong in their struggle.

So the UN, which is the pillar upon which Bush bases his war plans is not clear thinking when they want UN242 implemented?

I would consider being called a Socialist an insult. But then like my fathers second cousin, Will Rogers, said, "I am not a member of an organized political party, I'm a democrat.

When there is confusion about more than a single issue entering a discussion. Then there should be resolution before the killing starts. Remember, we, you, me, us, them, can always change our mind. When it is before someone dies nearly everything is reversable. After the killings starts, this is not the case.

peace . think about it.

Elizabeth

02-17-2003, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by edshuck

peace . think about it.

I think our country has been thinking about it with Saddam for the past 11 years and unfortunately it doesn't really seem to be helping the complete and total disregard for sense of community and humanity he seems to foster.

I'm not sure why many people are considering this a "knee-jerk" reaction to this whole situation. It has been escalating for so many years.

And in the wisdom of Colin Powell, "violence is ALWAYS a last resort. ALWAYS. But it MUST BE A RESORT."

Doesn't it bother you that he has thousands of liters of anthrax that he has ADMITTED TO having, but has yet to show? Doesn't it bother you that this is but one point in a LONG LIST OF many? I absolutely shudder to think of what he REALLY has stockpiled over there.

And it makes me ill, because if we didn't do anything about it, and he attacked his neighbors unchallenged... then the US would be at fault for having the information we have and doing nothing to stop him.

As always, we can't win no matter what we do.

Peace is a two-way street, and Saddam has made it entirely clear that he wants no part of it.

-Elizabeth

edshuck

02-17-2003, 03:47 PM

I need to give this justice and am a bit short of time just now. But I will go with a couple of comments and hope that you will not feel slighted.

Iraq has been an item of interest for much longer than 11 years. We could go back to the formation of Iraq or more recently when we had the hostage situation with Iran. You may recall that it was Iraq that put two exocets into CICs berthing compartment on the USS Stark. Then they (Iraq) started yelling that it was an accident.

No, do not misunderstand, I want Sadaam out, dead, done, gone and while we are at it, there are a couple of sons of his that need to take the same train as dear old dad.

But when the talk is of fire bombing Bagdad, even laying in a couple of fuel air bombs.

And in the paper on Saturday, did you notice the article about the small nukes that the military want to construct?

Peace is a two-way street, and Saddam has made it entirely clear that he wants no part of it.
I did not know that we were at war with Iraq. When did Congress vote on that?

Doesn't it bother you that he has thousands of liters of anthrax that he has ADMITTED TO having, but has yet to show? Doesn't it bother you that this is but one point in a LONG LIST OF many? I absolutely shudder to think of what he REALLY has stockpiled over there.
Where is the information about the anthrax. Has the UN team found it? Now, there is Fort Dietrich in Maryland that most certainly has some of the most vile chemical and biological products of man. Ah, but that is ours. They are safe. They are ours.

Yes, I also shudder with you. But the plans are to kill howmany, 100 K or 500 K or a million people.

And the point is people, not animals, as wscreate mentioned. No that is just an excuse to make it seem a little easier. Like playing a video game. It is not a video game. In this both the good and the bad die and many of the Iraqi who will die did nothing bad.

Powell made no point in front of the UN. It was all true but the logic of a link to alcada was missing.

ed

Elizabeth

02-18-2003, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by edshuck
...hope that you will not feel slighted.
Naw, the only time I feel slighted is when I hear "ho" in the same sentence as my name :D

Where is the information about the anthrax. I believe (y'all correct me if I'm wrong) that this declaration was buried in the 12,000 page document supplied by Saddam listing the weapons he currently has.

Now, there is Fort Dietrich in Maryland that most certainly has some of the most vile chemical and biological products of man. Ah, but that is ours. They are safe. They are ours.
No, of course not... they are just as dangerous.

I hardly think that anyone WANTS innocent men, women and children to die. That is absurd. The thought of it makes me as sick to my stomach as it does all of you. All I was saying is, it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.

It's like a police car chase where someone completely uninvolved gets hurt. The police usually get blamed for it. God forbid we blame the person who ran in the first place. Do we let the perp go because someone else might get hurt? If we let him go, do you think he will really say, "oh gee, I am so sorry I did that, I will never do that again!". No, of course not. More likely than not, his criminal activities will only escalate.

What do I know? I certainly don't have all the answers and I am fully aware that nothing in this world is as black and white as we would like. We all agree that Saddam is a despicable creature. Maybe the UN should put a bounty on his head.

-Elizabeth

edshuck

02-18-2003, 01:54 AM

I shared your earlier reply with some folks I know from another forum. There were two replies.

Both are included in their entirity and without editing.

Elizabeth is right -- it is the Bart Simpson Paradox we face. But, before we
get medieval on Saddam's ass, let's try something else. I've suggested this
before and I'll suggest it again.

Right now, the UN inspectors have unbridled access to any damn place they
want. My suggestion is that we escort those inspectors around with our own
military troops and let THEM do the 'heavy lifting'. If the UN inspectors
find a gadget that's not in compliance, they turn to our troops and say
"obliterate it". (Maybe they call up good ol' Kofi Annan and get the OK from
HQ to do this beforehand.) We either dismantle it or blow it up with a
modern art sculpture made of C4. If needed, we bomb the facility. We cordon
off the place, evacuate the people, and no civilians get hurt. We also keep
our noses out of oilfields and other areas that would justify the world
coming down on our asses for being intrusive and materialistic. Think of it:
pinpoint eradication under the guidance and approval of the inspectors, who
give us their direction (so we 'play nice in a group' with the United
Nations). That should silence our detractors. It would effectively
force-multiply the UN's people and speed up the process of inspection. Maybe
even assign some of our own troops who are bio/chem/nuke savvy to assist the
inspectors in doing the inspections themselves. Compromise! Use our forces
as an expeditious manner to accomplish a sanitary clean-up.

Just keep the damn tanks and strike aircraft out of the country and work the
international diplomatic angle alongside the UN. Hitting the Iraqis is like
trying to pop a zit; it spreads infection everywhere and requires worse
clean-up procedures to rein in the bacteria. Lance the wound and clean it up
surgically from within.

If and when the Iraqis don't go along with this strategy, THEN we can debate
a Big Whack Iraq Attack.

But, right now, it sure would make America look far more civil if we offered
the inspectors a hand in dispatching the non-compliant weapons with
alacrity. Less jingoism, more cooperation. Besides, it gives us access to
places all around the country...all the more intelligence for targeting
purposes if the need should ever arise (heaven forbid!).

I'm getting sick and tired of looking like a reactionary country in the eyes
of the world. Why not use our forces for good in a constructive way and
collaborate instead of being haughty and arrogant? Force has its
application, but this isn't yet the time for it. Work within the system and
use the system for advantageous purpose.

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." -- Asimov, "Foundation
Trilogy"

The second reply followed the first and is from a person heavy into the political scene in San Francisco. It is sniping and of little use.

Agreed, Paul. And while we're at it, let's have U.N. inspections in America.
Maybe Iraqi troops can accompany the inspectors as they poke around in our
most secret military installations, and obliterate anything the inspectors
deem necessary.

I am saddend that the leader of Iraq has stated a view that the protests are in anyway supportive of his position. I do not support him in any way shape or form.

You mention "ho". I would never do that. Perhaps acrimony enters my comments but certainly I have nothing but respect for the members of the forum.

The thing this forum and the discussion points out is that there is a lot, a whole lot, that I do not know.

But of this I am certain, When the war starts, and I feel it will start next Saturday, I support ONLY the safety of our guys and gals. At that point, the rest fend for themselves.

ed

wscreate

02-18-2003, 03:51 PM

The anti-war protestors should state their real belief. It is not that they are anti-war-- they are anti-American. anti-Americanism is what drives them. Anti-War is just their excuse to espouse their anti-American views.

Socialists hate America. America is the anithesis of Socialism. Europeans are almost entirely Socialist. That is why they hate America. They want a "weak" America. Any American who stood with the Anti-American anti-war protestors over the weekend are accomplices to the European Socialists and their goal of a weakened America. You war protestors (Americans) should be ashamed of yourselves. I am ashamed for you.

Socialists and anti-American's should be openly identified and shunned by true Americans. Let's call things by their right names for once. Let's treat Socialists and their ridiculous ideas with the contempt that they deserve.

If you feel you are a patriotic American and you think you can stand on the sidelines while Socialists in Europe and within our own country attempt to infiltrate our Society (Using the Demoratic Party), then you are a part of the problem. Speak your mind now. Call things by their right names and don't let Socialists/Democrats shout you down with their name calling and slanderous words. Be strong. Stand tall. You are an American. Socialism will fail miserably. America will win.

wscreate

02-18-2003, 04:05 PM

Ed Shuck Said ...... And the point is people, not animals, as wscreate mentioned. No that is just an excuse to make it seem a little easier. Like playing a video game. It is not a video game. In this both the good and the bad die and many of the Iraqi who will die did nothing bad.

Re: Animals
I was referring to any person who straps on explosives, surrounded by sharpened nails, glass and other shrapnel, who walks onto a bus loaded with children, elderly people and women and men, and then proceeds to blow those people up.

If you consider such a person as more than an animal, then you, Ed Shuck, are clearly a terrorist Apologist. There are enough terorrist Apologists in the Muslim world and in Europe, Mr. Shuck. America can do without them.

Part of Socialism is to be anti-semitic and to make excuses for Muslim violence against the Jewish people.

edshuck

02-18-2003, 05:17 PM

wscreate, I do not agree, but I am so glad you have pointed these things out.

If you would get someone to read the web site about the USS Liberty, you might learn.

SEE THE BIG HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE SHIP. SEE THE 30 DEAD AMERICAN SAILORS. THIS WAS DONE BY ISRAEL. SEE ED. ED DOES NOT LIKE IT. LET'S CALL ED UN AMERICAN.

Now I know where all the septic tank spam I have rcvd over the past year should have gone.

I know you will like this: One of the oft repeated signs at this last weeks march in San Francisco read:

"Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its Idiot"

You can have the last word. I am going to try a nukephp install without root access.

Again, peace

wscreate

02-18-2003, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by edshuck
wscreate, I do not agree, but I am so glad you have pointed these things out.

If you would get someone to read the web site about the USS Liberty, you might learn.

SEE THE BIG HOLE IN THE SIDE OF THE SHIP. SEE THE 30 DEAD AMERICAN SAILORS. THIS WAS DONE BY ISRAEL. SEE ED. ED DOES NOT LIKE IT. LET'S CALL ED UN AMERICAN.

To Ed....
I have always subscribed to the following....

"When arguing with a Liberal or a Socialist, it is not necessary to say anything. Just let the Liberal/Socialist speak. It will not take long for their lack of logic and reason to become obvious, and their arguement discredited".

The above paragraph is very true, Ed espeically in your case. Many who read this thread may get the impression that you are an anti-Jewish bigot. They might also assume that you believe that the Twin Towers were brought down by the Jews instead of the Muslims? You don't think that, do you Ed?

edshuck

02-18-2003, 08:39 PM

I wish to express my sorrow for having drifted so far afield in this discussion.

Thanks to everyone for the patience.

peace

simulant

02-25-2003, 12:36 PM

These Al Samoud missiles that Hans Blix wants Iraq to destroy......did the UN specify by exactly how many more miles the missiles are supposedly outside the allowed range? Iraq is claiming that the missiles' range is only slightly more than it should be, but that this is only because they lack guidance systems.

This is a good point.....I mean, the more weight you add to a missile, the less further it's going to travel. I would like for the UN to be a little more specific about this "violation". And I definitely do not think, as of yet, that this justifies a new resolution authorizing a war.

Of course, this resolution would not be based solely on this violation. Iraq clearly has a history of defying the international community and posing threats to its people and its neighbors, so I think that regime change is extremely important.

Any ideas??

edshuck

03-01-2003, 01:29 PM

Of course you are correct but the point is moot.

George W Bush has decided to war on Sadaam. The administration has taken the planning to the post war Iraq and planning for the recovery.

It will happen. I would have predicted that it would come about last weekend. But now I would say March 22 or 23, weather permitting.

peace

ed

shawon22

03-02-2003, 02:55 AM

Re: Animals
I was referring to any person who straps on explosives, surrounded by sharpened nails, glass and other shrapnel, who walks onto a bus loaded with children, elderly people and women and men, and then proceeds to blow those people up.

If you consider such a person as more than an animal, then you, Ed Shuck, are clearly a terrorist Apologist. There are enough terorrist Apologists in the Muslim world and in Europe, Mr. Shuck. America can do without them.

i doubt that u know the real history/ y this things are going on in israel/plantains, read this article i hope u'll get a clearer conception.

This is Israel

I am Israel - I came to a land without a people for a people without a land. Those people who happened to be here, had no
right to be here, and my people showed them they had to leave or die,
razing 480 Palestinian villages to the ground, erasing their history.

I am Israel - some of my people committed massacres and later became Prime Ministers to represent me. In 1948, Menachem Begin was in
charge of the unit that slaughtered the inhabitants of Deir Yassin, including
100 men, women, and children. In 1953, Ariel Sharon led the slaughter of the inhabitants of Qibya, and in 1982 arranged for our allies to butcher around 2,000 in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla.

I am Israel - carved in 1948 out of 78% of the land of Palestine, dispossessing its inhabitants and replacing them with Jews from
Europe and other parts of the world. While the natives whose families lived on this
land for thousands of years are not allowed to return, Jews from all over the world are welcome to instant citizenship.

I am Israel - in 1967, I swallowed the remaining lands of Palestine - the West Bank and Gaza - and placed their inhabitants under an oppressive military rule, controlling and humiliating every aspect of their daily lives. Eventually, they should get the message
that they are not welcome to stay, and join the millions of Palestinian refugees in the shanty camps of Lebanon and Jordan.

I am Israel - I have the power to control American policy. My American Israel Public Affairs Committee can make or break any
politician of its choosing, and as you see, they all compete to please me. All the
forces of the world are powerless against me,
including the UN as I have the American veto to block any condemnation of my war crimes. As Sharon so eloquently phrased it, "We control America".

I am Israel - I influence American mainstream media too, and you will always find the news tailored to my favor. I have invested
millions of dollars into PR representation, and CNN, New York Times, and others
have been doing an excellent job of promoting my propaganda. Look at other international news sources and you will see the
difference.

I am Israel - and you Palestinians want to negotiate "peace!?" But you are not as smart as me; I will negotiate, but will only let
you have your municipalities while I control your borders, your water, your airspace, and anything else of importance. While we
"negotiate," I will swallow your hilltops and fill them with settlements, populated by the most extremist of my extremists, armed
to the teeth. These settlements will be connected with roads you cannot use, and you will be imprisoned in your little Bantustans
between them, surrounded by checkpoints in
every direction.

I am Israel - with the fourth strongest army in the world, possessing nuclear weapons. How dare your children confront my oppression with stones, don't you know my soldiers won't
hesitate to blow their heads off? In 17 months, I have killed 900 of you and
injured 17,000, mostly civilians, and have the mandate to continue since the international community remains silent. Ignore, as I
do, the hundreds of Israeli soldiers who are now refusing to carry out my control over your lands and people; their voices of conscience
will not protect you.

I am Israel - and you want freedom? I have bullets, tanks, missiles, Apaches, and F-16's, to obliterate you. I have placed your towns
under siege,

edshuck

03-02-2003, 03:49 AM

Thank you Shawon22, I will cherish your words.

ed

jplush76

03-10-2003, 02:28 PM

sometimes I wish the US would stay out of foreign affairs just so countries like France will come begging like WWII for us to come save them yet again.

When I see someone holding a "NO WAR FOR OIL" sign I want to run them over. It just shows they have an extreme ignorance to politics to think once we take Iraq we get all their oil. I'm sure the world would let us just take their oil and use it for our purposes now.

