|
Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
03-04-04, 09:08 PM | #21 | |
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
|
Quote:
Yassim, Abu Nidal, palestinian Suicide money...i can go on and on, do you understand the meaning of "I'm tired of swating at flies"? hmmm...lets count the number of reasons why we went to war according to our resident moonbats: War for OiL War because "he tried to kill my daddy" War for Jews War for religion War for Empire i guess if you change it around enough eventually you'll hit on the right reason (hint; it has to do with protecting America) |
|
03-04-04, 10:03 PM | #22 | |||||
Just Looking Around
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Right here!!!
Posts: 341
|
Quote:
But your not sure if they will be better off? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Clearly you take things way too personal around here. Quote:
__________________
"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." - Thomas Jefferson |
|||||
04-04-04, 12:51 PM | #23 | |||||
Keebeck Canuck
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Close to a border of LUNATICS
Posts: 1,771
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Politics and religions tends to bring out the ugly part of us Quote:
Quote:
So far, i've been labeled A Fashist A Jhiad Lover A Communist A nut Case A lover of Yassin An anti-semite and the list grows long But i'm still here |
|||||
04-04-04, 01:44 PM | #24 |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,020
|
no offense taken aweshucks.
- js. |
04-04-04, 01:49 PM | #25 | ||||||
Just Looking Around
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Right here!!!
Posts: 341
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Actually Russia is still broke they can't buy squat. China is the one who will become the superpower over the next decade. No thanks to Bill Clinton for signing NAFTA. However shutting the US off of oil would most likely spell economic hell to any Arab nation. Quote:
Quite franctly I'd blame the CIA and Director Tenet who quite honestly should not have a job. Makes complete sense to me
__________________
"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." - Thomas Jefferson |
||||||
04-04-04, 03:47 PM | #26 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,699
|
We buy oil from Arabs????
Might wanna read this http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_oil_exp_net http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_oil_imp_net
__________________
ALLAH AKBAR on this Last edited by Pacewon : 04-04-04 at 03:58 PM. |
04-04-04, 04:46 PM | #27 | ||||||
Keebeck Canuck
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Close to a border of LUNATICS
Posts: 1,771
|
I do like to argue with you on politics AweShucks Even though i'm no democrat. Couldn't be since I don't live in your country.
Yes, unfortunately, the Kurds do live in iraq but i serouisly doubt that the Kurds called themselves Iraqies if givin the choice. I've seen shitload of doc about saddam regime and the one who marked me the most is "Uncle Saddam" Played on 'The Passionnate eye' aired on CBC Newsworld every night. Basically it showed Saddam as a sick person with the illness wanting to beat the US ass at any price. Also saw about chimical Ali, the one who is truly behind the kurds chimical murder. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Needless to say I was shocked and shook to my bones when I saw the first tower collapse, ditto for the second one. I also remember that Bush was no where to be found on this sad day when He truly heard the music. Also remember a certain mayor covered in white dust after the 2 tower fell. Where were Bush Jr at that time? He was being a chicken shit scared out of his mind for not listening the warning issued to him for a whole year. Even if saddam had plans for the a bomb, it was still hearsay (proofs please) Clinton adm were more scared of al-q than Saddam. Guess they were right on this... Strange enough that the tower weren't hit sooner under clinton 8 years. Just saying. Quote:
About Clinton and Nafta, The only thing he did was to bring the mexican into the deal. Before that it was only the US and Canada. I don't see how you can blame Clinton on this unless you have something against the mexican ppl (truly hope not). Now, to quote you on this again Quote:
Quote:
AweShucks, i've met other rep on this board that made more sense than supporting the Bush adm. Also remember on how Mc Cain was snuffed out by the Bush publicity during the choosing of the next rep representative for the white house. I have nothing against the reps, only have something against the Bush adm and how he got into power (Florida Ballots scam) Over here, we might be a primitive country by counting by hands the vote, but atleast, we are truly sure as to who won the election, there is no bad dimple of half punch ballot issue. We do not rely on computers or informatised way to count the votes of our citizen. Just to say that it should remain a local issue, why did the US/UK needed to drag along shithoad of other countries into this war? Was the US lacking money to wage war into iraq? Was it the infamous quote from Bush JR that if a country is not with us (our ideaology) is against us? With all the weapon you have, such a statement could be considered as a treath to other countries The US are not the cops or police state of the whole world The US has no right to meddle into the world affairs since if the whole world does not go with their point of view, they are against them. What a fucked up conspiracy theory and what a load of egotistic crap. Wonder what will happen when you run out of drikable water, will the US invade us next for our natural ressources |
||||||
04-04-04, 04:52 PM | #28 | |
Keebeck Canuck
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Close to a border of LUNATICS
Posts: 1,771
|
Quote:
Why not show us where Canada buys it's oil instead of showing me a map on who produce the Black Oil |
|
05-04-04, 07:00 AM | #29 | ||||||||||||
Just Looking Around
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Right here!!!
