PDA

View Full Version : Anyone plan on protesting our inevitable war with Iraq?



EricRG
11-11-2002, 11:22 PM
I for one, will. I'm sick of "my" government (yeah, right) pushing around the rest of the world to get its way. We even push around the UN these days! All I can say, is that if the US attacks Iraq without provocation and without the "blessing" of the Security Council, there'll be hell to pay in multiple forms. For one, hide your children because terrorists will be working full time. Two, the entire Middle East, minus Israel, will be fuming at us. Three, here at home, I think sentiment for this war is very low...perhaps a "Vietnam era-like" atmosphere. I plan on taking part/organizing protests against any such sad attempt at oil-grabbing in the MidEast.

Beast
11-11-2002, 11:41 PM
Only protests from me, will be if they don't kill Saddam Hussain this time. Come on guys, we are getting another chance to take out "Sodamn Insane", lets get it right this time. Besides, not attacking Iraq isn't going to decrease the chance of Terrorist Attacks. Or shall we sit back and let him create his biological weapons and his nuclear arsonal, and then cry when it's to late to kill him to stop World War III. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

EricRG
11-11-2002, 11:45 PM
I can't believe that people think that way. I GUARANTEE you that top al Queda officials have their cells in a stand-by mode to take action as soon as the US attacks.

Go over with me again why he's "Sodamn Insane"?

LTBasker
11-11-2002, 11:47 PM
Yep, I'm gonna go protest against my country protecting me. Yeah that's right, I don't want free protection! Who needs it? It's not like theres much gun control, I'll just get my own arsenal.

Bah, protesting against it is dumb. Let's see... we don't stop Suddam he ain't gonna stop till he gets control of everything, we put a stop to him, well the only thing Bush can do is try to get re-elected. Big difference there, frankly I'd rather Saddam be taken out and monkey lips let everyone go back to what they were doing than Saddam nuking us and trying to take over the US.

That's just me though...

2-1B
11-11-2002, 11:48 PM
That's a typo, he meant so damn inane.

QLD
11-11-2002, 11:49 PM
Man, I thought that hippies were finally extinct.

Guess I was wrong.

2-1B
11-11-2002, 11:50 PM
That's a typo, he meant hippos.

Beast
11-11-2002, 11:50 PM
You gurantee me nothing, since you have no knowledge about what they have planned. Feel free to be a paranoid scared little rabbit if you want. But he's a bigger threat while he's breathing, then he will be when he has a slug thru his head. :)

Gee, why is he "Sodamn Insane". Well, lessee. He killed a ton of people, including members of his own family. He ordered the slaughter of of Kuwait citizens. Had the oil fields lit on fire. Shall I go on, or would you like a complete run down. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

QLD
11-11-2002, 11:53 PM
No, I meant hippies. You know, the people who don't work, shave, or bathe. Them. :eek:

EricRG
11-11-2002, 11:55 PM
I figured I might get such responses. Hippies? They sure got a lot of them in Europe...500,000 protested last weekend...and there's not even a war yet! Just because I'm not satisfied to sit and watch TV every night to get "the latest news" and believe it all to be the truth without doing anything about something I disagree with does NOT make me a "hippy". Or a hippo. :) HOW CAN WE ATTACK A NATION THAT HASN'T DONE ANYTHING TO US??? I don't get it. Free protection? Ever heard of taxes???

ps - For your information, I'm PhD Biology grad student...working 60-70+ hours per week, being paid enough to barely survive. If I don't shave, it's because I don't have time. Glad I'm working to do things like cure cancer for your types.

MTFBWY2

Beast
11-11-2002, 11:56 PM
As someone that doesn't work, shave, or bathe. I take insult from the that. I am not a hippy like ole EricRG is. If we would have listened to him, Hitler would still be alive and in power. What a wonderful world EricRG would leave for his children. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:00 AM
Hey, if you are working on cancer, how about giving some to those jackass guys.

Thanks!

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:01 AM
How can you compare Hitler to Hussein? The only similarity I see is their last names both begin with H! Obviously, Hitler had done things to warrant our reply. AGAIN, I ask you, WHAT HAS SADDAM DONE TO US???????

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:04 AM
Well, there was this time that Saddam analy raped my mother while pouring sugar in my gas tank.

That was pretty mean!

Beast
11-12-2002, 12:05 AM
Well, they both ordered the slaughter of innocent human beings. So maybe that is why I can compare the two evil heatless murdering cowards. Man, go flash your peace sign to the people that lost loved ones to that son of a *****. :mad: :(

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:07 AM
Did anybody innocent die in Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

2-1B
11-12-2002, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Well, they both ordered the slaughter of innocent human beings. So maybe that is why I can compare the two evil heatless murdering cowards. Man, go flash your peace sign to the people that lost loved ones to that son of a *****.



Heatless ? Are they cold ? :confused:

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:09 AM
Alllllll we are saaaaaaayyyiinggggg....is give peace a chaaaaaance......

*toke*

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:11 AM
All I'm saying is Think for yourself.

Beast
11-12-2002, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by EricRG
Did anybody innocent die in Hiroshima or Nagasaki?
The good of the many, out weighs the good of the few, or the one. It is true in any war, that innocents are going to die. All you can hope for, is to minimize the casualties with pre-emptive strikes. The bombings did end the war, unless you read differently in the big book of hippy bullcrap. Dude, you seriously have some screwed up morals. :rolleyes: :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Wolfwood319
11-12-2002, 12:13 AM
Saddam is pretty much on the top of the list of "Meglomaniacal dictators," and he does pose the biggest threat against the US now. And his sons are absolutely insane. No doubt, Saddam is the biggest baddie right now. But he's been in that position for the past decade, and we never did threaten war with Iraq before in this situation. Last time we got involved after Iraq invaded Kuwait and the US took it upon themselves to play world police again.

And Iraqs not the only country who's building a nuclear/biological weapons cache.

Hell, a few weeks ago we just found out that S. Korea (or N. Korea, I forget) had been building Nukes for years. There are at least a dozen countries out there that have nuclear arsenals, and we don't go threaten war with them.

Its just the same big, revolving chess game that's been going on since the cold war.

I love America, don't get me wrong. But what's happening now isn't anything special, its been going on for decades. Its just made public now by the government. And for many reasons too; boost the economy (best thing for an economy is war), restore faith in American public, take attention away from other internal problems, etc.

I'm just opposed to sending troops over there and starting a war, until there is something to start a war over.

George Jr. is just trying to finish what his daddy couldn't, IMO.

If the Government really wanted Saddam out of the picture, they would've done it already. One quick Special Forces assignment later, and it would've been done.

2-1B
11-12-2002, 12:14 AM
merged hippo bullcrap into hippocrap

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:15 AM
Why is it that people always say that people who support the war, don't think for themselves.

I do, my mom told me so!

But seriously, that is such a cop out.

Just because I want to see Saddam's brains splattered on the wall, I am brainwashed?

I am of the opinion that some people don't deserve to share oxygen with us, and he is one of them. I don't care what Bush, Clinton, Gore, Streisand, or any other tree hugging hippy say.

I want him dead, and I support it. Nobody, especially the media, put THOSE thoughts in my head.

Besides, the latest news I saw, shows where Saddam is buliding chemical weapons facilities in heaven and disguising them as chocolate chip factories. :eek:

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:15 AM
I think you meant, "All you can hope for is to minimize the casualties of your own nation." How is an innocent Americans life worth any more than any other innocent civilians life? I have screwed up morals? Where is the morality in war???

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:17 AM
Because America is superior......DUH! :crazed:

Beast
11-12-2002, 12:18 AM
No, I know exactly what I meant to say. So don't suggest that I don't say what I mean. If we wouldn't have bombed Japan, the war would have likely continued for years to come. More people on ALL SIDES would have died. By dropping the bombs, they surrended and the war ended. The casulties if the war had continued, would have been far larger then the ones that resulted from the bomb dropping. :p :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:19 AM
But they would have been mostly military types who died, not hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese men, women and children.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SOMEONE give me CONCRETE specific examples of how Hussein is such a threat to us? So far, it's "because the TV told me so, and even the TV didn't give any real examples." Just said, Saddam, bad. Any questions?

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:21 AM
His beret threatens our heterosexuality.

Give us concrete proof why he isn't a threat first, and then I will give you concrete proof why he is. No funny stuff either, or the deal's off!