I support my country and if Saddam gave shelter to the mother****ers that took out the world trade center than I can't wait to see him burn.

edshuck

03-10-2003, 03:14 PM

if Saddam gave shelter to the mother****ers that took out the world trade center than I can't wait to see him burn.

The national security advisor, Connie Rice, was on Meet the Press yesterday and stated, not implied STATED, there was NO proof of Sadaam having any relation with the WTC bombing or alQuadah.

After 9/11 Bush was a hero and he has been running to try to measure up.

He violated a treaty with N. Korea and now there is a crisis with that country.

So far so good in Afganistan. Much more work needed. Some good guys lost and some civilians. But, sadly, it has happened and will continue for some time.

Homeland security. Wow. Joe McCarthy would be in awe.

I don't like the No War for Oil sign. We use something like 5 to 7 percent of the oil from Iraq, the rest is European and Japan. I do like the one that reads, "Somewhere in Texas a village is missing its idiot".

Bush will have this war with Iraq. I think he is wrong to do it.

To the men and women of the American armed forces, I say, "My thoughts and prayers are with you. God speed and come home safe".

Since I am last to post and this just came in on a forum I am a member of, I share it here. Seems to be the resignation of a diplomat.

Subject: US Diplomat's Letter of Resignation

t r u t h o u t | Letter
U.S. Diplomat John Brady Kiesling
Letter of Resignation, to:
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell

ATHENS | Thursday 27 February 2003

Dear Mr. Secretary:

I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service
of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S.
Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The
baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something
back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was
paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out
diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them
that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my
country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic
arsenal.

It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State
Department I would become more sophisticated and cynical about the
narrow and selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped our
policies. Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded and promoted
for understanding human nature. But until this Administration it had
been possible to believe that by upholding the policies of my president
I was also upholding the interests of the American people and the world.
I believe it no longer.

The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only
with American values but also with American interests. Our fervent
pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international
legitimacy that has been America’s most potent weapon of both offense
and defense since the days of Woodrow Wilson. We have begun to dismantle
the largest and most effective web of international relationships the
world has ever known. Our current course will bring instability and
danger, not security.

The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to
bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a
uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic
distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American
opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us
stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition
to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat
of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build
on them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic
political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al Qaeda as
its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion
in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of
terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a
vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to
weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand
of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of
American society as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia
of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire
thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?

We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade more of the
world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have over the past two years
done too much to assert to our world partners that narrow and mercenary
U.S. interests override the cherished values of our partners. Even where
our aims were not in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of
Afghanistan is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan
to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests. Have we
indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind
in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice, that overwhelming
military power is not the answer to terrorism? After the shambles of
post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a
brave foreigner who forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we lead.

We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of many of our
friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral capital built up over
a century. But our closest allies are persuaded less that war is
justified than that it would be perilous to allow the U.S. to drift into
complete solipsism. Loyalty should be reciprocal. Why does our President
condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to our friends and
allies this Administration is fostering, including among its most senior
officials. Has “oderint dum metuant” really become our motto?

I urge you to listen to America’s friends around the world. Even
here in Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism, we have
more and closer friends than the American newspaper reader can possibly
imagine. Even when they complain about American arrogance, Greeks know
that the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and they want a
strong international system, with the U.S. and EU in close partnership.
When our friends are afraid of us rather than for us, it is time to
worry. And now they are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the
United States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice
for the planet?

Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character and
ability. You have preserved more international credibility for us than
our policy deserves, and salvaged something positive from the excesses
of an ideological and self-serving Administration. But your loyalty to
the President goes too far. We are straining beyond its limits an
international system we built with such toil and treasure, a web of
laws, treaties, organizations, and shared values that sets limits on our
foes far more effectively than it ever constrained America’s ability to
defend its interests.

I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my
conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration.
I have confidence that our democratic process is ultimately
self-correcting, and hope that in a small way I can contribute from
outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and
prosperity of the American people and the world we share.

John Brady Kiesling

Mark

03-11-2003, 05:13 PM

BOMB THOSE MO**ER F**KERS TO H*LL, GO BUSH!

ps. - dont mess wit texas (anyone that does not understand this joke, watch SNL when they make fun of bush)

Mark

03-11-2003, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by jplush76
sometimes I wish the US would stay out of foreign affairs just so countries like France will come begging like WWII for us to come save them yet again.

When I see someone holding a "NO WAR FOR OIL" sign I want to run them over. It just shows they have an extreme ignorance to politics to think once we take Iraq we get all their oil. I'm sure the world would let us just take their oil and use it for our purposes now.

I support my country and if Saddam gave shelter to the mother****ers that took out the world trade center than I can't wait to see him burn.

OMG YES, EXACTLY

hykc

03-14-2003, 05:41 AM

what i think is, if Sadam is really a evil as what Bush said, then
Sadam doesn't need to have war with Bush using regular weapon. Just using Bio, Chem-Weapon straight way, etc

juschillinnow

03-14-2003, 08:27 AM

I don't ask this as a smart A$$ but I have been out of town for awhile and just traveling alot, so the news has been watched in fleating glances on my part and because of, am still undecided about the war.

Does the US have any proof that Sadam sheltered alqueda terrorists or funded osoma(however you spell it) ?

Hope someone can fill me in.

simulant

03-14-2003, 02:42 PM

Colin Powell did give a speech to the UN where he displayed satellite images and audio tapes, purportedly showing al qaeda involvement and iraqi non-compliance. But this was definitely not the "smoking gun" that the US has been trying to present.

I think if there is any strong evidence that ties Iraq to al qaeda, that it is probably locked away in the "highly classified box" that, if opened, would jeopardize ongoing investigations and alert the terrorists that we know what they're doing...thereby eliminating any intelligence information we hope to glean from them.

At least, this is what I hope. I mean, I hope that the US wants to get rid of Saddam because they KNOW that he harbors and supports terrorists. I also would wish that the US would do a much better job of convincing everyone that this is the case. If we go it alone, we will see a huge backlash of anti-americanism, in my opinion. Sure, we'll get rid of Saddam and his regime, but we will have created scores more enemies in the process.....

THE US NEEDS INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT!! Without this, we will be fighting this war for decades to come...

- TIM

edshuck

03-14-2003, 04:31 PM

Hi Tim

Thanks for the post.

I do not think there is any way of guessing what Bush will do.

If he stopped now, Sadaam would declare victory, and that would certainly upset me. Not the stopping, but that Sadaam is now in a position that I would care about his declarations. Personally, I think Sadaam is a nasty piece of **** that needs to be flushed to the nether region of hell (what ever that is - sure sounds bad).

But I am not in favor of our troops being hurt or killed. And I am not in favor of the people of Iraq to be hurt or killed.

I do not think there is a way out at this time. Bush has pushed it until there is an "impeach Bush" movement in the US and a movement to change the British government.

I also think the UN will be damaged beyond repair. For Africa, this will be a really bad blow. Strife, famine, really bad government (as seen in Nigeria) will sometimes go unabated and with impunity.

peace

Elizabeth

03-14-2003, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by edshuck
Bush has pushed it until there is an "impeach Bush" movement in the US
I must be WAY out of the loop, but I have not heard this at all. I've heard the "Peace is patriotic" slogan, but I have never heard anyone saying the President should be impeached. In fact, I have heard the opposite... And maybe it's because I live in conservative Cincinnati, but there is a VERY strong "Support our Soldiers" mentality here- with numerous rallies, educational seminars about what is really going on over there, and local businesses who are donating "luxury" supplies to our men & women in the armed forces. I think Bush is a LONG way from being impeached.

I also think the UN will be stronger because of this whole mess, not destroyed. As someone said (I can't remember who- sorry) - the whole purpose of the UN is to deal with issues like Saddam. Look at WWII - rebuilding can and will happen and any damaged relationships between countries will eventually heal and be stronger than before.

As an aside, I think France continues to lose credibility as their logic is unreasonable and as more and more of the political ties they have to Iraq come to light. (My apologies to any frenchmen or women out there :) ) And in the event of war, the French know they must eventually side with the US or else they will be completely isolated during the rebuilding of Iraq- they have too much to lose by doing that.

As another aside - I agree with simulant regarding the "smoking gun" evidence Colin Powell showed to the UN.. Imagine how much "intelligence" information he really has if he feels comfortable enough to allow highly classified satellite pictures and recorded phone conversations to be shown not only to the UN, but to everyone in the world that has the access and desire to watch it. Tip of the iceberg, I say.

just my $.02 :)
-Elizabeth

juschillinnow

03-14-2003, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by simulant
I also would wish that the US would do a much better job of convincing everyone that this is the case. If we go it alone, we will see a huge backlash of anti-americanism, in my opinion. Sure, we'll get rid of Saddam and his regime, but we will have created scores more enemies in the process.....

THE US NEEDS INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT!! Without this, we will be fighting this war for decades to come...

- TIM

I totally agree. This is where I'm caught. No one to this point has convinced me of anything. All I hear is a bunch of strong opinions and no PROOF. thanks for ********ing that up for me. WE DEFINITELY NEED INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT OR ELSE THE US COULD BE TOTALLY SCREWED IF THIS THING EXPLODES INTO A BIGGER WAR. My personal thoughts are that this war will on last a few weeks or less. But you never know

Elizabeth

03-14-2003, 05:59 PM

I think you guys may be missing a crucial goal of this movement... that is to make sure Saddam doesn't have the power to obliterate another country on earth in one fell swoop, using weapons that have been outlawed for the sake of the human race. I personally think the terrorist connection is almost like a "bonus" if you can even call it that. He needs to be shown that he can't control the rest of the world any longer. Saddam figured out 12 years ago that the world really wouldn't stand up to him, so he's been basically doing anything he wants, including stockpiling chemical warfare and outlawed weapons.
-Elizabeth

simulant

03-14-2003, 06:02 PM

THE US NEEDS INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT!! Without this, we will be fighting this war for decades to come...

Just to clarify my earlier quote: "this war" refers to the broader war on terrorism, not just the war with Iraq....

Thanks people :D

- TIM

chads2k2

03-18-2003, 01:13 PM

I think a boxing match between Bush and Saddam should settle it. :) Being a smart as$ just so you can get some humor in the whole situation. I am a Devry college student in Columbus and I can say that people are actually a little worried that they will be drafted to go fight against someone that has nothing to do with us. Why is US always the bully on the playground? DO NOT GET ME WRONG! I am for the US and do hope if we pick a war that we win. Though we always have to go around creating a freaking EMPIRE. UNITED STATES is trying to create an EMPIRE! Look at it guys! A co-worker of mine (not from Broken Formula LLC) said that "if you look at how our tactics are and how we cover everything up from our own people that the government is becoming an empire and its followers are not natural." I mean how many crazy Army men have you seen? Yeah there are a lot of natural and cool ones but there are a bunch that are just FUBARED! Its funny how we always learn about how bad that other countries are and we only hear what they want us to be influcened by. However does anyone really wonder what the United States is hiding from us? Our news and papers will never release anything that they feel "We are not ready for" and can "breach security" . . . I feel we have a right to know what the hell is really going on and not just what they want us to see and feel. Does our own government really think that we are not ready to see the true side of the world? I will get off my soap box and go sit the F back down in the corner and just listen. I do have a few other things to say.

What I said is not what Broken Formula feels. Legality stuff there. I am talking on a position of being 20 and going to Devry to become a Computer Engineer and learning and studying PHP all the time. Personally scared of war and being drafted because I am like 6' and 140 lbs. Not exactly the biggest guy out there. That is just the position I am at. Flame if you want but that is just how I feel at the moment -- NOTE: I don't know the real stories about what is actually happening in the world and with that piece missing cannot provide a valid feeling. Media has failed to let us realize the true beauty of our world and provided us with a firm harsh "reality" of the world we live in. I will always be for American till I die but I do have different mentality when thinking of the "news" they provide us.

edshuck

03-18-2003, 01:46 PM

At this time, I have only one thought, that is for our troops to be safe and soon return home.

God speed.

simulant

03-18-2003, 05:47 PM

An interesting tidbit of info:

Remember the Iraqi light-water nuclear plant in Osirak that was destroyed by the Israelis in 1981?? Well.......it was built by the FRENCH.....go figure. And it was probably a good thing the Israelis did what they did......otherwise there would be a good chance that Saddam would have some nuclear weapons at his disposal. And a leader who gases his own people would not be afraid to use them!

Ed, I'm with you......let's wish for the safety of our troops.

- TIM

juschillinnow

03-19-2003, 09:25 AM

I suppose it really doesn't matter what any of us think at this point!!! Looks like we are going to war.

I agree with edshuck. God, please bring our soldiers home safely.

chads2k2

03-19-2003, 06:50 PM

I agree . 8:00 P.M. tonight the moment comes out and I hope the outcome is not what I think it will be. If it is then I hope our troops come home safe and things are ok.

briansol

03-25-2003, 06:25 AM

to all those who feel bad for the Iraqui's, here are some LEGIT photos of US POW's that were MURDERED. not killed in action, but killed after been taken prisoner. Yet, we still feed our Iraqui POW's, let alone kill them.

Not for the weak stomach- these are highly graphic.
http://www.pipebomb.net/thewar/media/AlJazeera_POW_Footage/

vtb

03-31-2003, 05:33 PM

Some of these posts are premised on the notion that Saddam is known to have been involved with the 11-Sep-2001 attacks on the US. Where's the evidence?

Some people have overlooked the fact that the US invasion of Iraq is a violation in international law (e.g., the UN charter, of which the US is a signatory). Under the Bush doctrine, the US can pre-emptively attack any country it thinks poses a threat. By that reasoning, Panama could have, indeed should have, bombed Washington and overthrown the Bush Sr. administration before the US invaded Panama. (Of course I jest: we all know there's a double standard, one for the almighty US, another for lesser "rogue" nations.)

Some people haven't reflected on the fact that France, Russia, Germany, Israel, etc, share the same intelligence data that the US bases its policies on, yet they hardly tremble in their boots in fear of Saddam's offensive capabilities. Indeed -- according to a radio interview I heard with the guy who's the NYTimes bureau chief in Jerusalem -- the Israeli military, for all their aggressiveness and paranoia, do NOT consider Saddam a real threat and are more concerned about countries like Syria, with chem weapons up the wazoo, and Iran, which is more likely to try something cute with an unstable and even weaker Iraq.

Some who have posted don't seem to realize that the US intelligence apparatus itself delivered a report to the US Congress in October of 2002 in which it concluded that Saddam was not a credible threat and that attacking him would have an adverse impact on stability and the security of the US.

The Bush administration is being dishonest about its motives; the explanations and arguments they've expounded are plainly incredible. More likely, the real deal is about enforcing US hegemony over the region and controlling the oil; getting fat reconstruction contracts for mega-corporations, especially those with ties to the Bush administration; using the diversion to advance Bush's regressive domestic social and econmic agenda; giving the military some combat experience and an opportunity to test its weaponry and consume its enormous budget; and perhaps, to advance Mr Bush's Kristian Krusade against those evil non-christians. Let's ask ourselves, honestly: do you really think we would be invading if Saddam accepted Jesus as his personal savior and the country's main export were tulips? Really? Or do you really believe Mr Bush and his handlers are genuinely motivated by an altruistic desire to liberate the Iraqi population from its oppressor? Please.

Please don't rely on the corporate-funded US mainstream media to inform your worldview. When you watch Fox and CNN you watch propaganda. Wake up, ask questions, use your critical thinking skills, and try a few non-mainstream media alternatives such as:

http://thenation.com/
http://www.fair.org/
http://http://www.bbc.co.uk/
and of course http://theonion.com/

----
David Mintz
http://davidmintz.org/

Elizabeth

03-31-2003, 06:20 PM

I know in America we are entitled to our own opinion- which makes me so proud to be in this country. So I'm not trying to pick a fight (really! :) )- however, vtb, I tend to disagree with what you are saying...