Posts: 341
|
Quote:
But seeing as how you brought up how Saddam gained power........How about the systematic killing of any and all political rivals after he took power to ensure his reign? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There is a specific protocal the secret service follows. The less the public knows of the where abouts and travel plans of the President the better. As I recall the Bush demanded to be taken back to the white house and not hide depite the Secret Service suggesting otherwise. Don't think Air Force One doesn't have a phone on it! Quote:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/ http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/.../clinton.iraq/ http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/demsonwmds.php If you want to read more about Clintons stance views and action on Iraq do a google search string with this " clinton iraq threat" Franctly I wish the democrats would read more of it. Sounds very familiar Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nobody likes what happened in Florida don't think that the ballot issue is new. It's just that the count was so close they finally had to deal with it. Quote:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/28/clinton.speech/ Quote:
Consider all the countries that ask for our help or we give help to. Too many to list.........How many Billions of foriegn aid has the U.S. sent out and never recieved repayment or even asked for repayment. Often times this gets confused as meddling. Quote:
__________________
"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." - Thomas Jefferson |
||||||||||||
05-04-04, 07:00 AM | #30 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,699
|
I meant Russia. You said "what if arab nations begin start selling all of their oil to Russia"; which could never be the case, since Russia is the second largest exporter of oil; and doesn't import any
__________________
ALLAH AKBAR on this |
05-04-04, 07:29 AM | #31 |
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
|
Here's some questions for Miss Silver and any other anti-war nutjob:
1. Do you believe that a confrontation with Saddam Hussein’s regime was inevitable or not? 2. Do you believe that a confrontation with an Uday/Qusay regime would have been better? 3. Do you know that Saddam’s envoys were trying to buy a weapons production line off the shelf from North Korea (vide the Kay report) as late as last March? 4. Why do you think Saddam offered "succor" (Mr. Clarke’s word) to the man most wanted in the 1993 bombings in New York? 5. Would you have been in favor of lifting the "no fly zones" over northern and southern Iraq; a 10-year prolongation of the original "Gulf War"? 6. Were you content to have Kurdish and Shiite resistance fighters do all the fighting for us? 7. Do you think that the timing of a confrontation should have been left, as it was in the past, for Baghdad to choose? Here's another. Say you live down the street from a slightly deranged man that has threatened you and threatened all your neighbors and that you believe has a large cache of weapons to use against you and any of those neighbors at the time of his choosing, now say you call the cops about his threats, they beat down his door...they don't find any weapons but they do find out that he had killed his entire family and buried them in a large mass grave in his basement, now would you consider it a good thing that he was stopped? Last edited by span : 05-04-04 at 08:11 AM. |
05-04-04, 07:57 AM | #32 | |
annoying
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 553
|
Quote:
__________________
gettin' crazy with the cheese whiz |
|
05-04-04, 09:47 AM | #33 | |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,020
|
Quote:
that's some long street isn't it. would it be ok if it killed a thousand cops? ten thousand? would it be ok if thugs killed members of your own family - and were planning to kill all the rest - but the cops couldn’t respond because your idiot mayor sent them halfway around the world to get killed where they weren't wanted mediating some 5000 year old dysfunctional neighborhood dispute, and drum up some business for his family friends? you don't have to quit making sense - you haven't started yet. - js. |
|
05-04-04, 02:38 PM | #34 | ||
Formal Ball Proof