2-1B
11-12-2002, 12:22 AM
I thought the TV was supposed to have such a liberal bias ?

Wolfwood319
11-12-2002, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by Quite-Long Dong
His beret threatens our heterosexuality.

Berets have always been bad news. Bad bad news...



Beef pattys everywhere....so sad

darthvyn
11-12-2002, 12:24 AM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Well, they both ordered the slaughter of innocent human beings. So maybe that is why I can compare the two evil heatless murdering cowards.

the only time the US knew about his atrocities against the jewish people was AFTER we got there... we went there because hitler had taken over half of europe and didn't look like he was going to STOP with europe. the first time we went to iraq was because hussein took over kuwait. the problem was, we didn't finish what we started that time. he's still in power. now, we are going to war because he's not letting UN inspectors in? this is a job FOR the UN, and ONLY with their backing. the US has been the police of the world for a while, now, but if we go to war with iraq without the backing of the UN, we will be the rogue cop of the world, who's already handed in it's badge and gun, but luckily has two back-up pieces and a take no **** attitude. basically the blocking of inspectors is being used as an excuse for W to finish what daddy didn't. i can almost see the strings holding W's limbs up...


Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Man, go flash your peace sign to the people that lost loved ones to that son of a *****. :mad: :(

most of the people who lost loved ones to that son of a ***** now hate us because we live in the country that we live in, if you're talking about those that were slaughtered in that region. if you're talking about our casualties, most of it was friendly fire, which wouldn't have happened if we weren't at war anyway.

peace.

Beast
11-12-2002, 12:24 AM
EricRG, please take your hippy propoganda and go post at the "We are the world/Flower Power/Give Peace a Chance" message board. If you can't get the fact that Saddam Hussain kills innocents and is building nuclear and chemical weapns thru that thick head of yours, then I feel sorry for you. Innocents do die in the war. Or do you think they fight in some sort of futuristic cyber battlefield, away from anyone that isn't fighting. :stupid: :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:26 AM
Please JJB, that's what I'm asking you for...facts. So far, all you've given me, is "Just because he's bad". You obviously have NO real reasons to attack Iraq (no surprise there-there are none!) and you are resorting to name calling.

"Tv is liberal"...

That is such a misnomer. Some NEWSPAPERS do have a liberal bent. Let's see, who owns the major networks...GE, Disney and Westinghouse (defense/nuclear contractor). I wonder if they would have a "liberal" point-of-view...:greedy:

QLD
11-12-2002, 12:26 AM
I believe the UN just approved action against Iraq, if he doesn't respond by Friday. So any actions, would be with their blessing.

James Boba Fettfield
11-12-2002, 12:26 AM
I just wanted to ask something. EricRG said that "But they would have been mostly military types who died, not hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese men, women and children." Not everyone of those people who would have died were hardcore military types who volunteered to fight. You do know that all of our soldiers from the draft and even those who weren't drafted were somebody's son, daughter, husband, wife, etc. Not all who died chose to, their country chose them and they accepted the call.

2-1B
11-12-2002, 12:26 AM
I don't always listen to my TV, just this evening it told me "Yo da man" and I staunchly disagree.

Wolfwood319
11-12-2002, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
the fact that Saddam Hussain kills innocents and is building nuclear and chemical weapns
MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Not to play devil's advocate here, but he's not the only dictator who murdered countless of his people. Colpot(sp?) killed over 1 million of his people in his prisons, and we're just finding out about it now, and it happened over 3 decades ago.

Saddam isn't the only bad guy-dictator out there killing his people, he isn't the first or last either. The government is just using him right now as an example to the rest of the world in this post-9/11 era.

Take Saddam out, I really couldn't care less. But I wish they'd stop all the hub-bub and propaganda about it. Just send over a strike force, or a special forces team, or whatever other Tom Clancy-esque covert ops teams our Gov's got right now, and end it.

EricRG
11-12-2002, 12:32 AM
Yes Fettfield, but "they accepted the call." Therefore they had some choice there.

darthvyn
11-12-2002, 12:34 AM
Originally posted by Quite-Long Dong
I believe the UN just approved action against Iraq, if he doesn't respond by Friday. So any actions, would be with their blessing.

but dubya has said whether we have their blessing or not, we're going, and with the majority being rep. we're going. and he'll respond by friday, and then screw it all up again, til we go in alone.

anyway, this whole thing is because we can't find bin laden -

"hey, the public is gonna want to get the bad guy..."

"okay, well, let's just get another bad guy."

i still want to get bin laden. why aren't we doing that anymore?


Originally posted by Wolfwood319


Take Saddam out, I really couldn't care less. But I wish they'd stop all the hub-bub and propaganda about it. Just send over a strike force, or a special forces team, or whatever other Tom Clancy-esque covert ops teams our Gov's got right now, and end it.

unfortunately, then it would be over too fast to bring our economy the prosperity it would get from a war... wars bring industry a lot of new work - it's a two-fold political move - it would take care of the economy, and the "i can't hit the real enemy, so let's go to war with another one..."

LTBasker
11-12-2002, 01:26 AM
Japan didn't consider us much of a threat when they could take us by suprised on Pearl Harbor. We came back and beat'em because we were a threat. Saddam is a threat, and we know that. We strike early we can take that threat away and stop countless people from dieing. We have an advantage Japan didn't, which would give us the edge we need to stop Saddam once and for all. We didn't pay attention on Pearl Harbor, we didn't pay attention on 9.11, we can't afford to not pay attention now. We couldn't afford it then, and if we shrugged it off now, it could seriously mean many senseless deaths because of a madman.

Wolfwood319
11-12-2002, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by darthvyn
unfortunately, then it would be over too fast to bring our economy the prosperity it would get from a war... wars bring industry a lot of new work - it's a two-fold political move - it would take care of the economy, and the "i can't hit the real enemy, so let's go to war with another one..."

That's the whole point of this "war." Its what I've been saying all along. Of course this is being used to bring the economy back up.

I was just saying that on a personal level, I'm already sick of hearing about it on the news, in the paper, etc. And we haven't even gone to war yet. But unfortunately, we have at least 3 more years of this to go. Oh well...

My real thought is, after Saddam, who's next on the list if they haven't gotten Bin Laden yet?

2-1B
11-12-2002, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by Wolfwood319
My real thought is, after Saddam, who's next on the list if they haven't gotten Bin Laden yet?

Jean Chretien.

I just don't trust that guy.

Beast
11-12-2002, 01:59 AM
No, then we go after Canada. Those damn people with the flip top heads that say things like "aboot". "Blame Canada, Blame Canada. It's not a real country anyhow." Viva La Resistance!! ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

plasticfetish
11-12-2002, 05:57 AM
Is this whole thing a joke thread?


Originally posted by JarJarBinks
I am not a hippy like ole EricRG is. If we would have listened to him, Hitler would still be alive and in power.

Ummm ... don't you think Hitler would be a little old at this point? Not much of a threat considering that he'd be as mobile as the grandfather from Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

... and I hope we get over there and liberate that seriously oppressed oil very soon, 'cause my '64 Mercury only gets like 4 miles to the gallon. I hope the stealth bombers don't blow up MY oil, because that's MY oil and I need it. Hopefully the laser guided smart missiles will just blow up things like sand dunes and apartment buildings. Then when the war is over we can build a Starbucks where every blown-up civilian apartment building used to be in Baghdad. We can blow up all of the old evil political leaders and replace them with nice ones and then everything will be just super. Not to mention, the economy here at home will seem so much less bothersome because we'll all be glued to our big screen televisions (that we bought with high interest credit cards) watching the war on CNN. Oh, I'm sure gas prices will go up for a while ... but they'll surely go down again once it's all over in a month or two ... that just makes sense, huh? And it's a good thing we've got someone in charge that won't be afraid to spend a little money on the project ... finally those poor sad aerospace companies can start cranking out bombers and warheads. GM can sell more Hummers ... and we're gonna need that oil 'cause those babies get about the same mileage as my 38 year old Merc. Boy, it's gonna be great ... what's to protest?

QLD
11-12-2002, 08:19 AM
Yeah, Ion top of all of the other reasons to kill Saddam, he should be executed for making my gas prices so high.

No, I'm not kidding.

El Chuxter
11-12-2002, 10:20 AM
On the one hand, Saddam should be dealt with. Of course, he should've been dealt with ten years ago by Bush Sr.