Originally posted by vtb
Some of these posts are premised on the notion that Saddam is known to have been involved with the 11-Sep-2001 attacks on the US. Where's the evidence?
I believe evidence of Al Qaeda operatives in Iraqi uniforms has just come to light. I also believe there was a mural found of 2 American soldiers with the twin towers behind them, and 2 planes crashing into them (and it was hardly a tribute to the 3100 innocent men women and children that perished.) Granted this was no direct evidence that Saddam called up Osama and said "go ahead, do it" but come on... don't you find that fishy? And even if he wasn't directly involved, do you think he'd hesitate to orchestrate a similar attack against us?

Let's ask ourselves, honestly: do you really think we would be invading if Saddam accepted Jesus as his personal savior and the country's main export were tulips? Really?
I think he would if Saddam had a practice of sending body parts to the family members of dissidents as a message (as he does). I also think he might have a problem with a leader who massacres his own people to keep them in constant fear of their leader (as he does). OR perhaps we should wait until he has the power equivalent to Hitler before we do anything about it. Yes, let's be reactive to a madman, let's go ahead and see where he decides to use his chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction first, let's let another 9/11 happen and then say, oh gosh- maybe we should have stopped him before now. Yes, that's definitely a better choice.

Please don't rely on the corporate-funded US mainstream media to inform your worldview. When you watch Fox and CNN you watch propaganda.
I don't understand this point- as they are reporting as it happens. The good (if you can call it that) with the bad. They are right there- it's not some movie they are producing to be shown the way they want. We have instant live action of what is really going on. How can that be propaganda?

In fact I find the media to be Bush's biggest challenge- I find they tend to look for "mistakes" made by the government and exploit them... such as "did we underestimate Saddam's power?" and blah blah blah. They have all been reporting on all the protests (violent ones, at that, which I find ironic) all over the world- don't you think they would keep that out of the headlines if they were trying to propagandize the war? And maybe move it to behind the horoscopes or something?

Just another view from a very proud American... who wholeheartedly supports our troops, who are sacrificing their lives to prevent another devastating tragedy like 9/11 from happening to anyone.

-Elizabeth

dalecosp

03-31-2003, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by Elizabeth
Just another view from a very proud American... who wholeheartedly supports our troops, who are sacrificing their lives to prevent another devastating tragedy like 9/11 from happening to anyone.

-Elizabeth And here's mine:

http://www.daleco.biz/articles/story.php?story=12

vtb

03-31-2003, 06:54 PM

Thanks Elizabeth. Debate is healthy and good! Let's go for it. :)

As far as media coverage goes, here's a piece about diverging views of the war as presented by media in the US vs elsewhere:

http://search.csmonitor.com/search_content/0325/p01s04-woiq.html

Hit it now while it's still available, they charge a fee for things over 5 days old.

<<I also believe there was a mural found of 2 American soldiers with the twin towers behind them, and 2 planes crashing into them (and it was hardly a tribute to the 3100 innocent men women and children that perished.) Granted this was no direct evidence that Saddam called up Osama and said "go ahead, do it" but come on... don't you find that fishy?>>

You are letting your emotions distort your reasoning. You grant that this is not evidence, and you're right. That Saddam thought 9/11 was cool doesn't mean he was involved. Of course Saddam Hussein is a veritable scumbag, but that's not quite justification for invading Iraq.

<< I think [we would invade] if Saddam had a practice of sending body parts to the family members of dissidents as a message (as he does). I also think he might have a problem with a leader who massacres his own people to keep them in constant fear of their leader (as he does).>>

How do you account for the fact that Saddam was still getting massive military aid from Washington AFTER he had committed the worst of his atrocities? No, that does not excuse atrocities, but it calls into question the purity of our leaders' motives.

If you think our foreign policy is all about defending innocent civilains from their murderous governments, can you explain why Washington has aided and abetted brutal regimes in Indonesia, Chile, Brazil, Greece, etc?

As for the Hitler analogy, it's ironic that you compare Saddam to Hitler. Bush's own mendacious pre-war speeches are eerily reminiscent of Hitler's speeches shortly before his invasion of Poland in 1939: they are a threat, we have a right to defend ourselves, we are gonna do something about it. Saddam can't touch Hitler, that's pure alarmism and propaganda.

<<[Fox and CNN] are right there- it's not some movie they are producing to be shown the way they want. We have instant live action of what is really going on. How can that be propaganda? >>

This is a circular argument, as in How can you question the accuracy and veracity of Fox and CNN, sources of unquestionable accuracy and veracity?

Give this a try: http://www.fair.org/activism/scuds.html

<< In fact I find the media to be Bush's biggest challenge- I find they tend to look for "mistakes" made by the government and exploit them... such as "did we underestimate Saddam's power?" and blah blah blah. They have all been reporting on all the protests (violent ones, at that, which I find ironic) all over the world- don't you think they would keep that out of the headlines if they were trying to propagandize the war? And maybe move it to behind the horoscopes or something?>>

You mean, you'd like media to be even more completely subservient to government, and not challlenge anything it does? Most of our mainstream media are already docile and self-censoring enough as it is, for my taste.

As for anti-war protests, hello. If the media emphasize violent behavior of protestors, that's anti-anti-war distortion at work! I'll bet all my wordly goods that way over 99% of protesters the world over are exercising their human right to peaceful, free speech. And there are simply too many of us to ignore -- hence the media attention.

<< Just another view from a very proud American... who wholeheartedly supports our troops, who are sacrificing their lives to prevent another devastating tragedy like 9/11 from happening to anyone>>

Again, the false premise that this war on Iraq is about 9/11 and will prevent another 9/11. If anything, it will enhance the probability of more anti-US terror. Blowback, they call it. As for supporting the troops, yeah me too. I say bring them back alive NOW.

---
David
http://davidmintz.org/

Elizabeth

03-31-2003, 07:56 PM

Good article, vtb - thanks for posting it! :)

And dalecosp- thanks too for posting a very thought-provoking and well written article on your views... really enjoyed reading it. :)

-Elizabeth

Elizabeth

04-02-2003, 10:57 AM

Wow, vtb- just read your edit- methinks you should have been a lawyer! :)

I'll be the first to admit that I am often led by heart rather than head, and that my arguments are sometimes flimsy- I am accutely aware of the fact that things are not black and white, and we will never have the real truth from all sides because we are simply human. And being human, perception is everything.

I found this interesting bio of Saddam written by your boys in the bbc- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1100529.stm
(ironic that he was the one that married his cousin, and not the boy from Texas, ha ha)

I still disagree with you on the Hitler/Hussein similarities. To quote the aforementioned article, But his tactic of imposing his authority by terror has gone far beyond the occasional arrest and execution of opponents. In attempts to suppress the Kurds, for example, he has systematically used chemical weapons. And in putting down a rebellion of Shi'ia in the south he has razed towns to the ground and drained marshland."
Imposing his authority by terror. Eliminating opposition through execution. He has said time and again that Americans are Satanists and should be wiped from the earth. And he has the power to do it. Doesn't that frighten you as an American? And then who is next? What if he decides he doesn't like German people anymore. Or French people. What if he wants world domination and no one stands up to him... then what?

And this excerpt from a speech given by Hussein on 8/8/02-
But if they wanted peace and security for themselves and their people, then this is not the course to take. The right course is of respect to the security and rights of others, through dealing with others in peace and establishing the obligations required by way of equitable dialogue and on the basis of international law and international covenants.
I don't think respect for the security and rights of others, and international law and covenants has been high on Hussein's priority list, do you?

I don't mean to sound paranoid, but if someone has repeatedly, for 12 years, denied requests and demands to comply with international law for the good of humanity- and someone who has the power to make the area of NYC INHABITABLE FOR THE NEXT 10,000 years with the push of a button- yeah, that scares the living sh*t out of me.

-Elizabeth

cp1967

04-02-2003, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by vtb
Thanks Elizabeth. Debate is healthy and good! Let's go for it. :)

Again, the false premise that this war on Iraq is about 9/11 and will prevent another 9/11. If anything, it will enhance the probability of more anti-US terror. Blowback, they call it. As for supporting the troops, yeah me too. I say bring them back alive NOW.

---
David
http://davidmintz.org/

I am always amused at how befuddled Liberals appear in their arguements against anything that Bush and his administration attempts to do. You liberals (or shall I call you by your right name "Socialists"). Let it be known for all that care to listen to the truth that the anti-war movement is nothing of the sort. It is simply an "anti-Bush" movement -- and nothing more. If Clinton had the good sense to deal with the Iraq problem (which he ignored for 8 years), you would be viewing a different debate in the media. You would hear only "slight" protests rather than the callous, anti-American rhetoric being spouted off by the left. (See L.A. Times Columnist "Robert Scheer").

So, if you are convincing yourself with your own, lame, tired arguments (which are supported only by your "menopause like" emotions rather than facts), then I'm sure that is good enough for you. But make no mistake, it is not good enough for the American people and you are convincing no-one who has any sense whatsoever --- which doesn't include many in the Democratic party or the Socialist movement.

cp1967

04-02-2003, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by jerdo
If you don't like our leader fine, most of us don't support him
jerdo, if you are still in this forum, I would like to ask you where exactly you get your information. Since you claim that most of "us" Americans do NOT support Bush, I challenge you to provide one sliver of evidence to support your outrageous claim. If you cannot (and I know that you cannot) then you are simply another feckless Liberal who spouts off hatred to the benefit of no-one but your lost and helpless Democratic party. Pathetic!

To you liberals/Democrats/Socialists, here is an important point to remember. In this forum, like many otheres on the net, your posts will be read by people who do not share your Socialist ideology. Therefore, you will not be able to get away with your hatred, lies and distortions of facts as you would if you were talking to others who share your views.

Let it be know that MOST Americans do support Bush. Check any poll of the American people. Bush has NEVER been below 50% approval rating and has hovered well above 60% for most of his Presidency. Check any Poll from any organization you choose. The truth is out there. There is a reason why MOST of us support Bush.

jerdo

04-02-2003, 01:09 PM

Oh I so love the moronic point of view spouted above. My proof that most Americans don't support Bush lies in the last election when he didn't get the majority of the votes. What's your dittohead response to that going to be? I'm sure it will contain something along the lines of "you damn socialists" (read that as the new "inventive" way of saying pinko communist, which has been used until recently, when the shared brain must have finally figured out that communism isn't a threat anymore so you needed a new ditto response). I also like the normal ditto response of people exercising their right to free speech and questioning the motives of the government as not supporting our troops. Keep your propaganda coming, those of us with brains know it's garbage.

cp1967

04-02-2003, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by juschillinnow
I don't ask this as a smart A$$ but I have been out of town for awhile and just traveling alot, so the news has been watched in fleating glances on my part and because of, am still undecided about the war.

Does the US have any proof that Sadam sheltered alqueda terrorists or funded osoma(however you spell it) ?

Hope someone can fill me in.
Though many continue to deny it for their own purposes, the proof is in the pudding. Read the following article and form your own opinion.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/2020/Iraq_liberation_030402_bn.html

jerdo

04-02-2003, 01:47 PM

Has anyone here ever said that Sadaam Hussein isn't a tyranical ass? I don't recall that, in fact I don't recall anyone protesting against these actions ever saying that. Quit trying to contort reality to fit your own political views. We have seen the facts. Starting with the Carter administration we supplied Sadaam with weapons to fight Iran. Then when Reagan came to power we continued to supply him with weapons, including Anthrax and oh my what did he start making with that little gem? (Weapons of Mass Destruction) This follows a long line of stupid mistakes by our government, Vietnam, Bay of Pigs (which came after we helped Castro get into power then we decided we didn't like him anymore), the McCarthy communist hunt, etc. (notice both the Democrats and the Republicans have done this so your little Democrat/liberal slams don't hold water here). What people like you, cp1967, are essentially saying is you have no right to question the government and make them explain their actions to us, the people who they are supposed to represent. But when a party you don't agree with is in power you waste my tax money to see if he was having an affair, which by the way the Republican heads of the McCarthian witch hunt ended up being guilty of as well. So please instead of trying to spew the rhetoric of one party, present facts. By the way I am neither Democrat nor Republican, I feel as an American my duty is to vote for the person based on their record, not their party affiliation. If you ask me voting for or against anyone just because they sport an elephant or a jackass seems kind of childish.

cp1967

04-02-2003, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by jerdo
Oh I so love the moronic point of view spouted above.

You calling me a moron is like Saddam Hussein calling a Frenchman "Brave".

My proof that most Americans don't support Bush lies in the last election when he didn't get the majority of the votes.

Oh, was that it? What a suprise -- a Liberal who can't get past the lawful election of 2000. Can't you support your arguement with facts rather than your ridiculous emotions? It has been more than 2 years since the election. Get over it. Gore lost. :)

What's your dittohead response to that going to be? I'm sure it will contain something along the lines of "you damn socialists" (read that as the new "inventive" way of saying pinko communist, which has been used until recently, when the shared brain must have finally figured out that communism isn't a threat anymore so you needed a new ditto response).

I once read a quote that said, roughly, "When debating a liberal, there is no need to say anything. Let them speak and they will prove your point. "

You, with your negativism and name callling, have proven my point. Liberals/Democrats/Socialists do not have valid ideas backed up by proof and certainly, not backed up by majority opinion. You are powerless, left to exercise your weak power by calling names and spouting venom against those that do not agree with you. No, tyranny is not unique to Communists. It is shared by your Democratic party also.

I also like the normal ditto response of people exercising their right to free speech and questioning the motives of the government as not supporting our troops.

I respect your right to free speech. You have the absolute right to make an ass out of yourself with your weak arguments. Isn't freedom wonderful? :)

As for anti-war protestors who hold signs equating Bush to Hitler, well, how can anyone consider such a person as rational enough to know the difference between right and wrong in regard to war on Iraq. They are, like you, moronic.

And, you cannot be supportive of American Troops when you turn around and call Bush a killer. What you say about Bush, the Commander and Chief of the armed forces, you are saying about the troops. You can't have it both ways. That is a liberal goal, but people just don't buy it any longer.

Keep your propaganda coming, those of us with brains know it's garbage.

I think that you and people of your "ilk" are just upset that your propaganda is no longer left unchallenged. People have begun to speak up and challenge your ridiculous ideas. Americans have seen what your (Democratic Party) leaders have offered. The Democratic Party leadership has consistently voted against the wishes of the American people. The things your leadership attempts to do such as make the United States sub-servient to a weak and powerless United Nations are done in your name, maybe, but certainly Not in my name.

cp1967

04-02-2003, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by jerdo
Has anyone here ever said that Sadaam Hussein isn't a tyranical ass? I don't recall that, in fact I don't recall anyone protesting against these actions ever saying that. Quit trying to contort reality to fit your own political views. We have seen the facts. Starting with the Carter administration we supplied Sadaam with weapons to fight Iran. Then when Reagan came to power we continued to supply him with weapons, including Anthrax and oh my what did he start making with that little gem? (Weapons of Mass Destruction) This follows a long line of stupid mistakes by our government, Vietnam, Bay of Pigs (which came after we helped Castro get into power then we decided we didn't like him anymore), the McCarthy communist hunt, etc. (notice both the Democrats and the Republicans have done this so your little Democrat/liberal slams don't hold water here). What people like you, cp1967, are essentially saying is you have no right to question the government and make them explain their actions to us, the people who they are supposed to represent. But when a party you don't agree with is in power you waste my tax money to see if he was having an affair, which by the way the Republican heads of the McCarthian witch hunt ended up being guilty of as well. So please instead of trying to spew the rhetoric of one party, present facts.

So Jerdo, what you are trying to say is America is bad? <sarcasm>Wow, that's something I've never heard from a Liberal.</sarcasm>

I prefer to believe in the inherent goodness of America. Is America perfect? Not at all. However, America is certainly not as bad as you and the liberal movement make it out to be.