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,948
|
Quote:
But, one of the many sloppy holes in the analogy is that Hussein "killed his entire family". He didn't. The cops beat down the door saying they were going to put an end to this "slightly deranged man's" power and stop him from killing and subjugating the rest of his family, ostensibly. Great. Standing at the door before they beat it down, the cops gave loud and clear lip-service about freeing the surviving family members and giving control of the house respectfully over to them, so they could lead a "normal, wholesome, democratic family life" with the big head asshole safely in jail. So why are the cops still in the house killing members of the family and why are the survivors killing the cops? How many cops are going to disappear into that house, never to come out again? Why are the cops still in the house telling the families which newspapers to read? Do the cops think that the surviving members of the family didn't hear the cops promising to free them to run their house the way they wanted? And what will the cops do if the newly elected head of the house isn't any less threatening to the neighborhood? Clearly the situation is much more complex than that handful of cops said it would be, more complex than you seem to be able to grasp. Clearly this incessant, nauseating appeal that Hussein, the head of the house was "the neighborhood's whole problem" was far wide of the mark. Clearly the cops were talkiing out their asses in more ways than one before breaking that door down, in order to assure the neighborhood everything was under control, minimalizing the situation as cops so often do. "Don't worry folks, we'll have this fixed in a jiffy. No need to worry about any kind of escalation." It's as if in your fantasy/analogy, all Iraqis are in mass graves. That would wrap up your attempt at logic very neatly if it were true, but it obviously isn't. ... And since the rest of your post consisted of questions originally posed by Christopher Hitchens from Vanity Fair, and because my new policy is not to answer questions that are prefaced by calling people "nutjobs" because of their opinions, I'm going to spend as little of my time and original thought as you did and reply in kind by simply pasting some other people's opinions, collage style, from various sites on the web. Hope you find them at least as entertaining as being dismissed as a nutjob. Quote:
|
||
05-04-04, 03:34 PM | #35 |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,020
|
well gee. that was a way better answer than mine.
- js. |
05-04-04, 05:31 PM | #36 | ||||||
--------------------
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
|
Re: Tao Te Ching, chapter 36
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Know the reason I shouted out "That was Awesome" was because I wanted to say something just as if not more stupid then what knife wrote. Of course I don't think it was Awesome. A solider is a solider, doesn't matter what side they are on. But they do have a job to do and the Americans are doing it very well. Quote:
I don't need or want to see any killing on my TV or the net. I read CNN, I know how many men are being killed over there. That is bad enough, showing Americans being killed and dragged in the streets is not something people need to see. And it is Propaganda, face it.... Quote:
Paper Tiger comes to my mind...... but I will have to come back.....your post is long, good, but long.....I gots no Time, Quote:
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend |
||||||
06-04-04, 01:28 PM | #37 |
Pronunciation: 'hau-lE
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 502
|
Had I known that we would engage half-heartedly in a war where we allowed our forces to become sitting ducks for the enemy, I would have been against going in, too. It's time to get down to business over there and quit pussyfooting around with the Iraqis. Change is going to happen there, whether they fucking like it or not. I can only hope our military coordinators take off the pink panties.
|
06-04-04, 05:54 PM | #38 |
flippin 'em off
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the real world
Posts: 3,232
|
Yeah. If they're going to use mosques as forts, the military should be allowed to blow them up like forts.