However, I'm not sure war is the right answer here. Our policy in the Middle East has always been questionable: "We're friends with Israel, since they're mentioned in the Bible, and with Saudi Arabia, since they're run by oil barons. We don't care what they do to their people. And as for the other countries, screw 'em if we can't get our oil." Also, Dubya has tried to pick every single fight he can since he got in office. Not to mention he's a (tah dah!) oil man hiimself.

In short, I think that the justification for a war isn't the right one. I know it's a question of simple semantics, but if Bush really and truly wanted to liberate the Iraqi people and protect the US, I'd not have too much of a problem with it.

Even with the wrong reasons being behind the inevitable war, I'm not opposed enough to protest.

Old Fossil
11-12-2002, 10:39 AM
It all matters little now. Iraq has rejected the U.N. demands, as we would were we in their place. We will invade Iraq and remove the current government there. The Iraqi people will be made to suffer even more. Iraq will drop from 160th to 200th in rank among the world's developed nations. American and Iraqi soldiers will die. The U.S. will install a fragile democracy in place of Hussein's regime, creating further instability in the region, because democracies simply don't work well in the Muslim world. Oil prices will go down. Americans will forget about Iraq and focus on their sitcoms, football, and SUVs. Bush will get re-elected, and focus will shift to some other petty dictator who hates the U.S., probably North Korea or Iran.

The cycle will continue, when Cheney is elected years from now.

Eventually, the world will tire of the arrogance of the U.S. Eventually, it will truly be Us against the World.

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2002, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Twodot Tatooine
It all matters little now. Iraq has rejected the U.N. demands, as we would were we in their place.

Not exactly.

The parliament voted to recommend rejection of the resolution. The final decision lies in Saddams Command Council, of which he is the head.

Besides, chances are that was orchestrated to make saddam look favourable when he agrees to the resolution.

Beast
11-12-2002, 10:51 AM
Of course he'll probably agree, just so that he can break the agreement later again when he feels like it. The same thing he's been doing since the Gulf War ended. :p :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

2-1B
11-12-2002, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by Twodot Tatooine
Oil prices will go down. Americans will forget about Iraq and focus on their sitcoms, football

Good, I can't wait ! :D

JON9000
11-12-2002, 11:20 AM
I see good arguments on both sides. Certainly Saddam is an awful dictator, and he is certainly not above loading a nuke onto an oil tanker bound for a U.S port.

I think we would be better off to overhaul and beef up port security and the coast guard. When the bomb comes, it will be in the guise of the Trojan horse, and blowing up Saddam will not stop it.

I think we can leave the fact the that "Saddam is bad" out of the equation. There are baddies everywhere, we only care about those who have the capacity to harm our interests.

I do worry about the precedent being set and lthe loss of lives, and one day every country that wants them will have nukes. SHould we invade all of them? Prometheus is coming down from the mountain.

Lord Tenebrous
11-12-2002, 11:36 AM
The Bush teams does not want you to know that Iraq does not pose a grave threat to the United States of America. Iraq has been effectively contained by the sanctions, and the weapons inspectors virtually annihilated whatever weapons program they had. Whatever they might have been able to squirrel away is now junk, because the chemistry of the stuff they were trying to make dictates that it ceases to be effective after a couple of years. They do not have any missile technology. They certainly do not have any connections to Al Qaeda - Saddam Hussein has been viciously and vigorously repressing Islamic fundamentalism in his own country. He puts people to death if they proselytize Islamic fundamentalism. That's why he attacks the Kurds. If Hussein were to give Al Qaeda weapons of mass destruction, they would use those weapons on him first. They hate him. Also, the politics and cultural facts of the region, this pipedream of democracy in Iraq, that we're going to institute a regime change and create western style democracy, is laughable. This administration does not want that at all, because the majority of people in Iraq are Shiites, theologically and ideologically aligned with Iran. If we were to give them western style democracy, they would immediately align themselves with Iran and create a strategic issue that is ten times as bad as the one we have now.

http://www.truthout.com/docs_02/09.30Ab.intv.wrp.htm


Ansar al-Islam is the Kurd group most closely associated with Al Qaeda. They are the Al Qaeda in Iraq...

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2002, 11:38 AM
Here is an interesting article about the relationship - history of the US and Iraq:

http://hnn.us/articles/1066.html

Note the paragraph about the 1990 meeting with US ambassador April Glasbie...

Interesting how recent these two nations have become adversaries, after a vast history of a more allied relationship.

Lord Tenebrous
11-12-2002, 11:40 AM
Saddam only became a problem after we stopped funding him. Much like the Taliban. We used them as shell states for our own interests, only to turn our backs to them once the objectives were through.

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2002, 11:43 AM
It's fully clear that ANY action taken by the US with regards to iraq, let alone the mid east region, hinge on one factor: Threats to US oil interests.

JON9000
11-12-2002, 12:22 PM
Thanks for the link OLR. Not many people seem to remember when we were best friends with Saddam, or that he thought he had the blessing of the United States when he invaded Kuwait. Most of the media simply do not bother to explain the background story.

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2002, 12:31 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JON9000
Thanks for the link OLR. Not many people seem to remember when we were best friends with Saddam, or that he thought he had the blessing of the United States when he invaded Kuwait. Most of the media simply do not bother to explain the background story. [/QUOTE

The Media, atleast the predominant media in the western world, have quite a bit to gain from a war as well. ratings, ratings, ratings.

sith_killer_99
11-12-2002, 12:36 PM
:rolleyes: It's all about the oil.:rolleyes:

:rolleyes: GW just wants to finish what his dad started.:rolleyes:

The United States has tried to stay out of the affairs and wars of others. The result was Pearl Harbor. We were attacked without warning. We were kind enough to warn them about an attack by a weapon more powerful than the world had ever seen. After we dropped the first A-bomb we warned them about another attack. Japan in their arrogance refused to surrender. They (the Japanese government) had the opportunity to save millions of lives.

So, I have NO remorse for what happened at Hiroshima or Nagasaki. I will save my remorse for those who died on Dec. 7th!My Grandfather fought in WWII, Pearl Harbor was hit when my Grandmother was pregnant with my Father. I had the honor of re-enlisting on the USS Arizona Memorial! Innocent people died at Pearl Harbor. They had never killed anyone, thier government had not declared war!

As for Saddam, he invaded Kuwait, just like a certain other power hungry Dictator from WWII. Kuwait ASKED for our help!!!! Saddam used chemical weapons on his own troops in Desert Storm, and YES our own troops were exposed to these weapons. Saddam supports Terrorists.

Some people would have us pretend that we don't need to fight. The Clinton administration allowed Bin Laden to get away with attacks against the United States. This kind of "war is unpopluar so let's just hope it goes away" philosophy is much more dangerous than acting to preserve U.S. interests, property, life, etc.

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2002, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by sith_killer_99
:rolleyes: It's all about the oil.:rolleyes:

:rolleyes: GW just wants to finish what his dad started.:rolleyes:



Despite what many on these boards seem to think, echoing the arguments of others and framing them with "rolleyes" is not a valid argument ;)


Originally posted by sith_killer_99
:

The United States has tried to stay out of the affairs and wars of others. The result was Pearl Harbor. We were attacked without warning. We were kind enough to warn them about an attack by a weapon more powerful than the world had ever seen. After we dropped the first A-bomb we warned them about another attack. Japan in their arrogance refused to surrender. They (the Japanese government) had the opportunity to save millions of lives.



As did the United States, by not hastily dropping a bomb which they did not fully understand.


Originally posted by sith_killer_99


As for Saddam, he invaded Kuwait, just like a certain other power hungry Dictator from WWII. Kuwait ASKED for our help!!!! Saddam used chemical weapons on his own troops in Desert Storm, and YES our own troops were exposed to these weapons. Saddam supports Terrorists.



I'll direct you to read the article I posted. It details americas initial notion about disputes between mideast nations.


Originally posted by sith_killer_99


Some people would have us pretend that we don't need to fight. The Clinton administration allowed Bin Laden to get away with attacks against the United States. This kind of "war is unpopluar so let's just hope it goes away" philosophy is much more dangerous than acting to preserve U.S. interests, property, life, etc.

Again, US interests is the key here. Saddam poses NO THREAT to us freedom, or personal safety. He can mess with your oil though.

Lord Tenebrous
11-12-2002, 01:46 PM
The sorry thing is, it's fully economic.