By the way I am neither Democrat nor Republican, I feel as an American my duty is to vote for the person based on their record, not their party affiliation. If you ask me voting for or against anyone just because they sport an elephant or a jackass seems kind of childish

If I were a betting man, I would bet that if you are old enough to vote (Which, based on your views, you sound as if you may have just recently graduated from a Liberal saturated University), you have never voted for anyone who was not a Democrat. I know you won't tell me if I am right, but I am somewhat astute and I think that I am right in this matter, at least. :)

cp1967

04-02-2003, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by shawon22
i doubt that u know the real history/ y this things are going on in israel/plantains, read this article i hope u'll get a clearer conception.

This is Israel

I am Israel - I came to a land without a people for a people without a land. Those people who happened to be here, had no
right to be here, and my people showed them they had to leave or die,
razing 480 Palestinian villages to the ground, erasing their history.

I am Israel - some of my people committed massacres and later became Prime Ministers to represent me. In 1948, Menachem Begin was in
charge of the unit that slaughtered the inhabitants of Deir Yassin, including
100 men, women, and children. In 1953, Ariel Sharon led the slaughter of the inhabitants of Qibya, and in 1982 arranged for our allies to butcher around 2,000 in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla.

I am Israel - carved in 1948 out of 78% of the land of Palestine, dispossessing its inhabitants and replacing them with Jews from
Europe and other parts of the world. While the natives whose families lived on this
land for thousands of years are not allowed to return, Jews from all over the world are welcome to instant citizenship.

I am Israel - in 1967, I swallowed the remaining lands of Palestine - the West Bank and Gaza - and placed their inhabitants under an oppressive military rule, controlling and humiliating every aspect of their daily lives. Eventually, they should get the message
that they are not welcome to stay, and join the millions of Palestinian refugees in the shanty camps of Lebanon and Jordan.

I am Israel - I have the power to control American policy. My American Israel Public Affairs Committee can make or break any
politician of its choosing, and as you see, they all compete to please me. All the
forces of the world are powerless against me,
including the UN as I have the American veto to block any condemnation of my war crimes. As Sharon so eloquently phrased it, "We control America".

I am Israel - I influence American mainstream media too, and you will always find the news tailored to my favor. I have invested
millions of dollars into PR representation, and CNN, New York Times, and others
have been doing an excellent job of promoting my propaganda. Look at other international news sources and you will see the
difference.

I am Israel - and you Palestinians want to negotiate "peace!?" But you are not as smart as me; I will negotiate, but will only let
you have your municipalities while I control your borders, your water, your airspace, and anything else of importance. While we
"negotiate," I will swallow your hilltops and fill them with settlements, populated by the most extremist of my extremists, armed
to the teeth. These settlements will be connected with roads you cannot use, and you will be imprisoned in your little Bantustans
between them, surrounded by checkpoints in
every direction.

I am Israel - with the fourth strongest army in the world, possessing nuclear weapons. How dare your children confront my oppression with stones, don't you know my soldiers won't
hesitate to blow their heads off? In 17 months, I have killed 900 of you and
injured 17,000, mostly civilians, and have the mandate to continue since the international community remains silent. Ignore, as I
do, the hundreds of Israeli soldiers who are now refusing to carry out my control over your lands and people; their voices of conscience
will not protect you.

I am Israel - and you want freedom? I have bullets, tanks, missiles, Apaches, and F-16's, to obliterate you. I have placed your towns
under siege,

The truth be told, the Jews are also Palestinians. They shared the disputed land that is now called Israel. The Arabs that did not want to live in Israel then migrated to other Arab nations. In Jordan, the kind hearted state put all of the so-called Palestinian Arabs in a section of Jordan called the West Bank (which was formerlly a part of Jordan). So, who are the real Palestinians, anyway?

There is not any such thing as a Palestinian state. That is simply a vehicle that Arab governments intend to use to weaken the Jewish state because Muslims cannot accept non-muslims living among them. Muslims do not accept infidels. Has anyone ever heard about that little "clause" in the Koran? Do you get it?? Thus, they will NEVER accept Israel. Anything Israel does to seek peace will not result in peace for Israel. The only thing for Israel to do is to remain strong and to always defend herself.

vtb

04-02-2003, 02:28 PM

jerdo is right to encourage cp1967 to keep spewing and foaming. he makes us look even better.

cp31967, any intelligent neutral observer watching this thread would look at your posts and say, this guy can't debate the issues so he attacks the person instead. You're embarassing yourself.

One foolish thing you said, though, that deserves to be shot down: you say, in substance, a lot of people on this board don't share our socialist ideology and knee-jerk opposition to the Bush administration. In fact, the PHP community is very international, and most international opinion is against the invasion of Iraq. There may even be people in the PHP community who do not tremble with fear at the mention of socialism!

cp1967

04-02-2003, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by vtb
jerdo is right to encourage cp1967 to keep spewing and foaming. he makes us look even better.

cp31967, any intelligent neutral observer watching this thread would look at your posts and say, this guy can't debate the issues so he attacks the person instead. You're embarassing yourself.

One foolish thing you said, though, that deserves to be shot down: you say, in substance, a lot of people on this board don't share our socialist ideology and knee-jerk opposition to the Bush administration. In fact, the PHP community is very international, and most international opinion is against the invasion of Iraq. There may even be people in the PHP community who do not tremble with fear at the mention of socialism!

Again, another Liberal who has proven my point for me. I am an American. America is my country. Let the rest of the world worry about themselves and let Americans worry about America and our interests. The fact that you defer to a weak and anti-American International community (Embodied in the United Nations which is evidently what you refer to as the "international community") further proves my point about American Liberals. You will do anything to try to make your point seem valid, even if you have to defer to others who do not have the best interest of your country in their hearts.

The nations of the U.N. do not like America, in general. There is a large anti-American bias among them. It will suit these countries if America is weakened. You are a good tool for these people. They use you like a puppet.

You should be ashamed. I am ashamed of you as an American.

vtb

04-02-2003, 03:23 PM

If it weren't so plainly irrational, your ranting would be offensive.

jerdo

04-02-2003, 04:02 PM

I like how cp1967 tries to say no one has a logical argument and yet the only thing he seems to have to say is socialist, liberal and democrat. He sounds just like Rush Limbaugh, or a Fox News "personality". So anyway, cp1967, keep ranting and not addressing the issues and then trying to say no one else is saying anything of substance because they point out obvious flaws in you "rationale". I also like that you try to same I'm name calling and yet your first post says Elizabeth's comments are "only by your "menopause like" emotions rather than facts", sounds like you aren't worth the time to type to, so I'm done, funny thing is I won't even need to read your remarks because all they will contain is liberal, socialist, democrat. By the way I am from Kansas, which is about as Republican as a state can get (you might remember one of our most famous citizens in recent times Bob Dole), went to a mainly ag based school (isn't that who the Republicans claim to represent?) called KSU, the liberal school is KU. So as I said keep spewing nonsense and thinking you are smart.

cp1967

04-02-2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by vtb
If it weren't so plainly irrational, your ranting would be offensive.

In a true Liberal fashion, you have ...

1. Not repsonded directly to my arguement with facts that will help your arguement
2. Instead, you called me names and stated I am irrational and that I am ranting

So, I assume anyone whom you do not agree with you will call names and dismiss? You can try all you like, but people like me will never go away. We will always be in your face exposing your lies and distortions and complete lack of logic.

I point out your faults out for others to see. You have been extremely helpful. Easy, but helpful.

Next?

cp1967

04-02-2003, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by jerdo
I like how cp1967 tries to say no one has a logical argument and yet the only thing he seems to have to say is socialist, liberal and democrat. He sounds just like Rush Limbaugh, or a Fox News "personality". So anyway, cp1967, keep ranting and not addressing the issues and then trying to say no one else is saying anything of substance because they point out obvious flaws in you "rationale". I also like that you try to same I'm name calling and yet your first post says Elizabeth's comments are "only by your "menopause like" emotions rather than facts", sounds like you aren't worth the time to type to, so I'm done, funny thing is I won't even need to read your remarks because all they will contain is liberal, socialist, democrat. By the way I am from Kansas, which is about as Republican as a state can get (you might remember one of our most famous citizens in recent times Bob Dole), went to a mainly ag based school (isn't that who the Republicans claim to represent?) called KSU, the liberal school is KU. So as I said keep spewing nonsense and thinking you are smart.

jerdo, your arguementive ability has already been proven by me to be lame. Also, you misconstrue my argument. I did not address Elizabeth in any way or fashion. I was replying to vtb who had responded to Elizabeth.

I know its complicated, jerdo, but try to keep up. Rebutting false accusations is a waste of my time.

Try to do better. :)

jerdo

04-02-2003, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by cp1967
In a true Liberal fashion, you have ...

1. Not repsonded directly to my arguement with facts that will help your arguement
2. Instead, you called me names and stated I am irrational and that I am ranting

So, I assume anyone whom you do not agree with you will call names and dismiss? You can try all you like, but people like me will never go away. We will always be in your face exposing your lies and distortions and complete lack of logic.

I point out your faults out for others to see. You have been extremely helpful. Easy, but helpful.

Next?

Hey cp, maybe you should read your own posts. You try to say no one else is saying anything, or stating facts and yet you dodge the facts. You never responded to my historical facts about who helped create Sadaam, except with your usual nonsense about those who don't agree with you are anti-American. So please take your drivel away, until you can as you say in your own words: respond to facts with facts, and not resort to name calling (yes everyone with a brain can tell that when you say liberal/democrat/socialist it is meant to be derogatory, I know you thought you were outwitting everyone but that's hard to do when you don't have wits) Please respond soon as I'm sure you will have something brilliant to say and it won't include any of your 3 favorite words.

cp1967

04-02-2003, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by jerdo
(yes everyone with a brain can tell that when you say liberal/democrat/socialist it is meant to be derogatory

Those 3 words are derogatroy to some and not to others. How can I make them mean something that I "want" them to mean?? I just don't get you jerdo.

I know you thought you were outwitting everyone but that's hard to do when you don't have wits)

Man, its the same old thing with you guys everytime. More name calling and derision with no facts or supportive arguement. Okay, I will respond anyway.

I have not tried to outwit everyone, just you and the other guy who I have gone back and forth with today and maybe one or two others. There are many posts in this forum which I felt no need to respond to because their arguement was either sound or based on facts.

I don't care to outwit others, for the sake of making myself feel better, if that is what you are implying. I just point out the flaws in certain people's arguments. I am particularly passionate about the hatred against my country that is displayed by many people on the left (like yourself). Thus, I choose to defend these things passionately by pointing out the flaws in the logic of people like you. Again, it is nothing grand I am doing. Political arguments coming from people of your political persuasion are generally flawed at their core. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. Nothing grand at all.

shawon22

04-03-2003, 02:23 AM

cp1967
please do us a fav. go back to israel

cp1967

04-03-2003, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by shawon22
cp1967
please do us a fav. go back to israel
Anti-semetism rears its ugly head.... only, I am not Jewish.

If I were Jewish, I might live there, but I am not, I am Presbyterian. However, I would be proud to stand up with any Israeli in support of them.

epimeth

04-04-2003, 05:54 PM

nobody has really addressed UN 242, so i will...

Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

o Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

o Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

whether or not Israel followed subclause one, it no longer applies to the current situation. ...occipied in the recent conflict; NOT any conflict afterwords...

and as for subclause two, it mentions no country by name, so it means that ALL middle eastern countries abide. Israel makes no claim to any other nations (although the Jewish people as a whole beleive that their our land extends into Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon... but we still have plenty of time to take that land, we aren't actively demanding it), but most of the surrounding nations do NOT accept Israel's sovereignty, nor our 'right to live in peace...'

so I happily say that the UN can take resolution 242 and shove it where the sun don't shine.

as for this thought provoking post... I felt sick to my stomach after reading it... well, not really... I actually found it amusing...

This is Israel

I am Israel - I came to a land without a people for a people without a land. Those people who happened to be here, had no
right to be here, and my people showed them they had to leave or die,
razing 480 Palestinian villages to the ground, erasing their history.

you lost me on the land without a people for a people without a land line...
Yes, we did raze some pallestinian villages... THATS WHAT HAPPENS AT WARTIME. I wonder at the amount of history that the whole world has lost...

I am Israel - some of my people committed massacres and later became Prime Ministers to represent me. In 1948, Menachem Begin was in
charge of the unit that slaughtered the inhabitants of Deir Yassin, including
100 men, women, and children. In 1953, Ariel Sharon led the slaughter of the inhabitants of Qibya, and in 1982 arranged for our allies to butcher around 2,000 in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla.

but never any mentions of the massacre of Israeli citizens...

"Just four days after the reports from Deir Yassin were published, an Arab force ambushed a Jewish convoy on the way to Hadassah Hospital, killing 77 Jews, including doctors, nurses, patients, and the director of the hospital. Another 23 people were injured. This massacre attracted little attention and is never mentioned by those who are quick to bring up Deir Yassin. Moreover, despite attacks such as this against the Jewish community in Palestine, in which more than 500 Jews were killed in the first four months after the partition decision alone, Jews did not flee."

deir yassin: see the real (?) story here (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/deir_yassin.html) but we can always put that false story up to the jewish conspiracy to take over the world (or at least the USA)

Qibya: real (?) story... (http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_qibya_1953.php) this, too, may be the result of the Jews trying to rally the world to their side using the internet...

I am Israel - carved in 1948 out of 78% of the land of Palestine, dispossessing its inhabitants and replacing them with Jews from
Europe and other parts of the world. While the natives whose families lived on this
land for thousands of years are not allowed to return, Jews from all over the world are welcome to instant citizenship.

what land of Palestine? It was owned by the British, who gave it to us as a refuge for the Jewish people of the world...
The native families were free to keep their homes and continue living here... just the ones that rose against the decision were thrown out or unfortunatelly killed.

I am Israel - in 1967, I swallowed the remaining lands of Palestine - the West Bank and Gaza - and placed their inhabitants under an oppressive military rule, controlling and humiliating every aspect of their daily lives. Eventually, they should get the message that they are not welcome to stay, and join the millions of Palestinian refugees in the shanty camps of Lebanon and Jordan.

Distance from mediterranean sea to the west bank: about 30 miles on average... if that much. So when war broke out (before we annexed the West bank), the invaders could hit pretty much any Israeli settlement within hours. We pushed them back and took the land they came from. We were not the invaders, they were. If they would have stayed the **** out, the land would still be theirs. sorry for the curse, but I'm not erasing it... its what came out... So THEY invaded, and we had to make sure they couldn't threaten us that quickly again. As for oppressive rule, they are self governed in times of 'peace'.. and they are under military rule when people from their towns go and blow themselves up on our land. If they are unhappy about it, they should tell their next-door neighbor to take his own life in a less destructive way.

I am Israel - I have the power to control American policy. My American Israel Public Affairs Committee can make or break any
politician of its choosing, and as you see, they all compete to please me. All the
forces of the world are powerless against me,
including the UN as I have the American veto to block any condemnation of my war crimes. As Sharon so eloquently phrased it, "We control America".

yes. beleive that. I make it a point to allow ignorance and (dare I say it?) stupidity that helps me in any way continue unhindered.

I am Israel - I influence American mainstream media too, and you will always find the news tailored to my favor. I have invested
millions of dollars into PR representation, and CNN, New York Times, and others have been doing an excellent job of promoting my propaganda. Look at other international news sources and you will see the
difference.

oh! oh! don't forget! The Press Secretary of the Bush administration is JEWISH!!! most of the news from the white house promotes Israeli proporanda!!! be wary of all news coming from the white house!!! Not to mention many movie producers/directors... leaders in american broadcasting... and banks... they have their hands on a lot of american cash...

Its just the jewish/israeli conspiracy rearing its ugly head...