And if a mullah is killing his rivals and Iraqi police, the military should be allowed to arrest or kill him instead of worrying about public opinion. The politicians are once again snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by putting their political games ahead of soldiers lives. When the fighting is over then they can do their government building and economic development. But the military should be allow to finish its job first. |
09-04-04, 07:17 PM | #39 | ||||
Formal Ball Proof
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,948
|
Quote:
I consider myself a decent person, and you seem to be as well, and we don't run away. True, at times I do consider it more or less like a trip to a bargain basement 'natural dentistry' clinic which doubles as a kennel for emotionally challenged pit bulls, and I usually feel the graffiti I leave on these walls would proabably be just as well mailed to the North Pole with no return address, but I don't participate to try to persuade anyone of anything, even though the appearance of my participation may seem entirely contrary to that statement. I just do it to clarify my own conscience. Quote:
enantiodromia The data exists, so in a sense every usage of it, right down to talking about it on the internet, can become a tool for propagating and distorting other ideas. But we do all credit these 'terrorists' with creating these events to 'send a message.' They hung bits of these dudes from a bridge, which harkens back to the prechristian Roman practice of crucifixion--significant here because it was the equivalent of nailing up errant slaves to walls, trees or bridges or whatever was handy with a sign stating their crimes, using bodies as billboards for deterrence. Such bodies advertised facts, not spun hypotheticals. Four dead slaves caught stealing hung in the square meant that if you were a slave caught stealing, you was a dead motherfuckin slave. The tragic sign hung on these guys couldn't have been more aptly wrought than in the phrase "Fallujah is the graveyard of Americans." The message is don't come here. This isn't propaganda, it's just plain old classic terrorism, doing what terrorism does best: scare people. Fear focuses the mind on the options of fight or flight. enantiodromia Of course those who wanted to fight at the outset may want to fight all the more as a result of this and every spike of escalation, they may even feel this is all the more proof they were right to fight in the first place, and those who didn't want to fight may want to fight even less, but this does not mean that those who were opposed to it at the outset are somehow more susceptible to fear--advocating de-occupation is consistent with not advocating occupation in the first place. Both had intrinsic arguable validity at the outset, however at this point it really does us no good to deny the validity of both approaches because A: we are there now and B: our ultimate "leaving" is now and always has been inclusive to our stated intent. All we have to argue about is the timing and indicators of our leaving. For most, an election will not be an indicator. If this occurs at the projected date it will not be a magic talisman against Americans getting killed in Iraq, and let's not forget the guys in this story were contractors and the Japanese hostages are aid workers and a journalist, pointing up that the intended coalition presence extends beyond the military in both space and time, providing all too easy targets. No one can say with any sense of certainty how long Americans in Iraq might be targets, but I'll be willing to bet it will be right up to the moment the last soldier comes home and beyond. (And anyone currently reading this is probably naive to think such a time will ever come in their lifetime.) And we can't forget that Iraqis are also targets for other Iraqis and we've taken on the responsibilities in these conflicts as well, ideological, tribal conflicts. We can only 'alienate' the Shiites by 'favoring' the Sunnis and vice versa at every given decision and with every condensed radical sect vying for voice and every such voice having resonance in a broader spectrum of social fabric, the potential for us to irritate and deepen divisions is as great if not greater than the chance of our bringing about unity. How would you like to be an invading force occupying, say, America and have the job of trying to get the liberals and the conservatives to agree on anything? ...except perhaps that they were both equally pissed at you for occupying thier country and wanted you the hell out. It's incredibly ironic to label insurgents as "freedom hating" while we are occupying their country. And if the invading force took out your local Baptist preacher and Catholic priest it wouldn't be just the churchgoing flocks who would react, you'd find "Catholic and Baptist sympathizers" coming out of the woodwork. Imagine America itself occupied by a force it even knew for a fact was hopelessly overwhelming and ask yourself how many rural and suburban American civilians would fight to their last breath anyway, most of them in whatever dirty little way they could devise. But even this is a weak analogy compared the depth and profundity of Iraq's internal schisms, and the global ambiguity in its collective perception of us, and the Islamic celebration of the concept of martyrdom. But, Jack, the important distinction between 'religious leaders' in the Christian and Islamic worlds is that the former rarely advocate ad hoc violence in dealing with 'infidels.' There are exceptions to every rule, and yes it is disturbing and unhelpful that Bush is a self-proclaimed 'religious leader,' but to view this conflict as truly originating from a clash of religious ideation is just to fuel the fires of Jihad. Pray we never as a people earn or accept the use of that word, or even entertain the idea. Certainly