There was a recent Rand corporation think tank group that went and spoke to Richard Pearl's defense Policy Board, which is influential inside the Pentagon, and described Iraq as the "tactical pivot" that would lead to "total war" within that whole region, to take the place over, to institute regime changes from left to right and to secure American hegemony over the oil producing countries in that region.


Saddam Hussein has been around for twelve years. In fact, he's been around for thirty years, but he has been an American problem ever since we stopped funding him and he turned on our allies. All of a sudden, in mid-August after three months of terrible economic news, and what looked to be an incredible catastrophe at the polls in the mid-term election for the Republicans, Saddam Hussein is now the most dangerous man on the face of the earth and has to be addressed militarily, immediately. This, in and of itself, supports the idea that they will instigate war to distract the American political populace from the sorry economic situation that we're in. It's only part of the story; it's only one half of the deal. All by itself, they might not have had the guts to go and do this. But at the same time it serves the purposes of the incredibly influential neo-conservative hawks in this administration, like Richard Pearl, Paul Wolfowitz, Don Rumsfeld and Dick Chaney to name a few, who very desperately want to rewrite the whole map in that region.


Your government has deceived you. And with your ignorance, I hope the consequences are worse than those proposed.


This is the only Al Qaeda connection:


U.S. intelligence recently [April] monitored an Ansar al-Islam site in northern Iraq where chemical or biological weapons experiments were conducted with farm animals. It initially was feared this might constitute a significant chemical-biological threat, but U.S. officials decided it was not serious enough to justify a military strike, American officials said Tuesday.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, initially said Arab members of Ansar al-Islam were involved in the experimentation, but later they said it was unclear whether they were Arabs or Kurds. The group reportedly has several hundred members, mostly Kurds.

Ansar al-Islam remains a serious concern, the officials said, in part because of indications the group is connected to the al-Qaida terrorist network.

Asked about the situation at a Pentagon news conference, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld refused to comment beyond saying, ``I have said for some time that there are al-Qaida in Iraq, and there are.''

``They have left Afghanistan,'' he said, referring to al-Qaida. ``They have left other locations. And they've landed in a variety of countries, one of which is Iraq.''

Rumsfeld would not comment on Ansar al-Islam's activities. He was asked whether its members are protected by Saddam.

``In a vicious, repressive dictatorship that exercises near total control over its population, it's very hard to imagine that the government is not aware of what's taking place in the country,'' he replied.

Some believe Saddam's government has secretly supported Ansar al-Islam in a bid to destabilize the Kurdish area and weaken his major Kurdish opponents.

Much of northern Iraq is beyond the control of Saddam because U.S.-British overflights prevent the Iraqi air force from attacking the area's Kurdish population. The Kurds generally are strongly opposed to Saddam.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~kurdistanobserver/20-8-02-us-monitor-kurdish-extremists.html

We won't strike them because they're Kurds, our supposed allies. I'm suprised they haven't attacked Saddam yet, perhaps because we're keeping Saddam out of the way while they try to destroy us?


And before you do the liberal crap, look what your own kind do to you...

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/rush-times.html

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2002, 02:07 PM
well...I know how much trouble I have hunting down those pesky stories hidden so deftly on the front page of my daily paper ;)

derek
11-12-2002, 09:40 PM
here at home, I think sentiment for this war is very low...perhaps a "Vietnam era-like" atmosphere

i suspect this "atmosphere" is not as widespread as you think. if you're still a student, then i could imagine this attitude would be widespread on campus, but out in the "real" world, the notion of toppling an arabic dictator is actually well received, hence the high number of democrats who are afraid to speak out against it, and the fact that the votors elected a republican congress.

if you're going to protest, hurry up, this war is gonna be over quick, and iraq, or new texas as i like to call it, ;) will be a better place after it.

Beast
11-12-2002, 09:49 PM
Well, some democrats are for putting a slug in the head of "Sodamn Insane". Like to meet one? You just did. Though I'm not a pure blooded democrat. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

derek
11-12-2002, 09:58 PM
hey jar jar,

i meant democrat politicians.;) a lot have recently admitted they only supported the iraq resolutions because they were afraid of not getting re-elected, since polls show the majority of americans support removing sadam. good 'ol democrat politicians, can't do anything without a poll. heaven forbid they actually stand up for something they believe in, even if it's not popular.

good luck withyour protest eric. if you see michael moore, get an autograph for me.;)

jobi
11-12-2002, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by EricRG
How can you compare Hitler to Hussein? The only similarity I see is their last names both begin with H! Obviously, Hitler had done things to warrant our reply. AGAIN, I ask you, WHAT HAS SADDAM DONE TO US???????


Well let's see, first what did Hitler do to us??? We didn't get overtly involved in WWII until Pearl Harbor that was Japan. Hitler attacked our Allies so we joined on that front as well. Hussein has threatened us with weapons of mass destruction. Those aren't little terrorist attacks those are when MILLIONS of people die.

What did Hitler do to warrant our reply? Genocide? The same thing is going on in parts of Iraq. Of course Americans aren't nearly as offended by this because those being slaughtered aren't "God's Chosen People"

What he's done is cause problems throughout the world he supports terrorism and murder of innocent Americans. Do you know what the Bounty on American soldiers is over there??? No, I didn't think so.

You wanna protest? Go ahead I will stand up, put my uniform on, salute smartly, and defend, your American right to do so, to the death if I must.

QLD
11-12-2002, 10:07 PM
I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
I am a real American, fight for what's right, fight for your life!

When it comes crashing down, and it hurts inside,
ya' gotta take a stand, it don't help to hide,
Well, you hurt my friends, and you hurt my pride,
I gotta be a man; I can't let it slide,
I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
I am a real American, fight for what's right, fight for your life!

I feel strong about right and wrong,
And I don't take trouble for very long,
I got something deep inside of me, and courage is the thing that keeps us free,
I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
I am a real American, fight for what's right, fight for your life!

Well you hurt my friends, and you hurt my pride,
I gotta be a man; I can't let it slide,
I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
I am a real American, fight for what's right, fight for your life!
I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
I am a real American, fight for what's right, fight for your life!

jobi
11-12-2002, 10:26 PM
One more thing, at least you live in America where you have the right to protest. If you were from Iraq and you protested Saddam's laws where would you be??? Prison if you were lucky enough to not be tortured to death.

EricRG, have you ever been to the middle east? It's not all Lawrence of Arabia. It is a very scary place to be. Human life has little value in most of the countries in that region. (unless you're an American soldier, then the price is around $10,000 for your head)

I'm through reading, replying, and getting mad at this post. You're an American you have the right to disagree with government policies. I'm using one of my rights by ignoring this thread for the remainder of it's existance.

Lord Tenebrous
11-12-2002, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by derek
if you're going to protest, hurry up, this war is gonna be over quick, and iraq, or new texas as i like to call it, ;) will be a better place after it.



Quick...interesting. Not with the open war rumblings. Some tycoons won't be content unless the whole region is under the control of the States.


I'd suggest some of you do some research on the present, rather than spouting generalizations about the past, expecting them to somehow hold true for the future. This is no longer about parisanship. Bush isn't a Republican, he's a politicalized businessman, and while it may seem glorious to reap the power and wealth such war can give us, we must realize that such goals are not as simple as our leader wants us to believe.

When so many are poised to die in the name of greed, one can almost be sympathetic towards the terrorists. For terrorism is violent political opposition. My tongue could be a terrorist, for why run planes through buildings, when I can run evidence through the truthless veil of a man, destroying his credibility, the only real measure of a man.

But...there is nobody to listen. So the terrorism will lie in my silence, as the ignorant march off to die in wars that will never really matter.....

EricRG
11-12-2002, 11:02 PM
Thanks Derek. Just saw "Bowling for Columbine" last week. Good flick. Learned a lot.

Just to address all the "real" Americans here, I do firmly believe in the Constitution of the United States. THAT is the political system that I wish on all countries (with minor modification ;) ). The thing is this: the democracy espoused in that document no longer exists. We currently live in a PLUTOCRACY. That is obvious. Just because other countries are "worse off" than us with regards to human rights, etc. doesn't give us an out to not try to improve the conditions we currently live in.

Did you ever stop to think about why people from the Middle East hate us? Or the rest of the world for that matter?

The US IS the modern day Third Reich in that it hopes to one day own the entire world. I do truly fear a US/England/Israel vs. the rest of the world one day. Just about the entire Middle East and Asia is fed up with us already. All great powers have come to an end...and every time it was because they were POWER HUNGRY. They wanted it ALL. Why can't the US be different? And truly great...