I am Israel - and you Palestinians want to negotiate "peace!?" But you are not as smart as me; I will negotiate, but will only let
you have your municipalities while I control your borders, your water, your airspace, and anything else of importance. While we
"negotiate," I will swallow your hilltops and fill them with settlements, populated by the most extremist of my extremists, armed to the teeth. These settlements will be connected with roads you cannot use, and you will be imprisoned in your little Bantustans between them, surrounded by checkpoints in
every direction.

I really can't argue that... the settlers are usually extreemists, but I stand by them because it is their homes and children that bear the biggest brunt of terrorism.
And the land is ours... I wonder who controls Puerto Rico's water, airspace, and all else of importance... or California's for that matter...

not that those checkpoints do us any good, mind you... they still manage to sneak through the cracks.

[personal story]
While my family (and I) were still liveing in Israel, we lived in a place called Alphe Menashe, which back then was right on the Green Line (not that it isn't very far away now). We left when I was around 3 and a half or so... 4 months later the first Intifada began.
Testing time!! Who was/were the first casualties of the first intifada?

My then best friend and her mother, with a pipe bomb thrown at their car. A woman and a child.

I might be wrong tho, this is just what I've been told.

And really, I hold no (conscious) resentment about this. I don't remember them at all... I was too young.
[/personal story]

more on the next post... kinda went past the 10k characters mark with this one... :rolleyes:

epimeth

04-04-2003, 05:56 PM

I am Israel - with the fourth strongest army in the world, possessing nuclear weapons. How dare your children confront my oppression with stones, don't you know my soldiers won't
hesitate to blow their heads off? In 17 months, I have killed 900 of you and injured 17,000, mostly civilians, and have the mandate to continue since the international community remains silent. Ignore, as I do, the hundreds of Israeli soldiers who are now refusing to carry out my control over your lands and people; their voices of conscience will not protect you.

rubber bullets, mate... they don't do much blowing up of heads. We use real bullets on people with guns and explosives.

total Palestinians killed in occupied territories as of september 2000 by IDF units:
1908
of them, minors under the age of 18:
346
Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians (occupied terr):
29
of them, minors:
3

Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians (occupied terr):
175
of them, minors:
29
IDF soldiers killed by Palestinians (occupied terr):
155

Palestinians killed by IDF (inside the green line):
77, one minor

Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians (inside green line):
302, 63 minors
IDF killed inside green line
67

all data from here (http://www.btselem.org)

injured Palestinians: 22,300, from Red Crescent Website (http://www.palestinercs.org/crisistables/table_of_figures.htm)

injured Israeli civilians: 3425
injured IDF: 1398
from IDF website (http://www.idf.il/daily_statistics/english/6.gif)

I can't deny statistics... but it's a good thing we were told where the very incorrect statistics we got before came from...

and when I last checked, there was no Palestinian army since THERE IS NO PALESTINE.

I don't understand the 'ignoring my order' bit...

I am Israel - and you want freedom? I have bullets, tanks, missiles, Apaches, and F-16's, to obliterate you. I have placed your towns under siege,

oh, Israel has those things... but if they were for obliteration purposes, then why the hell are there still israeli civilians injured and dying???

and here it ends... what comes after the comma????

aaaanyway...

Iraq. A child trying to show up his father, or a hero saving the world from a (and I quote the great Eddie Izzard, although about
hitler) mass murdering ****head? YOU decide!

Or can it be both? Can Bush be doing it for his father, AND trying to save the world from Hussein? I certainly think so.

See, no matter how you slice it up, bottom line is this:
For the good of Iraq (and if not, the world) Hussein must be killed.

Sure, the american people will be happier with cheaper oil, which this will probably bring... but what country won't benefit?

Sure, Bush's dad has a bit of a vendetta... but Bush couldn't do this if he didn't have the support of (at the very least) his cabinet.

Sure, America has chemical weapons testing facilities and other weapons of mass destruction... but they we have refrained from using them (except for once, but the nuclear age had to be ushered in somehow!!! well, I had to find some excuse, didn't I?) Notice that we've been using conventional weapons, and doing just fine...

umm... can't think of any more right now, and my post is more than long enough...

and yes, I am a socialist...
DEATH TO THE CAPITALIST PIGS!!!! :eek: :D :p

Elizabeth

04-04-2003, 06:11 PM

Now methinks epimeth should have been the lawyer :)

(and no, that's not intended to be derogatory) :)
-Elizabeth

epimeth

04-05-2003, 06:17 PM

hmm.. the f*cough*ck is still in there...

where are the moderators!?!?!? down with evil words!!!!!

we need order!!!!!!!!

oi! shawon! you gonna stand up for yourself?

Bunkermaster

04-06-2003, 07:24 AM

moderating this would kill around 50% of its length.
I would like to see more PHP related material though. Such as :
does anyone know if the DoD have PHP developers?
do you think PHP is used on a day to day basys on the battle ground (we know that it is by some web reporters but what about military)?

Really this thread is going to hell as someone (premonition on my new duties?) mentioned to me in a PM. I will read the whole thing again (:eek: ) today and try to see if something HAS to go. Knowing that one of the main beligerents has left the building that is.

Having all political discussions contained in this thread is good BUT as you all know this forum is NOT a political tribune. We all have to benefit from everybody's experience, nameless israelis helping nameless palestinians. Nameless indians helping nameless pakistanies. This place is a place of peace. We all help eachothers to the extent of our skills. Isn't this place great?

:D

epimeth

04-06-2003, 09:28 AM

as has been mentioned before, the Echo lounge is specifically for non-php material tho

"General Chat and Introductions. A catch all for any topic"

copy/pasted strait from the main forum page...

so really, as long as a post isn't offensive, it shouldn't be deleted.

Bunkermaster

04-06-2003, 09:37 AM

indeed :)

with my PHP lines I just wanted to lighten the mood. I horribly failed. :P

but some material may not look abusive to some and offensive for others. If you see anything that offenses you, report it to the moderators and it will be looked at. If it is something deeply cultural, please explain. So far, concidering that some persons have been removed, this topic remains as is.

largo

04-08-2003, 05:08 AM

I don't know why, but it always pleases me when I see a post / reply by Bunkermaster. What is up with that.....

...no, that's not it.

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 05:21 AM

:eek:

I choose to take this literally and to actually concider that someone somewhere enjoys my posts (would be a shame after around 800 posts)

:cool:

vtb

04-08-2003, 10:50 AM

That's the hardest thing about moderating a discussion board like this, isn't it. Even if something is genuinely offensive to some people, there's also a strong argument for free speech that has to be weighed carefully. It's not too hard to draft guidelines, that is, publicly set forth a policy as to what's OK and what's not, but no matter how well-crafted such a policy is, there will still be borderline cases.

This guy who was railing against the Israelis, I agree with some of it -- the Israeli government's conduct towards the Palestinians is atrocious -- although it was a little inflammatory for my taste. Then he started in with the bit about the Jews controlling banking and media, which is a tired old pile of anti-Semitic crap[1] that I find quite offensive -- and I'm only a Jew in the sense that I would qualify for extermination if Hitler were in power, as far as beliefs go I am a hardcore atheist. Should a post like that be supressed or edited? I would say no, albeit with some reluctance.

[1] Jews run Hollywood and the NY Times, other than that they are not overrepresented in media ownership. As for banking, I think there are a lot of bankers of all flavors. The thing about us Jews culturally speaking is that we place emphasis on education, and smart, educated people tend to get money because poverty sucks. Some people resent that, I guess. Though it's irrational -- Jews have no exclusive lock on brains and education.

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 12:24 PM

Above a certain level of intelligence, people DO find that poverty being something which interest has been greatly overrated. These people try to avoid it and making money is a good way.

This said, I think that if freedom of speech is a good thing freedom of stupidity is not. In most of my communities you can talk all you want about almost any subject and the second you start ation like an offensive idiot you're out. We have all religions, nationalities represented and of course when something as personal as politics or religion comes into view you WILL hurt/annoy someone. The goal of this community is to help eachothers around PHP and it's beauty.

if I could say how many people read that thread and decided to leave I think I could amaze a few people. Some of the arguments used here will trigger shame in some people at a later point in their life. Some of the points made here were just half shewed and thought on information provided by puppet media.

:eek: getting to warm. Need a cigar.

Elizabeth

04-08-2003, 12:40 PM

Gosh, I hope that people reading this aren't so offended that they never come back to PHP Builder! I definitely prefer to keep things on the lighter side, but I also enjoy a good meeting of good minds, and I like to hear opinions from around the world. I think the whole Iraq issue is in the forefront of so many people's minds, it would be hard to ignore it completely. And regarding the offensive posts, there are people in the world that just love to stir up sh*t wherever they go- those are the kinds of people that can take a good thing and make it bad. I actually feel pity for those types of people because they can't just be normal and have normal conversations and interactions with other people.

So my response to anyone who has been offended, or has decided to leave, is to not let one other person get to you so much, and let them control your actions in such a way. People can only offend me if I let them offend me- I can control how I react to a situation. And I make the choice to stay at PHP Builder because I enjoy the interaction with intelligent people who share my interests. If we all felt the same way about things, there would be nothing to discuss, would there? This is just one thread in a long list of many other important, crucial topics like "what's for dinner" and "geek vs. nerd" :) - so let's all just relax, shake hands, and move on to something as equally important like "what's the deal with Michael Jackson, anyway?!"

<- handing a cigar to Bunker and patting him on the back..

-Elizabeth

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 12:54 PM

You say when you "hear" Eli. The fact is that a real live conversation is often healthier than a forum post.

Simple reasons :
Not everyone will understand what you meant (especially if using second degree humor or irony) because not everyone can understand what you wrote in the same way.

Let's all post in PHP and abandon english

epimeth

04-08-2003, 01:13 PM

***I'm trying to change some minds around here... this post is meant to continue a discussion, not start an argument***

vtb... how, in your opinion, should we treat the palestinians?

oh, and that was me talking about Jews controlling the media, not the guy making inflamatory remarks... I was just being overly... uh...me... there.

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 01:38 PM

ok tricky (joke) question here:

Is Israel's media controled by Jews?

:D

Elizabeth

04-08-2003, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by Bunkermaster
You say when you "hear" Eli. The fact is that a real live conversation is often healthier than a forum post.
...Let's all post in PHP and abandon english
echo "Well, of course real face to face conversation is healthier,";
echo "... but here in Cincinnati, I don't have a lot of
exposure to people who live in other countries,";
echo "so it's interesting to me to get opinions
from all over.";
echo "Perhaps PHP Builder should sponsor a free conference so
that we can all meet face to face over
a cup of coffee :)";
echo "Oh yes, and I like your idea about
posting in PHP.";

:)

-Elizabeth

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 01:52 PM

Parse error: parse error, expecting `','' or `';'' in /home/sites/Elizabeth/web/bleh.php on line 4

Elizabeth

04-08-2003, 02:02 PM

echo "Bite me, Bunker!";
:D
-Elizabeth

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 02:09 PM

bite( $Elizabeth , 'random' );

Guess what is the second param?

:D

vtb

04-08-2003, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by epimeth

vtb... how, in your opinion, should we treat the palestinians?
Uh, who is 'we'? (You know how we Jews always answer a question with a question). Seriously, though, gee let me think..... humanely?

oh, and that was me talking about Jews controlling the media, not the guy making inflamatory remarks... I was just being overly... uh...me... there.

Truth to tell I haven't read every word that closely because when I see people are talking /sh[a-z]{1}t/ , it doesn't really deserve a close reading. My apologies if I overlooked something you wrote seriously and in good faith.

epimeth

04-08-2003, 02:32 PM

'we' is Israelis... really, the israeli government.

every heard of the term "biting the hand that feeds you"?
we treat them humanely, give them electricity, water, medical aid... and out of the very towns who's people we help come the terrorists who snipe at our cars driving down the highway, fire upon our towns in the golan and the west bank, and blow up major commercial centers of our cities.

its very simply the carrot and stick concept. we know that when we place them under marshall law, the attacks slow to a trickle.. and when we give them a free hand, we get one or more attacks daily! So if they only stop the attacks from coming from within their own homes, they would be much happier in many ways.

and besides, we do treat them 'humanely'... why don't their own leaders take better care of them? if they don't live in Israel (as they claim), but in Palestine, why should we suppy them with water, electricity, and medical services? If their leaders would spend more cash on making their people happy instead of lining their own pockets and throwing it all away on terrorism, things might change a bit faster.

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 02:37 PM

easy, easy, would hate to close this thread really but i will if this argument warms up even a tidy bit.

epimeth

04-08-2003, 03:17 PM

bite is defined as follows:

/**
* This function allows you to bite a person.
* who - a string with the person's name
* where - an integer, defined as follows
* ASS = 0 : rear end
* NOSE = 1 : nose
* LEFT_EARLOBE = 2 : left earlobe
* ANKLE = 3 : ankle, for use by small yappy dogs
* for full documentation, read the bite manual (man bite)
*/

bite(var who, var where);

and bunker... this isn't an angument! an argument goes something like this:

a) you suck
b) no I don't, you do
a) no, you do!
b) nuh uh
a) uh huh
b) nuh uh
a) uh huh
b) well you suck more
a) well you suck the most
b) well you suck times infinity
a) theres no such thing as higher than infinity, so that proves that you suck
b) no I don't
a) yes you do
b) no I don't
a) yes you do
...
...
...
b) and then and then and then and then and then and then?

vtb

04-08-2003, 03:29 PM

pity we don't serve alcohol in this lounge. if we did, maybe we'd all have a nice drink and relax...

...or get drunk/aggressive and go settle it out in the parking lot.
:cool:

Anyway I'm done, so if the censors have to shut this down, hey, don't blame me.

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 03:36 PM

dude! what does my tatoo say?

:D

Bunkermaster

04-08-2003, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by epimeth
bite is defined as follows:

/**
* This function allows you to bite a person.
* who - a string with the person's name
* where - an integer, defined as follows
* ASS = 0 : rear end
* NOSE = 1 : nose
* LEFT_EARLOBE = 2 : left earlobe
* ANKLE = 3 : ankle, for use by small yappy dogs
* for full documentation, read the bite manual (man bite)
*/

bite(var who, var where);

second argument can also take an array :D

epimeth

04-08-2003, 03:37 PM

go to Party(2)... there's some alcohol there

epimeth

04-09-2003, 09:26 AM

sweet! but what does mine say?

Bunkermaster

04-09-2003, 12:47 PM

dude! what does mine say?

epimeth

04-10-2003, 10:22 AM

sweet! but what does mine say?

Bunkermaster

04-10-2003, 11:39 AM

DUDE! what does mine say? :mad:

Elizabeth

04-10-2003, 12:04 PM

I'm confused.

epimeth

04-12-2003, 01:21 AM

no, Eli... the next line is

:mad:SAWEETAH. But WHAT does MINE say?:mad:

Bunkermaster

04-12-2003, 10:14 AM

DUDE! WHAT DOES MINE SAY?
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

(LOL :D )

epimeth

04-12-2003, 12:51 PM

now do we conclude this, or let Eli stay confused?

Bunkermaster

04-12-2003, 01:03 PM

please conclude :)

epimeth

04-12-2003, 01:15 PM

IDIOTS! Your tattoo says DUDE. Your tattoo says SWEET. GOT IT?!

Bunkermaster

04-12-2003, 01:51 PM

ok this requies a little more explanation I think...

The truth (http://www.filmhead.com/reviews/2000/dudewheresmycar.html)

Elizabeth

04-12-2003, 04:17 PM

Ah yes, should have known- a film I have not yet seen :)

-Elizabeth

dalecosp

04-12-2003, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by Elizabeth
Ah yes, should have known- a film I have not yet seen :)

-Elizabeth By that reviewer's account, this make us the wiser..... :)

epimeth

04-13-2003, 05:03 PM

eh... the film's a laugh if you're in the right state of mind...

filn

04-16-2003, 02:05 AM

im with the swiss, there ready for the shizzle to hit the fat. i hear that everybodys got a bomb shelter and that all the bridges and tunnels are pre-rigged with explosives so if it goes bad they can just blow everything before you can even get there.. hahahaha i donno if thats true, but it would be funny if it was :)

Bunkermaster

04-16-2003, 03:04 PM

It is true. Switzerland (?) is a giant fortress without Christopher Lambert (thank God)

zudo

04-21-2003, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by Elizabeth
We do not have a dictatorship over here and there are always high-ranking people ready to challenge every decision the man wants to make.