the clash is cultural and disparate religious approaches are inherent to our respective behaviours and psyches, but even the anointed Bush knows an agenda of purging Islamic sympathies root and branch could never sustain support and would be doomed from the outset. Does he regret this? lol, the fact that this question exists is scary enough. But, 25,000 separate denominations of Christianity do peacefully coexist in our nation while as few as two or three subtle denominations of Islam existing in the same place are historically deadly more often than chance would dictate. Another fine moral line, but a line nonetheless. I actually find a sense of patriotism by clinging to the idea that this is not a religious war from my country's point of view, a sense that can still pertain even if the war is about oil or even pure ignorance. I'll take empire building or a fight against elusive ghosts of human evil being fought in the wrong place before a war over whose imaginary deity has bigger balls. We'd lose that one. Quote:
I guess it's because Americans are taught a version of history with themselves always at the center as the heroic protagonist, how we regale ourselves with oral traditions of repeatedly and neatly and almost single-handedly saving the world from Idols of Menace which predisposes us to think of war, when we're not in one, in the abstract as a sort of irrefutable panacea. If you look honestly at the broader history of war, it's a far filthier and more futile feeling it ultimately creates in all parties than the cut-and-dry adrenalized save-the-world propostion which usually motivates the well-intentioned advocate, and generations seem to need to learn this over and over again. This idea of "victory" is going to remain very problematic for Americans until we affirm beyond all doubt that it will not be up to us to define or claim this moment. If there is to be a victory in Iraq, it will not be a victory for America but for Iraq. This is inclusive in our mission statement. It's behooved Mr. Bush politically to appeal to our primal nationalistic instincts, to constantly mix the dual concepts of America's 'victory in the war on terror' with our heroism in the freeing of an alien people. But the unfortunate result is that even while the subsequent increased safety of Americans remains arguable at best, the logistics and the very definition of the freedom of this alien people seems even more unpredictable, even less definable and even, sometimes, less important. Quote:
It seems to me that it would be truer to say that if there is change in Iraq it will be because they fucking like it regardless of what we do or do not do--and most probably at this point in spite of it. I also can't believe you are citing the 'pussification' of the American military in the situation with 135,000 troops deployed, which even Rumsfeld himself has called "an unusually high level," and is far more than was expected or projected to be required to contain the situation. What, if anything, this could say other than that we committed the classic and dire mistake of underestimating the enemy, I can't imagine. I also can't imagine what color of ultramasculine tactical undergarments you would have us wear that would make less of our boys die or win more 'hearts and minds' of Iraqis. I'm not sure how much more butch you can get than tanks full of Marines. Perhaps we should just cut our losses and revert to the old classic "NUKE IRAQ" strategy? Your comment is antithetical to the essential core process of "supporting the troops" and disrespectful to the 'military coordinators' as well, because we are putting American lives into an unbelievably complex situation where they not only barely know who the enemy is, but the perception of it can change at any place at any moment. I'd repeat from my earlier post the comment by Dr. Ragan, "you can't just suddenly turn around and mow down a whole bunch of people because someone's lobbed a homemade explosive at you and then fade it off into the marketplace." We are confronting a living mesh of interconnected human reactions we can scarcely grasp, and it has drawn us fully into its own territory. I'd like to point out that if you don't think they're doing their jobs with enough gusto, they'd probably be more than happy to get you enlisted and on the front lines yourself. I had Fox News on in the background the other morning (for the strange comic relief factor) and I heard an interesting comment by a retired general whose name I didn't catch. He was talking about the video of the bloody Marines climbing out of the tank which they were looping endlessly, and he was saying, basically, "oh yeah this always happens when you get a group of new young Marines coming into the field, they always get in there headlong and get a bloody nose but things calm down." The grim subtext of this is that the boys we pour into the front lines barely know why they are there. We may know on principle and have a headful of tactical hypotheticals, but we do not know who we are fighting or what door they will be behind. Stay tuned for endless hostage situations, car bombs and insurgency flare-ups. Stay tuned for a continuous body count that will make the staunchest advocate vomit. It's been that way there for over two-thousand years and I doubt our presence there will significantly change it any time soon. And hello albed, I got all nostalgic seeing you here. You might be happy to know you are the author of a comment that had a profound effect on me, something I still think of from time to time and may never forget. |
||||
09-04-04, 07:43 PM | #40 | |
Thanks for being with arse
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
|
good post there..
but i have to pounce on this bit.. Quote:
that seems to sum up what is the main problem over there ..atm |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|