Beast
11-12-2002, 11:05 PM
Modern day Third Reich? Damn, what do they teach kids in schools now a days? Yes, we have gas chambers and kill innocents all the time, just like they did. Man, you are one step from being placed on ignore.

I'm pretty open minded, but even I have to say, you don't even offer a convencing argument why you feel the way you do. Not to mention you ignore when people answer you why "Sodamn Insane" is a threat. :stupid: :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

EricRG
11-12-2002, 11:06 PM
JJB,

Dude settle down, I didn't mean it LITERALLY. Read what I wrote AFTER the first 8 words of that paragraph again.

I'm sorry, I'm not accepting "Because the Bush family thinks Saddam is a baddie" as a valid response.

derek
11-12-2002, 11:22 PM
let's say, just for discussion's sake, that bush's total motive for ousting sadam is for oil related reasons. even if this is the case, which i don't think it is, iraq will be a lot more free post-sadam than it is now under his dictatorship. afganistan, for example, isn't perfect yet, but it's a lot better than it was under the taliban. women atleast have some rights now, and are able to pursue an education and have a job, as they were not before.

let's say we do oust sadam and take over their oil fields, or at least get good deals for cheap oil. the iraqi people will still be a lot better off. it's not like we're going to kill every first born male child, rape their women, and sell them into slaverly. industry will move into the area and eventually benefit the people. hopefully we'll set up a ruling leader who favors freedom and individual rights, and in time iraq will be a free, peace loving country, who dosen't invade it's neighbors, launch missles at israiel, and support suicide bombers families.

if i were living in a country that forced it's citizens to witness the public executions of those who spoke out against the government, as iraq does, or kill whole towns with poision gas because they are the wrong ethnic group, or oppose the ruling dictator, as sadam has, i would be very thankful if a country like america overthrew my dictator, regardless of their motives.

Dar' Argol
11-12-2002, 11:26 PM
Oh boy, here's another one:rolleyes:. Its so easy to do when your sitting behind a computer;)

Everyone needs to back off a bit. Whenever it comes to politics, religion, personal beliefs and way of life, everyone can lose it quickly. Everyone believes something different, that's what makes humans so interesting. We're not clones. The problem here is when ppl start getting too hot-headed about a topic like this. Next thing you know, your name calling, swearing, and quoting from the Constitution:rolleyes: :D. Then I have to come in with my Mr. Daddy Pants on and kick your butts out of the room, hose the walls down and scrub them. You know how long that takes??:D

This thread is walking a fine line of Closedom. Please keep that in mind. And remember, this is a SW site and even though this is a General Area, there is a line on how far you can take it.

And now for something completly different. Worm Ballet. :D

Lord Tenebrous
11-13-2002, 12:12 AM
Worm Ballet...that could be a closeable topic in itself.


But anyways, Derek, I ask you to read the first article I posted (http://www.truthout.com/docs_02/09.30Ab.intv.wrp.htm), an interview with a past weapons inspector, William Pitt. He was in Iraq. And he says:


...the politics and cultural facts of the region, this pipedream of democracy in Iraq, that we're going to institute a regime change and create western style democracy, is laughable. This administration does not want that at all, because the majority of people in Iraq are Shiites, theologically and ideologically aligned with Iran. If we were to give them western style democracy, they would immediately align themselves with Iran and create a strategic issue that is ten times as bad as the one we have now.


And as far as the killings:


Saddam Hussein has been viciously and vigorously repressing Islamic fundamentalism in his own country. He puts people to death if they proselytize Islamic fundamentalism. That's why he attacks the Kurds. If Hussein were to give Al Qaeda weapons of mass destruction, they would use those weapons on him first. They hate him.



It is not good enough to disagree. If you are to take of the negative position in this debate, you must find evidence. Not claims that in your mind work.


And Mr. Argol, I'm trying not to make a scene. I have tried to be the light of logic in this thread, to make my fellow forumites think critically about this serious issue we have on our hands.

I shall semi-retire for the night, somebody please throw some pro-war evidence at me, I beg it. :)

EricRG
11-13-2002, 12:54 AM
I don't know Derek-
When it is right to move against another country under the guise of "We'll make things better for them" is a VERY fine line. The taliban were an extreme case. In the past, the US gov't has supported SO MANY gov'ts with the blood of their own people on their hands in the past... Look at just about every country in South America, as well as many countries in the Middle East. What makes Iraq different? Oil. Lots of it. America is one of only a handful of countries that still have the death penalty. Just because we don't show it on CNN (yet) doesn't really change things in my mind. And also by justifying attacking Iraq in the name of changing their gov't to something more similar to ours justifies other gov'ts attacking us because they don't like our gov't.

plasticfetish
11-13-2002, 01:33 AM
All sarcasm aside ... my only personal concern about this entire situation is that once it's "over" and done with (if that's ever really possible) no one will really know the truth about what truly got us into this thing. I mean, someday I'd like to know the truth ... here's what I sort of know ...

I remember vaguely seeing something somewhere about how Iraq ended up joining with the Axis in WW2 and how the British had a bit of a hard time protecting certain "oil interests" back then. I've read how the British had even been fiddling about in the region during WW1 and how it eventually led to the "1920 rebellion" ... imagine a group of people actually trying to wrestle some kind of independence from the British Empire which seemed solely interested in controlling certain petroleum resources. Funny that idea huh? It's also funny how I keep seeing the "Nazi" thing come up in comments, as I understand it ... during the war (WW2) there was a strong Nazi influence in Iraq and much persecution of Jews as a result. (Though I've also read that many good Iraqi Muslems opened their homes to feed and protected the Jews.)

After the war the British help to set up a happy "pro-British" government and for years Iraq is an important Middle Eastern supply center for American and British forces. Follow this with years of Coups, wars and instability ... Iraqi leaders coming and going, as well as an end to friendly relations with the west ... in 1961 Kuwait breaks away from the British and Iraq jumps at the chance to snatch them up ... but the British help to secure Kuwait's sovereignty (at least they have some friends in the oil business, huh?) Through the '60s and '70s more coups, assassinations and wars ... and now they've got border disputes with Iran to worry about. Saddam Hussein (then vice-president) helps to bring an end to these border disputes in 1975 and then shortly after assumes the role of President in 1979. Ahhh, now the good times of the oil boom of the late '70s ... money, money, money. Now Saddam is the sole ruler of Iraq ... and once again trouble flares up with Iran. There's an 8 year war with Iran which has a crippling effect on the economy of both countries and after eight years of war no territory had been gained by either side but an estimated one million lives had been lost. Nice (sounds like a good leader.)

1988, Iran accepted the terms of UN Resolution 598 and there is finally a cease fire with Iran. But, the fun didn't end there ... as it seems Saddam gets a little bored and invades Kuwait in 1990. The invasion is the result of this territorial dispute and that oil production dispute ... while they negotiated beforehand, the US promised that it would not get involved, but that all changed come August 2nd 1990 when we decided it would be best if we did something to protect Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. You all know the story from there I suppose ... we use our incredibly sophisticated weaponry to wipe out a bunch of "mud huts" and 40 year old Russian helicopters and ever since then we've buzz bombed the "no fly zones" with our fighter planes.

Think what you will, we'll do what we must ... but understand how and why we got where we are ... and let's just hope that whatever we do and however we do it ... it's worth the potential risks and loss of life to American soldiers (and potentially civilians here at home.) To jibber-jabber about Saddam "Insane" and root for a war for no practical reason does an injustice to all of those that have fought for and lost their lives to promote freedom and Democracy.

The Overlord Returns
11-13-2002, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by jobi



Well let's see, first what did Hitler do to us??? We didn't get overtly involved in WWII until Pearl Harbor that was Japan. Hitler attacked our Allies so we joined on that front as well. Hussein has threatened us with weapons of mass destruction. Those aren't little terrorist attacks those are when MILLIONS of people die.


America became fully involved in WW2 in what has become it's typical fashion for getting involved in global conflicts. When it's own interests were threatened. As to your "statement" that Hussein has threatened America with weapons of mass destruction, how can he threaten you with weapons he claims not to have. He has never made threats in regards to using weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. in an unprovoked attack. I know it's easier to buy into, and that spout back, the rhetoric your president and his staff feed you, but that doesn't make it accurate.