Hey elizabeth... maybe we don't have a dictator but we have something worse. We have brainwashing and censorship. You Elizabeth are living proof of brainwashing, and take a look at arab media in comparison to U.S. media and have an open mind.

Elizabeth

04-21-2003, 03:09 PM

Well, my only response would be that I do try to have an open mind... and that everyone with access to any media whatsoever is getting a censored version of what's going on, simply because we are all human. Even eye-witness accounts of an event are going to be different depending on each person's account of what happened... which is solely based on an individual's perceptions. I may see a robbery and think the robber was 6'5"... the bank teller might say he was 6'3". And on the news it was reported that he was 6'6". But in reality he is 6'4". We are all close, but nobody has it exactly right.

Which is why there are very few things in this world that are black and white. I would venture to say that the arab media produces a "censored" version of the truth as well- just censored differently.

And my only point earlier was that while Bush has a lot of support from the American people - there is always a Democratic party ready to challenge the way things are handled... with everything. From the economy, to education, to crime, to homeland security. It's called Checks and Balances. And it seems to have worked pretty well thus far, IMHO.

Thanks for the feedback :)

-Elizabeth

shawon22

04-29-2003, 06:30 AM

here is the php version of the war

<?
$middleEastWar = 'true';

$israelPeople = 20000;
$palPeople = 500000000;
$israel = 'true';

$usMoney = 60656595660;
$usTaxMoney = $usMoney/.4;
$palMoney = 2554555;
$israelMoney = 955455056;

$israelDeath = 200;
$palDeath = 4000;
$usDeath = 0;

$usSupport = 'false';

echo "<h1>\$usSupport " . $usSupport . "</h1>";

echo "\$middleEastWar = " . $middleEastWar . " " .
"\$israelPeople = " . $israelPeople . " " .
"\$palPeople = " . $palPeople . " " .
"\$usMoney = " .$usMoney . " " .
"\$usTaxMoney = " . $usTaxMoney . " " .
"\$palMoney = " . $palMoney . " " .
"\$israelMoney = " . $israelMoney . " " .
"\$israelDeath = " . $israelDeath . " " .
"\$palDeath = " . $palDeath . " " .
"\$usDeath = " . $usDeath . " ";

$usSupport = 'true';

while($israel)
{
if($usSupport)
{
$israelPeople++;
$palPeople--;

$usMoney--;
$usTaxMoney--;
$palMoney--;

$palDeath+=$israelDeath/100*20;
$usDeath++;
$israelDeath--;
$i++;
}
else
{
$middleEastWar = 'false';
break;
}

//end of palestain
if($i == 200)
{
break;
}
}

echo "<h1>\$usSupport " . $usSupport . "</h1>";

echo "\$middleEastWar = " . $middleEastWar . " " .
"\$israelPeople = " . $israelPeople . " " .
"\$palPeople = " . $palPeople . " " .
"\$usMoney = " .$usMoney . " " .
"\$usTaxMoney = " . $usTaxMoney . " " .
"\$palMoney = " . $palMoney . " " .
"\$israelMoney = " . $israelMoney . " " .
"\$israelDeath = " . $israelDeath . " " .
"\$palDeath = " . $palDeath . " " .
"\$usDeath = " . $usDeath . " ";

?>

zudo

04-29-2003, 05:36 PM

shawon22 that's the best program i have seen yet, because it's true. shawon22 do you get al-jazzera? i do, if you don't i will tell you about it, every time you turn it on it shows the war... which basically is palestinian blood and other middle eastern blood. but if you turn usa t.v. it says 1 israile died, what it don't say is 500 palistian die. bios? yes! that is why every one in my jr high school dislike me for no say pledge because me no want to pledge allegiance with a undercover terroist organazation

matt_4013

05-01-2003, 02:59 AM

I'd really like it if this would get back on topic. The first 8 pages that I read I found absolutely fascinating!

Now a question. Why is it that in every discussion forum I post in, when a topic about this war comes up, and people start getting into some fantastic thought provoking arguments, moderators start banning and closing threads. Really, if people are going to get worked up enough to leave a forum, because of a single thread that encourages the expression of opinion, I think they're really in a lot of trouble, and maybe shouldn't be somewhere that does include such a diverse range of cultures and opinions. This is a discussion forum, and as such should be treated like one. Granted, it is a massively open forum and people's maturity levels can't be guaranteed, however if you don't like it, don't read it, or provide a counter-point of your own! Enough of that . . .

Another question. How can you people claim so much knowledge over a subject, when you can't even spell the names of the leaders of the participating countries? eg, Hittler=Hitler, irak=Iraq, al kaieda=Al Qaeda, Hossean=Hussein

Last question, which will hopefully be thought provoking. Why is it, that if Saddam Hussein had all these weapons of mass destruction, and the obvious unstable mind to use them, did he not use them when his home was being invaded? That strikes me as a little strange. It's quite obvious to the entire world, and I'm sure him as well (he's really quite a smart man), that he's not going to come out of this alive or at the least he'll have lost all power in Iraq, so really, what would he have to lose? And yet, nothing.

Now for some comments :)

I deplore the use of 9/11 to justify this war. That's like Australia going to war with Indonesia because of the bombing of the Australian nightclubs in Bali. We have been shown absolutely no evidence of a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, just a bunch of heresay (If anyone can show me some kind of evidence contrary to this, I would be more than happy).

Finally, I saw a LOT of misinformed posts reading this as a non-participant. There was a lot of things people were arguing that were NOT based on fact, but speculation and media propaganda. I think it's mostly the World War II references that annoyed me. First, about the Americans going in and "saving" the Allies. The Americans stayed neutral until Pearl Harbor and the resulting Pacific war, and even then, their forces were mainly operating in that area, and as such only had a relatively minor percentage of the soldiers that were operating in Europe. Arrogance and propaganda at it's worst. The American forces didn't "save" France and Britain. Sure, they helped, but so did many others.

Elizabeth, when I get back from work, I'll see if I can find some kind of reliable material on Hitler for you. He did some great things for Germany in the years before he went nuts and tried to take over the world. Don't get me wrong, I don't support his actions, and am absolutely disgusted by the Holocaust, but have a look at what he did BEFORE all that began. It wasn't all about terror. Hitler's public opinion was through the roof. The people loved him, he'd built the economy back up from ruins, and had instilled a sense of pride and hope in the German people after their defeat in World War I.

I was gonna say "my 2 cents", but looking at that post, it's more like "my $9.50".

Matt

epimeth

05-01-2003, 05:11 AM

let me start with hitler, and then go into a lot of speculation....

when hitler came into power, it wasn't exactly a hard thing to do good things in germany. when you're at the bottom, there's only going up... and Hitler didn't do it alone. You don't single handedly pick up a country in depression and turn it into a country with an economic base strong enough to support an army. He had a lot of help from a lot of very powerful people that hoped to be even more powerful. I must say, in his defense, that he did a very good job pulling the [power] rug from under them... also, using the communists and jews as scapegoats started before he even became chancellor. Remember, the Nazi party was created long before Hitler came into power... most of the sense of pride he was instilling in the german people was that they were al a part of the 'master race' (aryan) that was destined to rule the world... So yes, Hitler put Germany back on its feet. But does the end justify the means?

and now, onto speculation!!!

9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. Whats the connection?

Anybody read the Dune novels?

Why is it that there is so much friggin money in the dessert????
The rulers of the middle eastern countries are all rich beyond belief! Why? Because of the big invisible hand that rules the world these days: supply and demand. On one side we have a couple of countries that own a very important and rare commodity: Oil. On the other hand we have 191 countries in the world (As released by the Office of the Geographer and Global Issues, January 19, 2001, according to the [url=http://www.state.gov/www/regions/independent_states.html]State Department[/i]), of which many (if not most or even all) require this. What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is an oligopoly that (like microsoft) is squeezing us for every penny we own! They all get rich by overpricing the oil... and build fancy palaces full of priceless junk... and pay a couple of people a lot of money to a)keep their mouths shut and b)keep all the other people (who, btw, see none of this cash) in their place... oh yea, and pay an even less amount of people an even larger amount of money to make sure that that a small group of refugees from a number of middle eastern countries (sorry, but Israel is not the only country that isn't exactly pleased with palestinians living in it) are heard.

So, to put it another way (and I must say the light isn't very flattering)... Every time you fill up your gas tanks and grumble about how %$#&ing much you're paying (I know americans complain about gas prices... but have you seen how much the british pay?!?!?!), some percentage of that money goes strait into the pockets of known terrorist organizations. Not to mention the fuel that is put into fighter jets, airplanes, cruise ships, and power plants...

So. Who isn't happy with this? I know I'm not. I'm sure everyone here (and elsewhere) who owns a car would be more than happy to see gas prices plummet. Now how are we going to do this? Go up to Baron Vladimir himself and demand he lower the price of spice?

Well we tried that... and it didn't work too well. Images of brand new 1973 cadillacs standing in line waiting to fill up on gas come to mind... and mind if I mention that the Yom Kippur was all through October 1973?

So lets skip forward a few years.

1993. Osama bin laden tries, unsuccesfully to take down the world trade center. Promises he'll succeed next time.

2001. The US loses FOUR PLANES. Who loses four planes?!?!?! but lets assume that really was an accident. I'm not willing to admit to myself that 'they' (be it the government, NSA, CIA, FBI, whatever) let it happen. So Bin Laden smiles, waves, and says "Hi guys, told you I'd do it! Come and get me!"

President Bush calls for an invasion of Afghanistan, largely supported by people of America. Doesn't Do Much. Where is Osama? Wasn't the whole point of the operation to capture and/or kill him? last I heard he's in Syria. Or Pakistan. Or Uzbekistan. Or some other *istan.

Get to the point, Roy! What about cheaper oil prices?

Some loose strings... Where did Osama get the cash? Training a bunch of people to get past airport security and then fly a passenger airplane isn't free, you know. So which country did it? Eenie meenie miney mo. Oh look! I happened to land on daddy's unfinished business! What were we saying back then? Something about weapons of mass destruction? Yea! Lets go with that one again!

So they did.

Just one thing ole' Bush (or should it be young Bush?) forgot.

1981. Israel takes out Iraq's only nuclear power plant, setting back Iraqi nuclear capabilities by at least a decade (1991 desert sheild ring a bell?). So Israel ensures no nuclear weapons for ten years and takes a step back? I seriously doubt it. I'd bet we've been in there since, making sure Saddam doesn't kill all of us by pressing a shiny red button. Coincidentally, Ilan Ramon (first Israeli in space, died in the recent Columbia accident) was in that attack... but making that connection is absolutely rediculous (but then again, Saddam did have a large wad of cash begging to be spent)...

So where next? Bush has threatened Syria. Israel doesn't like Syria. Syria is where Hamas is based. Hamas is where the terrorism comes from. Bush is merely saying "thanks, Israel, for all the help you've given us for the past 50 years."

Did you know that Shimon Peres was behind the assasination of Yitzchak Rabin? Think about it... it makes sense...

The Wolf

05-01-2003, 07:02 AM

Originally posted by Elizabeth
Ok I was trying really hard not to enter this conversation, however...
Have you people forgotten a little thing called 9/11? Where almost 3000 innocent men, women and children perished at the hands of a true madman Bin Laden???! Hence the issues with Afghanistan. So sorry if we were such a big pain in the butt to maybe want the dude to pay for a little thing like that.
You make me sick, woopie 3000 people died, boo hoo, honestly though, that has the be the stupidest come back ever! Sure 9/11 was sad, but, it was a wakeup call, one that didn't work.

Originally posted by Elizabeth
And gee... let's think... who released the Afghan people from the tyranny they were under for so many years? And who sent $100 million in aid to the Afghan people to help rebuild their country and government? Yes, the USA.

Ak, that 100 million could have helped the homeless people of the USA, and also helped the school system by paying for equipment and stopping the need for the day some schools call "coke!" day.

Originally posted by Elizabeth
Secondly, I guess it just must be me but I kind of appreciate the fact that NO ONE COUNTRY is allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction (USA included) and I'm glad there is some sort of watchdog out there. If you all want to blame Bush for being the bad guy then so be it. However, when Hussein decides to use those "nonexistent" weapons and half the human race is wiped out, then it will be the USA's fault for not doing something sooner.
Again, the usa has MORE womd than all other countries combined, and they have not stopped making them, money that would help your school and health systems is being wasted!

Originally posted by Elizabeth [B]
I didn't vote for Bush, but I would hardly call him a madman. We do not have a dictatorship over here and there are always high-ranking people ready to challenge every decision the man wants to make. It's the basis for our entire governmental system. It's called checks and balances, people - so no ONE PERSON has too much control. I mean, let's face it - regardless of what he does, there is always criticism. He can never make everybody happy. It's the nature of the job. But to call him a "madman" well I think that is just a little over-the-top, don't you?
You may not have a dictator-ship BUT you do have a govt. trying to make you all blind to the fact that millions of dollars are NOT payed in tax by most of the big corps, instead its YOU that has to pay for them!

Originally posted by Elizabeth
I mean think about it logically- if Hussein had nothing to hide and no weapons of mass destruction, then why did it take 14 tries for the UN weapons inspectors to be let in? It's like the drunk guy who won't take the breathilizer or the guy with drugs in his car who refuses to let the cops search it. IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE THEN WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL?!

I agree, he WAS hiding womd.

Elizabeth

05-01-2003, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by The Wolf
You make me sick, woopie 3000 people died, boo hoo, honestly though, that has the be the stupidest come back ever! LOL- Actually, Wolf, I think that was the "stupidest" comeback ever.

Thanks for the thoughts though, I like to hear opinions from all walks of life :)

-Elizabeth

matt_4013

05-01-2003, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by epimeth
But does the end justify the means?

Whoa, settle down there, I said all along that I abhor what hitler did, I was just saying that he really did do a lot for Germany. I'm not agreeing with his methods, and definately not the final outcome, but there are some things I just can't help but admire.

Again, the usa has MORE womd than all other countries combined, and they have not stopped making them, money that would help your school and health systems is being wasted!

This is also one of my main points of consternation. Seriously, why isn't the UN demanding that the Good 'ol US of A allow weapons inspectors. I want to see this. That'd be a big eye opener, wouldn't it? You've got our dear friend, Mr President Bush, saying one thing, but on the other hand, he's got the largest nuclear arsenal in the world! "But he's RESPONSIBLE" they say? Right. He's just ITCHING to press that button. Should we conveniently forget that the US is the only country to ever actually use a nuclear weapon? Show me the responsibility there?

Then you've got Afghanistan. What can we say about that? The US government has just spent millions of dollars on a war to depose the regime they put in power, in the 70's. Strikes me as quite strange. They obviously thought that one through. "I know, let's support an extreme Islamic movement, because they're fighting those RED COMMY BASTARDS!".

And to Epimeth: Saddam Hussein and our dear Baron Harkonnen are very very different ;) Although I do see your connection, I don't think you can cast Bush in the same light as Paul Atreides. However, I'm not sure of your argument. Are you arguing against the war on iraq, for it, or are you just arguing? You have some (as I see) conflicting statements in there. Could you please clarify what you're arguing for? (That statement was not intented to cause offence, but I couldn't think of a way to rephrase it).
About your "price of oil" argument. Wasn't it you who argued that only 7% of the US oil came from the middle east? (I'm probably wrong, but I can't be bothered going back a few pages).

Anyway, enough from me, before I make more enemies than I probably already have,

Peace.
Matt

epimeth

05-02-2003, 12:37 AM

you're making no enemies, matt... just as long as you go help some newbies with their code :-)

first of all, the US gets substantially more than 7% of their oil from the middle east. Maybe the oil for our cars, but certainly not for all economic areas.

from (dunno how reliable a source...)
Where does U.S. oil come from?
The United States currently imports about 60 percent of the oil that it consumes. About 50 percent of that oil comes from OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries). Persian Gulf OPEC countries account for about 26 percent of U.S. imports, with Iraq supplying slightly under half of the oil the United States gets from this region. Interestingly, oil from Iraq today makes up a much larger portion of U.S. oil imports than it did before the Gulf War. Non-Gulf OPEC countries, and specifically Venezuela, account for about 14 percent of U.S. imports. With such a high degree of dependence on foreign oil, it is no wonder that the United States is concerned about conditions in the Middle East. The nation has a great deal at risk if oil supplies from that region, especially from Iraq, are disrupted for even a short time.

also, since you quoted me there, I have to explain about that line... its just a reference to Bismarc's philosophy of realpolitik... Hitler was a huge fan of Bismarc and his philosophy.

as for the US having womd... thats just a rediculous thing to say. no mention of Britain, France, or China? Or India? Or Israel? Or Pakistan? Or RUSSIA? big, corrupt, black-market Russia??? I think we should be more worried about some other countries in that list than the US. Sure, you can argue that the US is the only country in the world to use them, but thats because at the time, the US was the only country to have them. Since then the weapon became one of prevention and fear, not actual use. However, if a country comes along planning to use them, the alarm bells start to ring and inspectors should come in. I am not advocating the use or existance of nuclear weapons, but I know I feel a lot better about knowing that they are in the hands of the security counsel and not in the hands of rouge nations.

now why does the US throwing the taliban out of Afghanistan seem strange to you? they did what they were told when they were first put in, and then decided to do their own thing. The US was in charge and they forfeited their power when they decided to go against what the US said.

As for Harkonen=Saddam, Atreides=Paul...
I was going more for Atreides=Israel... but the key difference is that when the Harkonen came in force the Atreides were toppled, but the Israelis stood strong. I guess the Corrinos were on the Atreides side this time.

An argument can't stand if both sides aren't argued. Yelling "I'M RIGHT! I'M RIGHT! I'M RIGHT! I'M RIGHT! I'M RIGHT!" and then "YOU'RE WRONG! YOU'RE WRONG! YOU'RE WRONG! YOU'RE WRONG! YOU'RE WRONG!" doesn't prove anything and just makes you (plural, general. not YOU you) look bad. But as for what I was going for, its like I said in the begining... Speculation. I was just looking at a couple of occurences and put them together in a way I see that works.

jimson

05-02-2003, 01:38 AM

u see what i mean right...
he is an evil man... at least for now...
he is a killing monster.

The Wolf

05-02-2003, 02:13 AM

Originally posted by Elizabeth
LOL- Actually, Wolf, I think that was the "stupidest" comeback ever.

Thanks for the thoughts though, I like to hear opinions from all walks of life :)

-Elizabeth

You forgot to read the rest of what I said didn't you, or are you just plain nice? :D

shhhhhhhhhhh have a seat and enjoy the wind on your face

BuzzLY

05-02-2003, 02:32 AM

Now, now, name-calling is really not necessary. Calling someone's "comeback" stupid is not that bad... calling a person stupid is just a personal attack, and quite petty.

I believe Elizabeth was simply pointing out that it was ironic that a person claiming a comeback was stupid would say "whoopie boo hoo." I found that quite amusing myself :D

Besides, she did say that she enjoyed reading your opinion.

Ease up a little -- there is no reason to get hostile over a few words :)

jimson

05-02-2003, 07:11 AM

like subject.. :)

Bunkermaster

05-02-2003, 01:32 PM

Dude! What does mine say?!

Elizabeth

05-02-2003, 02:59 PM

Ok, I just realized that I hadn't been keeping up with this thread so apparently I missed some good old-fashioned Elizabeth-bashing... oh well thanks Bunker for removing it before I had a chance to see my name drug through the mud :D... and thanks Buzz for sticking up for me in my absence! :)

Yes, Wolf, I do enjoy reading about other people's opinions, even if they aren't the same as mine. Doesn't mean I'm going to change the way I think necessarily- but I think it's a good thing that we can all express our opinions in an open format... and I think it's very interesting to hear how other people think.

So call me what you want, but it takes a lot to get me riled. ;)

-Elizabeth

BuzzLY

05-02-2003, 03:01 PM

Are you throwing down the gauntlet??? It sounds like a challenge to me!

Elizabeth

05-02-2003, 03:08 PM

Sure, Buzz- bring it on! :D

-Elizabeth

BuzzLY

05-02-2003, 04:10 PM

Oh... it's already been broughten!!!

epimeth

05-02-2003, 05:50 PM

hold it! hold it!

I want to see a good, clean fight!

none of this *pokes Buzz in the eye*
this *kicks Buzz in the shin*
and especially none of this *sees Buzz rolling around on the floor, so kicks Wolf in the groin*

now begin!

The Wolf

05-04-2003, 05:47 AM

Ah... sorry Elizabeth, had a little too much to drink, forgot I even posted that! :P

ahundiak

12-31-2003, 11:14 PM

Happy New Years Saddam!

dalecosp

01-01-2004, 01:49 AM

...SaddamROFLMAO! Indeed!

And, hey, ahundiak...what a message for your 900th post! :D

Moonglobe

01-01-2004, 02:36 AM

Originally posted by dalecosp
ROFLMAO! Indeed!

And, hey, ahundiak...what a message for your 900th post! :D Hope he like's his cell better than his 'hidey hole'* ;)

anyone here watch the daily show with Jon Stewart? for those who don't -- think Ben Afleck saying "It is a hidey hole!" in a fake Osama accent :p

bubblenut

01-02-2004, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by epimeth
now why does the US throwing the taliban out of Afghanistan seem strange to you? they did what they were told when they were first put in, and then decided to do their own thing. The US was in charge and they forfeited their power when they decided to go against what the US said.

Is that really what self rule is all about. Should America have the right to continue going back into Iraq every time their government doesn't do what America wants them to? If this is the case I really wouldn't like to be living in central Europe at the moment.

Originally posted by epimeth
sorry, but Israel is not the only country that isn't exactly pleased with palestinians living in it
No; but Israel is the only country where they have a legal right to live.

Bubble

ultraslacker

01-06-2004, 08:54 PM

Secondly, I guess it just must be me but I kind of appreciate the fact that NO ONE COUNTRY is allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction (USA included) and I'm glad there is some sort of watchdog out there. If you all want to blame Bush for being the bad guy then so be it. However, when Hussein decides to use those "nonexistent" weapons and half the human race is wiped out, then it will be the USA's fault for not doing something sooner.

Where are you getting this fantastic ukase against wmds? All the western nations seem to have them...

Do you have any idea the immensity of the task to wipe out "half the human race" And it isn't just the lethal element - the delivery systems required would cripple a congressional budget... Iraq has neither, by all evidence and by most accounts.

Do you have ANY EVIDENCE that Iraq, after devastating bombing campagins and debilitating sanctions, had wmds that could threaten half the human race? Or are you fear mongering like your fearless leader?

I mean think about it logically- if Hussein had nothing to hide and no weapons of mass destruction, then why did it take 14 tries for the UN weapons inspectors to be let in? It's like the drunk guy who won't take the breathilizer or the guy with drugs in his car who refuses to let the cops search it. IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE THEN WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL?!

Bringing logic into your argument is quite disingenious but nevertheless your statement is similar to the one used to support the Patriot Act. "If you have nothing to hide..." It opens up a huge can of worms, but it is such an accessible argument. Sure Iraq probably had WMDs - they definitely did at one time, as the US (among others) supplied the components. That these WMDs were ever a threat to any of the flagwaving ninnies in America ridiculous, except of course to those same ninnies, who will swallow any fiction that covers America's ugly march to its hegemonic destiny.

Nothing unusual here, for those who know their history.

Elizabeth

01-06-2004, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by ultraslacker
... the flagwaving ninnies in America ...
Flagwaving ninnies? That's a new one... I like it! :D Maybe they could add that to the Pledge of Allegiance - "...with liberty and justice for all (flagwaving ninnies, that is)"...

-Elizabeth

Bunkermaster

01-06-2004, 10:09 PM

there we go again

/me prepares his slappage alien artifact

piersk

01-07-2004, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by Bunkermaster
/me prepares his slappage alien artifact

*shudder*

Worms. Can. Opening of...

stolzyboy

01-08-2004, 04:46 PM

ughh a year later...

Does noone realize that the WMD thing was merely a way for us to get to war... We didn't only want him cuz of the WMD's, but come on, he has been killing HIS own people for years now...

Is that right? NO!

And as soon as people figure that out, we'll be done with this flaming the US crap!!

It's getting really old.

piersk

01-08-2004, 04:51 PM

/me applaudes stolzy

This is an international board for international people. You can't slag people off for what their leaders do.

Play nicely everyone.

ultraslacker

01-09-2004, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by stolzyboy
ughh a year later...

Does noone realize that the WMD thing was merely a way for us to get to war... We didn't only want him cuz of the WMD's, but come on, he has been killing HIS own people for years now...

Is that right? NO!

And as soon as people figure that out, we'll be done with this flaming the US crap!!

It's getting really old.

Okay, let's take the hodgepodge of excuses one by one. It's democracy, it's freedom, it's the war on terror, it's humanitarian concerns...

First, democracy. Will this be the one...the one time the US invades a nation and leaves it as a representative democracy? The usual pattern is that the US instigates a coup against a democratically elected ruler.

The war on terror. Saddam did support terrorists, but there has been no evidence that he supported the terrorists responsible for 9/11.

Humanitarian concerns. Yes, the good old standby, the trump card for the heartstrings of the nation. Look at the history of Iraq - Saddam was supported by the US during his worst atrocities. If you did not know that and cannot be bothered by looking back some years (yes, I know this is sooo last year and sooo boring), I will provide the links. Saddam's rule was awful, but that has not stopped the US from supporting his rule, as well as other equally or more horrific regimes.

piersk :

There have been no ad hominems in my posts.

stolzyboy

01-09-2004, 03:35 PM

Has the US made mistakes? Yes
Will the US make more mistakes? Yes
Do other countries make mistakes? Yes
Will other countries make more mistakes? Yes

We all have to learn from our mistakes and try and correct them any way we can.

It just pisses me off, that everything the US does is considered wrong, or that everything the US does has some alterior motive.

I suppose the millions of dollars that the US is giving to Iran after the earthquake is something bad.

Do you realize how much money the US gives other countries every year? Probably more than any other country has or ever will give to another country. We haven't been in talks with Iran since 1979, now we're helping them monetarily after this tragedy.

Wow, the US is a horrible country!!!

Elizabeth

01-09-2004, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by ultraslacker
Look at the history of Iraq - Saddam was supported by the US during his worst atrocities. If you did not know that and cannot be bothered by looking back some years (yes, I know this is sooo last year and sooo boring), I will provide the links. Saddam's rule was awful, but that has not stopped the US from supporting his rule, as well as other equally or more horrific regimes.
For the record, I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the US had in the past provided support to Saddam (as have numerous other countries by the way) but isn't that all the more reason to get involved and stop him? We do things right and we do things wrong in this country, but overall I think we as a nation have a strong conscience and concern for humanity in general- not unlike many other nations. We are just perhaps more willing to act, and that brings us under fire a lot more often.

And nobody seems to be complaining (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0117894E-837C-4030-87D5-763315752F13.htm) that we captured Saddam.

Remember that hindsight is 20/20 (just read the report here (http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,8356508%255E1702,00.html)) but you do the best you can with what you have, when you have it. And I'm glad to call this country home, where you can say whatever you want - something the Iraqi people can now do.

ultraslacker

01-09-2004, 03:53 PM

Let's stick to the issue at hand, which is US actions towards Iraq (I believe). Are you not willing to respond to my argument, or are you intentionally misrepresenting what I said? I sense a straw dog here...

On the off-topic subject of foreign aid - I have seen very little to indicate a success story of foreign aid, especially considering that a considerable chunk of this aid is in the form of military aid. Israel and Turkey come to mind. The benefits of foreign aid to the oppressed people is debateable - this issue is an involved one and will only muddy these waters...

ultraslacker

01-09-2004, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by Elizabeth
For the record, I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the US had in the past provided support to Saddam (as have numerous other countries by the way) but isn't that all the more reason to get involved and stop him? We do things right and we do things wrong in this country, but overall I think we as a nation have a strong conscience and concern for humanity in general- not unlike many other nations. We are just perhaps more willing to act, and that brings us under fire a lot more often.

If humanitarian concerns were the motivating factor, then why did the US support Saddam? Why did it oppose his popular overthrow? I would agree that Saddam not being in power is a good thing, but I am skeptical about the reasons given for US intervention and about the current intentions. If the welfare of the Iraqi people were ever the concern, why did the US follow up its initial bombing campaign with debilitating sanctions,

And nobody seems to be complaining that we captured Saddam.
...
And I'm glad to call this country home, where you can say whatever you want - something the Iraqi people can now do.

Did you know that al'jazeerah offices were attacked in both Afghanistan and Iraq? These were not military targets, but important avenues for the US to control the flow of information.

From Reuters http://www.reuters.com/news.jhtml?type=world

U.S. Troops Disperse Pro-Saddam Protest in Tikrit
Mon December 15, 2003 04:45 AM ET

TIKRIT, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. soldiers Monday used batons to break up a demonstration in Tikrit to protest against the capture of Saddam Hussein near his hometown, witnesses said.
Chanting "We sacrifice our blood and souls for you Saddam," scores of people gathered outside Tikrit university to denounce Saturday's arrest of Saddam, who was born and captured near the town.

"God is Greatest, America is the enemy of all peoples," they shouted with their fists raised.

Shortly afterwards U.S. soldiers charged the protest, beating and arresting some protesters, the witnesses said.

I am not skeptical about the goodwill of the american people, I just believe that they have been misled by their leaders.

stolzyboy

01-11-2004, 02:12 AM

Skeptical about the US intentions?

Do you really think we want to occupy Iraq?

Don't you think we could find some more appealing countries to take over?

Aside from oil, Iraq has nothing to give to the US.

And, there is plenty of oil available from other countries as well as our own.

ultraslacker

01-11-2004, 01:01 PM

Don't you think we could find some more appealing countries to take over?

I do not think you could have. Oil reserves, a weak military, a known boogeyman...sounds perfect.

Aside from oil, Iraq has nothing to give to the US.

And, there is plenty of oil available from other countries as well as our own

The US does not need Iraq's oil, of course, but to dismiss it and to think oil was not a reason to invade, that controlling the oil is not in the strategic interest of the US, can hardly be anything other than naive. Other countries do need that oil more than the US, and these countries could become a threat in the first half of this century. US foreign policy is not about meeting threats, it is about preventing a possible rival from becoming a threat. That's political science 101, really.

Invading Iraq was also the example case for which there has been so much clamoring from the hardliners (Frum, Perle..) This new direction is well outlined in the US National Strategy Report.

You would think that in a nation of free speech this great freedom (no sarcasm) would be used to keep people more informed, but from the opinions on this thread I see that most of you just can't be bothered. Of course, saying WMDs, liberation, or oust Saddam is much sexier than, say, the Plan for a New American Century...

It sickens me. I am not slagging Americans - so that there is no confusion, I am an American - but I am slagging an attitude of indifference.

You can support the invasion, it's a free country after all, but at least give reasons that are supported by evidence...

Elizabeth

01-11-2004, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by ultraslacker
...most of you just can't be bothered. Of course, saying WMDs, liberation, or oust Saddam is much sexier than, say, the Plan for a New American Century...