Originally posted by jobi


What did Hitler do to warrant our reply? Genocide? The same thing is going on in parts of Iraq. Of course Americans aren't nearly as offended by this because those being slaughtered aren't "God's Chosen People"



Americas foray into WW2 had little to do with the genocide of the jews from a government standpoint. The internment of jews had been in full swing for years by 1941, and the world at large were quite aware of it. Before it's involvement, american media moguls often had Nazi officials as guests in YOUR nation. Again, see american interests.

As for Husseins attacks on Kurds, see Tenebrous' articles he's posted earlier in the thread. In fact, read the articles I've posted as well. They may give you a different viewpoint.

The Overlord Returns
11-13-2002, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Modern day Third Reich? Damn, what do they teach kids in schools now a days? Yes, we have gas chambers and kill innocents all the time, just like they did. Man, you are one step from being placed on ignore.

I'm pretty open minded, but even I have to say, you don't even offer a convencing argument why you feel the way you do. Not to mention you ignore when people answer you why "Sodamn Insane" is a threat. :stupid: :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Well.....ericG is clearly a bit of an idealist...youthful vim....yada yada yada....

Still, It's a little odd that the pro war "slug in the head" side of the debate here have ignored the articles and findings posted by LT and myself, and focused all their attention on young eric here.

Also, no one here has actually given any real, or interesting, reasons as to why they feel Hussein is now the greatest threat facing American security. Isn't it a little difficult for him to ignore something that isn't there?

derek
11-13-2002, 03:21 PM
And also by justifying attacking Iraq in the name of changing their gov't to something more similar to ours justifies other gov'ts attacking us because they don't like our gov't

hey eric,

the mistake in this line of thinking is morally equating our "democracy/ republic/ free country/etc..." with a barbaric dictatorship. i believe we are completly justified in invading any country that opresses it's people. i don't mean to sound like a "chest-beating nationalist", but in the case of what kind of government a country should have, our's is the correct one, compaired to any opressive dictatorship. our country was founded as one which acknowledges man's right to exist. we are morally correct, not from a religious standpoint, but in that, for the most part, we further the concept of individual rights, where-as iraq does not.

if a country like iraq, or china, for example, decided to invade us with intent of ruling our land and people, and set up a government that did not respect an individual's rights, then they would be morally wrong.

maybe bush and his buddies are really after cheap oil, i don't know for sure, but i do know we're not going to attempt to rule iraq as a colony, or an expansion of the united states empire.
but, if ever, thru elections, or a military takeover, our country did become an opressive dictatorship, that did not allow it's citizens to speak out against tyranny, or live without fear of being murdered by those rulers, i think a country who did acknowledge our right to freedom, would be justified in invading us and freeing us from our captors.

EricRG
11-13-2002, 04:40 PM
That's easy to say from your (our) point of view. Don't you think other governments think that they have the best system also? I know China does. Our's is the correct gov't only from OUR point of view.

Patient Zero
11-13-2002, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by EricRG
Our's is the correct gov't only from OUR point of view.

Sounds like religion to me.

*Gets hit in the head with a book*

Alright, I'm going!!!:crazed:

The Overlord Returns
11-13-2002, 06:26 PM
Well...it seems as this topic is on it's last legs.........

plasticfetish
11-13-2002, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by derek
hey eric,
the mistake in this line of thinking...
... "as I see it" is ...

Originally posted by derek
i believe we are completly justified in invading any country that opresses it's people.
Careful. Everything is relative ... what's oppressive to one society may be tradition to another.

Originally posted by derek
... but in the case of what kind of government a country should have, our's is the correct one, compaired to any opressive dictatorship.
Define "correct" and what gives us the right to force this correctness on another group of people? Are we still talking about defending our country from terrorism or are we talking about forcing our belief system and way of life on another society that may not want it?

Originally posted by derek
our country was founded as one which acknowledges man's right to exist. we are morally correct, not from a religious standpoint, but in that, for the most part, we further the concept of individual rights, where-as iraq does not.
Brilliant point ... and doesn't this also mean that we must to a certain degree be respectful of another nation's right to exist as it will? Give them a chance to evolve on their own ... God knows if it wasn't for the oil, we'd have never tried to tamper with these people's governments in the first place.

Originally posted by derek
if a country like iraq, or china, for example, decided to invade us ... then they would be morally wrong.
Yes, in that they invaded us ... and forced themselves and their society on ours.

Originally posted by derek
maybe bush and his buddies are really after cheap oil, i don't know for sure, but i do know we're not going to attempt to rule iraq as a colony, or an expansion of the united states empire.
Ummm ... I'd say let's see how long before there's a Wal-Mart in Baghdad ... once the oil resources run out in a few decades, they'll be begging for Starbucks to start opening franchises along the Euphrates. Then we can start talking about the "expansion of the united states empire."

The Overlord Returns
11-13-2002, 07:11 PM
Damn.......mayhaps I spoke too soon.

plasticfetish
11-13-2002, 07:36 PM
"Ha ha."

- Nelson Muntz

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
11-13-2002, 09:10 PM
Just a point of contention on the earlier posts in the thread.

Hippies for the most parts were communal living, peace loving, free-sex, earthy type of people. While most of them were anti-war, the War on Vietnam was not their main preoccupation. However, music, sex, and drugs were.

The anti-war movement was mainly concentrated on the college campuses of the 1960's. These people were mainly straight-laced middle class college students who saw many people of their generation, plucked from the of their youth, to fight an unjust war in a jungle laden, raggedy third world country. By and large they were not hippies nor embraced their lifestyle.

It is the legacy of the Vietnam war that we question our governments actions and motives in regards to war and try to see if these moves are justifiable.

Thank you for your time. You may get back to your discussions.

Emperor Howdy
11-14-2002, 02:30 AM
God, not again. There is NOOOOOO way I'm debating this issue again. I'll just make it short and sweet:

1: We will invade Iraq.

2: We will win.

3: I will point at all of you who don't support the war and do a Nelson: "Hyaaa-haaaaa!"

4: God love the Republicans. I'd much rather my taxes build a bomb than put food stamps in the hand of some lazy crackhead who trades 'em for dope and squirts out kids for higher welfare checks.

Emperor Howdy
11-14-2002, 02:36 AM
Originally posted by EricRG
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SOMEONE give me CONCRETE specific examples of how Hussein is such a threat to us

How were Stormtroopers such a threat to the Ewoks?......oh, but they sure were quick to jump in on the battle....slinging rocks and stuff.........even using helmets as drums......egad!.....war mongers! :eek:
























Sorry for the dumb analogy. I just wanted to make a SW reference. :stupid:

:Pirate: ....yeeargh!!

plasticfetish
11-14-2002, 02:41 AM
Hey! W ... wa ... wait a minute! I just did the Ha ha ... you can't do it so soon.

Besides, bombs are boring ... well, maybe those ones that dig underground are cool ... but what's really cool are those stealth bombers! I think we should just build those because they're cool looking.


and Howdy ... by the way ... I'm watching C-SPAN and your new senator from Georgia is on ... Saxby Chambliss. I swear, out of the corner of my eye I thought it said Sexy Chambliss. Now that I look at him ... hmmm ...

Darth Sinister
11-14-2002, 03:58 AM
I swear I can't believe this thread.

Why is that thousands of people have to die and landmarks have to be destroyed before we get the ok from you people to fight. Look what happened when we just sat on our hands and did nothing. Do we really have to wait for something else to happen before we can go on the offensive? Do we need any more proof that Hussein is hiding something....every time a UN inspector got close to something they were kicked out.....he sponsers terrorists which the last time I checked was a big No-No. Do you people really just want to wait and hope nothing happens?

For the first time, America is standing up for the rights of free people everywhere.....when a country wants our help, we help....when a poverty stricken country needs aid....we aid. What thanks do we get, it's always a what have you done for me lately attitude. What's worse, is we have to listen to the people of THIS country more than others. You want to talk about U.S. interests....I will bet that most of you that talk so negative don't care one bit about those who have been killed and those who WILL be killed if we don't act now. It is your interests that concern you only....will this take money away from me.....will I have to pay more for gas....I, I, I.

Hussein is monster who has killed his own people, even killed members of his own family for NOTHING...used gas on his own people for NOTHING...HIS OWN PEOPLE!!!!!!! Does he have to use it on us before we can say "OK, he's made his move...now we can fight back". This is insane. Finally, someone has the guts to do something about it...something that the people of Iraq want...someone who will stand up to the monster and make him fall into line. I'm glad that the "educated" have there own little world to live in...but I wish they would stay there because we have problems of our own and don't need the moral authority standing over us crying thier tears for the oppressed. BTW, go to Iraq and say something like this......see what happens.