It sickens me. I am not slagging Americans - so that there is no confusion, I am an American - but I am slagging an attitude of indifference.
It's not that we don't want to be bothered. It's that no one person has the entire story- not you, not me, not anyone. There are always 2 sides to every story. I have said this before, and I'll say it again. Ask 2 people to describe the situation and they will most likely have differing opinions on what happened. In a controversial arrest, people with a strong dislike for authority or the police in general will call "police brutality" but others will say the officers' actions were justified in the name of societal well-being. THINGS ARE NEVER BLACK AND WHITE. And as each of us has his/her own opinion, and no one is very likely to change... I think I'm done with this thread.

ultraslacker

01-12-2004, 03:02 AM

Although we aren't arguing subjectivity here, there are often MANY sides to a story, but whether there are 2 or 20 doesn't lessen the burden of evidence and the adherence to law, or the need thereof. Last time I checked, international law had clear mandates for the voicing of grievances, and the resolution of such should have been left to some other means than invasion. Perhaps a panel...a team of investigators...that could have looked at things objectively.

For those interested, an article in Der Spiegel (http://smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/07/1046826528748.html) about a letter sent to Clinton urging the overthrow of Saddam. The letter's contents read like a blueprint for the war, except the reasons are different -
"We believe that the US has the right under existing Security Council resolutions to take the necessary steps, including war, to secure our vital interests in the Gulf. In no circumstances should America's politics be crippled by the misguided insistence of the Security Council on unanimity." The letter was signed by Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Armitage, and Perle, among others.

stolzyboy

01-12-2004, 10:39 AM

and you are mistakenly taking "vital interests in the Gulf" as that we need or want something from them...

i believe all we are trying to do is try and instill order in that area of the world cuz if we wouldn't TRY and do something, nothing would get resolved.

And the "Perhaps a panel...a team of investigators". Like there is EVER going to be a panel that is objective!

There are always going to be disagreements when talking about war, no matter if it is 100% right or 100% wrong (which it never will be).

There will always be someone who opposes it. Look in Iraq, look at all the people praising the US for us overthrowing Saddam, and then look to the next street where they are killing our soldiers because they are "loyal (read brainwashed)" supporters.

tekky

01-16-2004, 03:11 PM

I'm just gonna jump in and comment on some old things said regarding NBC weapons.

US and many countries have Nuclear weapons, they are NOT outlawed as was previously stated.

You can read up on those at http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/npt1.html

After Hiroshima, treaties were made to DISARM to a certain extent, and stop acquisition and such of Nuclear weapons. NOT to ban them and punish those who have them, but to PREVENT the likeliness of a country or all countries panicking and striking with Nuclear weapons out of fear.

What is OUTLAWED, is Chemical and Biological weapons... why? because some of these agents/chemicals are capable of killing every person in an extremely large area *IF* disseminated correctly. SCUDS were equiped and capable of launching low yield explosive warheads designed to vaporize (defined as turn into small droplets -- not incinerated) and spread Chem/Bio agents over large areas. AND Saddam HAS used them in the past, on others and his OWN people. THOSE are the illegal weapons.... not the nukes.

For reference on the Chem/Bio agreements that were made between countries around the world....
note: this list does include Iraq and Afgan (since they seem to be the 2 countries this most pretains to))

http://www.state.gov/t/ac/trt/4718.htm

Anyways, just adding some factual references to this debocal of arguments

Manga27

01-17-2004, 04:28 AM

Originally posted by Shadeless
Bunkermaster i agree with you, but bombing the country is not the solution.

Join the military, go through S&R and defense weaponry training, become a general and then tell us what the practical solution is.

We're not bombing "the country". We are taking out military offensive and defensive targets - the same people who shoot their own countrymen.

Get an real-world education instead of watching the war on MSN or the local news snippets before you make a comment like that from your computer screen. It's easy to say "don't bomb", until you realize that the casualty rate is 500% higher to civilian and military personnel ON BOTH SIDES when deploying ground forces.

dave420

01-26-2004, 10:30 AM

I'd call using attack helicopters to blow up houses "bombing the country". As soon as the US showed it didn't mind blowing huge chunks out of housing estates, its claim of "we're only blowing up the bad guys" flew out the window.

The US has absolutely no tact, whether it be in diplomacy or military action. The US seems to forget about the rights it so vehemently defends for its own people, when it comes to people from other countries.

Welcome to the true American dream - absolute, all-encompassing hypocrisy.

It's easy enough for the US to say its weapons are legal, as it sits on the UN security council. Iraq, on the other hand, didn't. It had no veto to use when people were deciding what is illegal and what isn't. The US did. The US has vetoed more resolutions than any other country in the world. The US only cares about the US, and not anyone else. It's the nationalised epitome of childish behaviour. "Waaah! America wants its bottle! In Pyong-Yang!"

Anyone defending the US government has been brainwashed by their aggressive, state-wide propaganda campaign. Don't think it exists? When was the last time you saw someone criticising Bush on CNN or Fox? Or in the newspaper? Or on the radio (bar NPR, thank god!).

The American psyche is indoctrinated to have 100% support for all things American. The Pledge of Allegiance, 4th of July, ticker-tape parades, etc. The US government is using that to strengthen their position. As the US presidency is seen by many Americans to be the personification of the US leadership, they feel hard-pushed to question what it is or what it's doing. The Gov't knows this. They scream "USA! USA!" when doing something bad, and everyone instantly assumes it's the best thing since sliced bread. Anyone who casts doubt as to its moral or ethical integrity is branded Anti-American and a traitor/marxist/commie/pinko/lefty/terrorist.

It's easy to see from outside the US, but talk to any right-wing (or even politically-unenlightened) people, and you'll see exactly what I mean.

stolzyboy

01-26-2004, 11:01 AM

So, what you are saying is that we should NOT have been involved in WWI or WWII, any conflict here and in between, and you think the world would be a better place.

You people always think this of the US until something bad happens to wherever you live and the US has to come bail you out!!

Wow...isn't that a remarkable thought, the US bails people out when THEY are in trouble...I guess the US should just NOT do anything anymore and watch leaders like So'damn Insane wipe out his people left and right. Have you forgotten that he killed thousands and thousands and thousands of his own people to SWAY, if you want to call it that, their thoughts on his leadership in Iraq... Hmmm, you never think about that do ya!!

Merve

01-26-2004, 02:15 PM

dave420's post summarizes the sentiments of most Canadians...not to say that I agree with him, or with stolzyboy, or with anyone for that matter...but this is a very political topic :)

ahundiak

01-26-2004, 06:50 PM

From dave420
When was the last time you saw someone criticising Bush on CNN or Fox?

From Merve
dave420's post summarizes the sentiments of most Canadians.

Now I am truly puzzled. I watch (and read) CNN/FOXNEWS on a routine basis. Much of the news reported is openly critical of Bush. I can understand that non-english speaking people might have trouble due to translation and culture issues.

But Canada? Merve, could you please post some links that show that "most" Canadians don't understand CNN/FOXNEWS?

tekky

01-26-2004, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by stolzyboy
.....You people always think this of the US until something bad happens to wherever you live and the US has to come bail you out!!
[note: this is in reply to dave420 -- just quoting stolzy since he made valid points]

Wow...isn't that a remarkable thought, the US bails people out when THEY are in trouble.....

yup yup, and how much of the US debt is from forgiven DEBTS from countries who were BAILED out by the US when they needed help... Such as the TANKS and WEAPONS we provided OTHER countries during WWI and WWII -- yes... not ONE of those countries paid us back. ALL debts were forgiven in order to EASE the transition on those countries back into PEACE time from WAR time.

The US has practically (not saying completely) funded most wars since WWI in the right that they have forgiven those debts... we that alone should be enough proof that the US is not after OIL or GOLD or whatever other BS reasons you want to throw out there for us helping IRAQ.

Speak the truth, not slander... You don't see threads about France or Russia that trash their standings on the situation... They blatantly challenged the US's reasons for the war... are they being beat down, or repressed? OMG! No they arent... now that they are trying to get in on the economy in Iraq, they are being told to f-off since they chose not to participate in the WHOLE effort of removing Saddam so that its people can live w/o the fear of Saddam and his family. Is the US planning to raid them and destroy them? No... but hell we may as well by your standards! We repress and brainwash everyone else! Even our own people!

USA! USA! USA! USA!
(sorry got caught up in a subliminal message from some Radio commercial.... :rolleyes: )

ultraslacker

01-27-2004, 12:32 AM

You people always think this of the US until something bad happens to wherever you live and the US has to come bail you out!!

Oh absolutely. The US benevolence is keeping the world from descending into chaos. Where would central america be if it weren't for the US?

Stop the straw dog arguments. Not only is it chauvinistic, cis-racist, it is not applicable to Iraq, in fact with regards to Iraq it is disingenuos, perhaps unintenionally. In the case of Saddam's reign, the US supported a tyrant, encouraged his worst atrocities, and opposed his overthrow until it was politically and strategically expedient to oust him.

The US has practically (not saying completely) funded most wars since WWI in the right that they have forgiven those debts... we that alone should be enough proof that the US is not after OIL or GOLD or whatever other BS reasons you want to throw out there for us helping IRAQ.

That you are so flippant about arm sales indicates that you are ignorant or heedless of the issues. Debts that are forgiven are forgiven by the US govt, not the arms suppliers. Who do you think is getting paid, and who do you think is doing the paying? In addition, why do you think that the US is so free with military aid, how is that in the interest of the US gov't? Come on, is critical thinking dead in the US? I will connect the dots for you, if you like.

Hey kids, can you name the areas in the mideast that the US has established a military base in the last two years? And can you find a time comparable with this expansion?

Look, the US is a global power. Think in terms of power structures and don't color the picture with touchy-feely anthropomorphic tones. To think that the US went into Iraq because of humanitarian concerns for the Iraqi people (or the American people) is to be completely ignorant of US foreign policy...which I am sure some of you may be. If I mention Suharto or Pol Pot, you might not be able to explain the US involvements. Even throwing WWII out there is a complete hoax. In WWII, there was a clear aggressor...although I could muddy the waters here with US foreign policy before the war...but none of you want to hear that...

Do you know how important the middle east will be in this century? It is all classic empire stuff...what baffles me is how some of you can dress up expansionism like it is the friggin' red cross.

stolzyboy

01-27-2004, 10:23 AM

We did support Saddam, YES!! But we didn't know he was going to turn into an murdering Hitler like ruler and kill his own people to get them to agree with his way of thinking.

Wouldn't you follow a regime if they said, follow me or die, most would follow the regime, whether or not it was right, and that is exactly what Saddam did, and it obviously worked on you as well.

I hope next time that a country is under fire, in trouble, whatever that the US doesn't lift a finger and let them squander away and wonder, "When is the US gonna send us buttloads of money and relief to help us?"

That may not be how it was with Iraq, but Saddam needed to be taken down as ruler, or he would still be today killing his own people. Yes the US has killed some innocent people in this war, but ya know what, collateral damage happens in war, that's why it is called WAR, it isn't nice or pretty, accidents happen... Furthermore, we have killed many, many, many less people by accident in Iraq, than Iraq's own "leader" did, ON PURPOSE!!

Maybe we should let Saddam run the US for awhile and see how you US haters like it!!!

Merve

01-27-2004, 10:26 AM

You should've heard the sneers up here after Bush's state of the union address.
However, he also got some very good reviews up here.
Contradictory? Probably....
(Far be it from me to voice my opinion on this issue...)

ultraslacker

01-27-2004, 12:10 PM

We did support Saddam, YES!! But we didn't know he was going to turn into an murdering Hitler like ruler and kill his own people to get them to agree with his way of thinking.

No, no, it's about WMD's, not liberating the Iraqi people. Unless you buy into the revisionism and are unable to recall the doomsday speeches proceeding the war warning of imminent destruction unless the US moved NOW.

If it is about the Iraqi people then there is this problem called history. Look at the history of Iraq and the atrocities of Hussein. (FYI...BBC article adumbrating Saddam history (http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/walden/sad_about5.shtml)) The thousands he and his party killed in coming to power (with US help, even providing the hit list), the brutal repression of dissidents, the use of chemical weapons to quell uprisings... All awful, but these occurred before 1990. In fact the use of chemical weapons occured in 1987 during the war with Iran, according the the US State Department. There was outrage, but it was largely a smokescreen.

Washington Post Article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true)
"The U.S.-Iraqi relationship is . . . important to our long-term political and economic objectives," Assistant Secretary of State Richard W. Murphy wrote in a September 1988 memorandum that addressed the chemical weapons question. "We believe that economic sanctions will be useless or counterproductive to influence the Iraqis."

Do you actually believe that Saddam is unique in the region? Just wait for the next iron fisted dictatorship that the US has installed. What if Saddam were no more horrific than any other leader, any other administation?

If you are so concerned about Saddam's atrocities, which largely involved the Kurds, then why on earth have you not mentioned Turkey and its horrific campaign? Either you are unaware, as there has been no media campaign demonizing Erdogan, or you cannot mesh US support for Turkey with the newfound humanitarian mission of US foreign policy.

stolzyboy

01-27-2004, 12:45 PM

You are getting this all wrong! You seem to hate your own country and what it stands for! My God, move to another country and see how you like it there...

We may do dumb things at times, but that is how democracy works, we instill people with power to do what they feel best for the people.

They are never going to get it right all the time, and of course, a country is going to look out for itself, no matter what the confrontation, etc... at hand...

Do you think that any other country goes, "Hmmm... we should help these other people and let everyone else do horrible things to our country." No, everyone looks out for themselves, first and foremost.

We could go on all day and all night for days and days disputing the validity of the Iraqi war, and neither will sway either's mind. That's jus the way it is...

I'll even digress, The USA is a horrible country and should be toppled and ran by tyrants and we should help NOONE ever again...

That would help out the worlds economy, wouldn't it!!

I'm done with this, all it does is make me want to throw my monitor at the wall, cuz it is so disgusting that people of America can't follow their ELECTED leadership, no matter their decision...

If you want to make the calls, run for office and see how EASY it is...my God, it's not just a yes/no decision, there are hundreds of factors that accompany a decision of this caliber.

I'm done with this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ultraslacker

01-27-2004, 01:32 PM

I see a pattern here with people leaving this thread... You cannot have democracy without debate, but then you cannot have a debate without informed participants. I have yet to hear an informed argument here from the pro-war side.

Do you think that any other country goes, "Hmmm... we should help these other people and let everyone else do horrible things to our country." No, everyone looks out for themselves, first and foremost.

Almost an epiphany! If the US intervenes in a country, then it is in its interests to do so! Just like any other country.

I'll even digress, The USA is a horrible country and should be toppled and ran by tyrants and we should help NOONE ever again...

Let's not get emotional, although that may be the knee jerk reaction, especially when foreign policy decisions are framed in feel good phrases. I am not attacking the US, I am attacking the imbecility and ignorance of those people who swallow the humanitarian swill dished out by the demagogues, together with the arrogance that the world is heading for hell in a handbasket unless the US steps up.

If you want to make the calls, run for office and see how EASY it is...my God, it's not just a yes/no decision, there are hundreds of factors that accompany a decision of this caliber.

I find that excuse fascinating, as it invariably covers up a real blackeye to this supposed humanitarian slant of US foreign policy. Convenient, reprehensible, and intellectually bankrupt. If as you claim the US is not infallible, in fact it routinely screws up around the world, then maybe it should stop engaging in pre-emptive war?

No one here has responded to my arguments, except to attack straw dogs or launch emotional invectives. Did I say I hate the US? No. Did I say that foreign policy decisions were easy? No. Did I say that the US Foreign Policy had more to do with imperialism than humanism? Yes.

Why oh why can you not see the contradictions here? When has the US intervened for the proclaimed reason that it is in its economic interests to do so? Nope, it is always for some higher moral reason. God bless the USA and its benevolence.

that is how democracy works, we instill people with power

The US does not instill democracy abroad but rather has an impressive track record of overthrowing democratically elected regimes. In fact it recently attempted such a coup in Venezuela.

*edit: removed slander *