If I get up another beautiful morning and turn on the TV and see ANY other building burning or people jumping to there deaths...I will hold those who hampered its prevention as equal to those who carried it out responsible. They will be in the same category as our thank God ex-president who did NOTHING....and who also hoped that nothing would happen.

plasticfetish
11-14-2002, 04:24 AM
Originally posted by Darth Sinister
I swear I can't believe this thread.

I do. Frankly as an adult you should believe that you're always going to have to deal with people that might exercise their opinions in contrast to your own. To assume that your own opinion is the one true truth and that your perspective is without question the only one that matters ... for whatever reason ... is a little selfish.

Besides ... don't assume that there's so much disagreement with your opinion on the whole. Sometimes others may only differ with you in subtle ways ... it may not be so much "what" you believe ... but just "how" it is that you came to that opinion.

If you don't want to debate, then don't. If you do want to ... then it can only strengthen your point if you can defend it in different ways.

Old Fossil
11-14-2002, 08:18 AM
Well. Iraq has accepted the UN resolution. (I stand on my head.) War has been postponed, maybe, for a little while.

EricRG
11-14-2002, 09:53 AM
Iraq has accepted...I guess...it's hard to tell from what the media is reporting. It seems like they have, but the US is like, "Whoa, wait a second, you didn't dot the i there in the 2nd line of the 33rd paragraph...you MUST have weapons of mass destruction...and dammit that also means you're going to use them on the US!"

Iraq may WELL have weapons of mass destruction...the last time I checked...so did we! The line for me as to when an attack is merited is when WE ARE ACTUALLY threatened. I'm sorry, but "preemptive" aggression doesn't fly with me, and that's MY moral opinion. An Iraqi civilian death is NO different from an American civilian death in my humble opinion. That's where most of you seem to have an issue with me. You seem to think that an American life is somehow worth more than an Iraqi life. You guys probably would have been in favor of a pre-emptive strike in The Cuban misslie crisis as well. Thank "the Maker" we had Kennedy's administration in charge. I wonder what a Bush would have done...actually I shudder to think what a Bush would have done.

And to also attempt to include Star Wars in this thread, some of you need to review Yoda's comments in EpV. ;)

Lord Tenebrous
11-14-2002, 09:56 AM
Now we have a break to focus on the real problem. President Pervez Musharraf has given himself the rights of a dictator. He was ordered by court to return the rule to a civilian government by October of 2002, which has been ignored by the media in favor of Iraq.

And with our inability to enter Pakistan to search, al Qaida potentially has Pakistan's small stock of nuclear weapons as a terrorism tool.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20021111/ap_on_go_ot/whither_al_qaida_1



But of course, nobody want to attack Pakistan. Even though they do pose a threat to Western life.

JON9000
11-14-2002, 10:23 AM
President Musharraf beats the heck out of the lame regime that came before him. Those were the guys who helped the Taliban set up shop in Afghanistan. Mr. Musharraf understands the threat religious conservative fundamentalists pose to Pakistan. If the Mullahs get control, it isn't like democracy will flourish. He is working with the U.S. to root out these buggers. Why attack when we have cooperation?

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by JON9000
Those were the guys who helped the Taliban set up shop in Afghanistan.

As did the United States Govt. at the time:

http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq2.html#6

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 12:12 PM
Well, now that this thread is in full swing again....


Originally posted by Emperor Howdy

1: We will invade Iraq.


WOW...you and I agree on something. I also feel that, no matter how compliant Iraq is ( and it is still up for debate as to how cooperative Saddam will be, not yet a foregone conclusion) America will find a way to invade Iraq and take over. Afterall, this war they want is not about disarmament or regime change to spare the people of Iraq. It's about U.S. Interests in oil, and on the homefront, a nice boost to the economy that war always brings.


Originally posted by Emperor Howdy


2: We will win.


Well, yes, obviously. You have the largest, most powerful military in the world. If you didn't win, the international community would be doing a "haa-haaaa" of their own ;)


Originally posted by Emperor Howdy


God love the Republicans. I'd much rather my taxes build a bomb than put food stamps in the hand of some lazy crackhead who trades 'em for dope and squirts out kids for higher welfare checks.

Heh........the heartless, bloodthirsty ramblings of conservatives always make me chuckle......your delusions and generalizations are just TOO adorable.

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Darth Sinister
I swear I can't believe this thread.



Is it so earth shattering a notion that there are people out there with DIFFERENT opinions than yours?


Originally posted by Darth Sinister


Why is that thousands of people have to die and landmarks have to be destroyed before we get the ok from you people to fight. Look what happened when we just sat on our hands and did nothing. Do we really have to wait for something else to happen before we can go on the offensive?


So you want to attack Iraq because osama Bin Laden had his terrorist organization hit the WTC? That's sound logic. Saudi Arabia has a history of being used by the al qaed network as well. However, you're not attacking them, because they are your allies.


Originally posted by Darth Sinister


Do we need any more proof that Hussein is hiding something....every time a UN inspector got close to something they were kicked out.....he sponsers terrorists which the last time I checked was a big No-No. Do you people really just want to wait and hope nothing happens?


Read this and get back to me:

]http://www.truthout.org/docs_o2/07.25A.wrp.iraq.htm (http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/07.25A.wrp.iraq.htm)



Originally posted by Darth Sinister

For the first time, America is standing up for the rights of free people everywhere.....


Not free people everywhere................ only the nations that the govt. has an interest in.



Originally posted by Darth Sinister

Hussein is monster who has killed his own people, even killed members of his own family for NOTHING...used gas on his own people for NOTHING...HIS OWN PEOPLE!!!!!!! Does he have to use it on us before we can say "OK, he's made his move...now we can fight back". This is insane. Finally, someone has the guts to do something about it...something that the people of Iraq want...someone who will stand up to the monster and make him fall into line. I'm glad that the "educated" have there own little world to live in...but I wish they would stay there because we have problems of our own and don't need the moral authority standing over us crying thier tears for the oppressed. BTW, go to Iraq and say something like this......see what happens.


Hussein gassed Iran during their war as well....back when they were sponsored and assisted by your US government. Again, read this and get back to me:

http://hnn.us/articles/1066.html

In fact...read the articles that Lord Tenebrous has posted as well........it's all very informative, and you really should have as much info at your disposal as possible.

JON9000
11-14-2002, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by Darth Sinister

If I get up another beautiful morning and turn on the TV and see ANY other building burning or people jumping to there deaths...I will hold those who hampered its prevention as equal to those who carried it out responsible. They will be in the same category as our thank God ex-president who did NOTHING....and who also hoped that nothing would happen.

Wow. I love it when Conservatives tell the rest of us to shut our mouths and cease debating because any dissent (from their opinion, of course) aids the enemy- hence we are just as bad as the enemy.

Tell me Darth Sinister, since you would hold me- by virtue of holding a different opinion and speaking out- to be just as responsible as those who would commit such a terrible crime, would you execute me for "helping" them so much? And every other American who doesn't think pre-emptive strikes are the right thing to do? If I am just as responsible- don't you have to execute me?

And since you believe we should execute the threat before it is carried out, should I not be killed where I am standing? (Or at least forced to shut up?)

JediTricks
11-14-2002, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by plasticfetish
Frankly as an adult you should believe that you're always going to have to deal with people that might exercise their opinions in contrast to your own. To assume that your own opinion is the one true truth and that your perspective is without question the only one that matters ... for whatever reason ... is a little selfish.
Everybody read the above, and please remember that not everybody here is an adult... sometimes no matter their age. :crazed:

Nexu
11-14-2002, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by EricRG
I for one, will. I'm sick of "my" government (yeah, right) pushing around the rest of the world to get its way. We even push around the UN these days! All I can say, is that if the US attacks Iraq without provocation and without the "blessing" of the Security Council, there'll be hell to pay in multiple forms. For one, hide your children because terrorists will be working full time. Two, the entire Middle East, minus Israel, will be fuming at us. Three, here at home, I think sentiment for this war is very low...perhaps a "Vietnam era-like" atmosphere. I plan on taking part/organizing protests against any such sad attempt at oil-grabbing in the MidEast.

Go away ya hippie. ;)

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by Nexu


Go away ya hippie.

I guess this pretty much proves JT's point ;)

Nexu
11-14-2002, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by Darth Sinister
I swear I can't believe this thread.

Why is that thousands of people have to die and landmarks have to be destroyed before we get the ok from you people to fight. Look what happened when we just sat on our hands and did nothing. Do we really have to wait for something else to happen before we can go on the offensive? Do we need any more proof that Hussein is hiding something....every time a UN inspector got close to something they were kicked out.....he sponsers terrorists which the last time I checked was a big No-No. Do you people really just want to wait and hope nothing happens?

For the first time, America is standing up for the rights of free people everywhere.....when a country wants our help, we help....when a poverty stricken country needs aid....we aid. What thanks do we get, it's always a what have you done for me lately attitude. What's worse, is we have to listen to the people of THIS country more than others. You want to talk about U.S. interests....I will bet that most of you that talk so negative don't care one bit about those who have been killed and those who WILL be killed if we don't act now. It is your interests that concern you only....will this take money away from me.....will I have to pay more for gas....I, I, I.

Hussein is monster who has killed his own people, even killed members of his own family for NOTHING...used gas on his own people for NOTHING...HIS OWN PEOPLE!!!!!!! Does he have to use it on us before we can say "OK, he's made his move...now we can fight back". This is insane. Finally, someone has the guts to do something about it...something that the people of Iraq want...someone who will stand up to the monster and make him fall into line. I'm glad that the "educated" have there own little world to live in...but I wish they would stay there because we have problems of our own and don't need the moral authority standing over us crying thier tears for the oppressed. BTW, go to Iraq and say something like this......see what happens.

If I get up another beautiful morning and turn on the TV and see ANY other building burning or people jumping to there deaths...I will hold those who hampered its prevention as equal to those who carried it out responsible. They will be in the same category as our thank God ex-president who did NOTHING....and who also hoped that nothing would happen.


Excellant post.
Anyone hear the news that Hussein has bought 1,000,000 units of a nerve gas antidote? Any thoughts? I have one. Kill the [EDITED].


Originally posted by The Overlord Returns


I guess this pretty much proves JT's point ;)

hehehh, yeah, well I am technicaly an adult. ;)


Mod Note: Merged 2 posts that were less then a minute apart and edited out word.
DA

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 04:11 PM
On the nerve gas antidote issue:

http://www.stratribune.com/stories/844/3427094.html (http://www.startribune.com/stories/844/3427094.html)

Note the Turkish govt. departments having no record of an order/ request from Iraq.

Also note it is not a product that appears on the list that Iraq is banned from importing.

Even Colin Powell admits it is most likely a smokescreen, a bluff.

However, those who blindly follow what they're govt. dictates wouldn't really delve any further than CNN, would they?

Lord Tenebrous
11-14-2002, 04:23 PM
I suppose I'm going to have to win this debate...again...on a different angle.


http://www.yaleherald.com/article.php?Article=592


And if you're going to ignore it, then let me just quote the point here:


Osama bin Laden hates Saddam Hussein.

It's something that any Arab living in a dictatorship and watching state-run television knows, and it's a fact that would be apparent to anyone who watched the entire al Qaeda recruitment video, and not just the few-second clips shown on American television. In the video, Saddam is seen reviewing a line of Iraqi army officials. Bin Laden's voice is heard calling Saddam a false Muslim who "only worships the Ba'ath Party"—Saddam's ruling party in Iraq. He then goes on to compare Hussein to Saudi Arabia's King Fahd, whom bin Laden despises more than any other Arab leader.



It would be great news to bin Laden to hear Saddam's demise. The citizens of Iraq and Iran would then be his new allies against the United States.

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 04:35 PM
Even CNN admitted the other night that in a 1995 interview with bin laden, he reffered to Hussein as a bad, or false, muslim.

Still, posting all this information seems pointless, as the pro invasion side is hell bent on ignoring it.

Nexu
11-14-2002, 04:46 PM
For your information, I do not use the liberal news media as my source of information. It's been a long time since I've watched the news. The last thing I heard was an early report on this on Howie Carr's show, and I was merely asking if anyone had any news/thoughts on the issue. I am not "hell-bent" on ignoring anything. But honestly, what does it mean that Bin Laden thinks that Hussein is a bad Muslim, when he is one himself? Is it because he has expirience in the matter? :p

The Overlord Returns
11-14-2002, 04:49 PM
It's in reply to those that seem to think Bin Laden = Hussein.

The point being made is that Bin Laden and Hussein have far more differences than they do similarities.

And as for ignoring...I wasn't singling you out. Since this thread began, any piece of info that was counter "war machine" has been blatantly ignored, whith those choosing not to read it simply stating that Hussein is bad and needs to go, and that their government is doing the noble thing.......

EricRG
11-14-2002, 05:10 PM
Now we have people like nexu making blatant personal attacks in an attempt to get the thread closed, perhaps? Just please note which side every single personal attack has come from. The correlation is striking...some of those advocating an aggressive approach to world politics using a bullying and aggressive approach in their own lives. None of the people questioning the validity of this war have done so. Hmmm...

I also find it funny that people continue to call the news media liberal. I just don't see it. Maybe I'm wrong on this one...?

Lord Tenebrous
11-14-2002, 05:12 PM
Hate to be the Reek's horn, Nexu.

http://www.fair.org/reports/journalist-survey.html
http://www.korpios.org/resurgent/L-liberalmedia.htm
http://www.counterpunch.org/chuckmanmedia.html
http://www.makethemaccountable.com/misc/MythMedia.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/21/column.billpress/


In summary:



Myth: The U.S. has a liberal media.

Fact: The media are being increasingly monopolized by parent corporations with pro-corporate or conservative agendas.




And just so you know, the relevance of Osama/Saddam shows that any credible al Qaeda activity in Iraq would be aimed at Saddam, making bin Laden their savior under the terms the people want.

Osama probably would have destroyed him, too, if Saddam didn't have such high value to George W. Bush. What better way to humiliate Bush, than to have the States fail in a military objective, only to have al Qaeda crush him and convert the nation into a populace of Islamic extremists?



You don't have to answer that, as the other debate team has yet to provide a singe shred of evidence. What they rely on is a lot of BS.

Which is, as my debate professor says, bogus support.

Nexu
11-14-2002, 05:39 PM
Overlord, all I was saying is that Bin Laden are both radical Islamists. Obviously they have many more differences than similarities, with Hussein being the ruler Iraq and all.
Tenebrous, I have nothing to say. Take that however you please.
Eric, I was half-joking. ;)

EricRG
11-14-2002, 08:57 PM
Ok, nexu, if you were 1/2 joking, fine, but that becomes hard to perceive on a screen when you follow with the comments that you did, and the tone that you used, no smilees or anything.

Old Fossil
11-14-2002, 08:57 PM
You know, I ate 3/4 lb. of bacon last night. It was sooo good.

Anybody else here like bacon?

Bobajames
11-14-2002, 09:26 PM
i like bacon, wish you would have shared though of course...
I don't know if i want to read this thread anymore... i don't want to be mad at anyone. this thing is getting to be a point-counterpoint-counterpointinanarrogantway-counterpointwithaninsult kind of thing.

P.S. Bomb em, im sick of hearin about them. i want to pay attention to football, tv, and suvs. that is my pursuit of happiness dammit.

Nexu
11-14-2002, 09:34 PM
Hahah, I liked that last satement. :D
They should have been bombed years ago. I still don't full understand the Gulf War, did it really accomplish anything?

Old Fossil
11-14-2002, 09:43 PM
Bacon tastes good. Pork chops taste good.

Nexu
11-14-2002, 09:45 PM
As does Mountain Dew.

Bobajames
11-14-2002, 09:53 PM
OH man! i found a cool fan made movie at theforce.net 's film section that was called the essence of the force and there was a sith guy trying to capture the essence of the force. his name was mewey maul or something, and this guy that looks like qui-gon came and whooped up on them and took the essence and it was a mountain dew. it was neat

Adam
11-14-2002, 10:16 PM
I love that film!! I never saw that mountain dew coming!



Whatever happens with Iraq, I hope it gets resolved as quickly as possible...

Bobajames
11-14-2002, 10:19 PM
my favorite saying... "can't we all just get along?" i really wish i lived in one of those utopia paradises where no one fights. sometimes humans really **** me off.