Anti-War Movements

Archive of the Sojourn3 General Discussion Forum.
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Anti-War Movements

Postby Daz » Mon Oct 14, 2002 9:05 am

Bah, I am supposed to believe that America, the country that is fueled by (I admit) serving its own needs is seriously worried about war in Iraq?

BS

These kids are desperate to be hippies, so they have something in their otherwise boring little lifes to talk about. They can sit around talking about how 'they made a difference.' Garbage. They want a resume that can include political activist agendas. They want a reason to be cool.

These people are selfish. They say we should not attack first, I say bullshit. I say Iraq is a threat that should be dealt with.

Would you rather wait for your mother get cancer and seek treatment, or do you want her to prevent the cancer from growing?

I don't think its a difficult question.

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
Gerad
Sojourner
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Contact:

Postby Gerad » Mon Oct 14, 2002 9:08 am

I am utterly of the opinion (and have been for a long time) that we should smite iraq with a viscious left handed thwap.

------------------
Auril tells you 'Yes, we're plotting the destruction of all that is holy - and unholy, too. Just to be thorough.'
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Mon Oct 14, 2002 9:26 am

Anyone here ever grow up in a neighborhood where you fought all the time as a kid?

Sometimes, you can't just jump on someone or let them know you are going to hit them. You talk trash, you run your mouth. You make them think its a word game.

The most effective way to drop someone, is to play the word game. Then, in mid sentence, you tag them in the jaw. Seriously, when there guard is down, you just lay one on them, and it will drop them, or hurt like hell.

What iraq is doing stinks of a sucker punch to me.

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
Rausrh
Sojourner
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Madison,WI
Contact:

Postby Rausrh » Mon Oct 14, 2002 3:08 pm

Only a fool would not be worried about any war. War is serious business and demands concern by everyone involved. It is not there to entertain you on CNN.

I'm sure it makes it very easy for you to dismiss arguments from the other side when you can just scoff at them. Why should you listen to a bunch of kids, wanna-be activitists. Of course if you change the word 'hippies' to 'Suits', the argument works against the pro-war activistists too. Neat huh?

I agree that Iraq is a threat, but going to war needs to be very carefully considered. To ignore either side of the debate is folly to a fault. This goes to those who don't want a war as well as to those who do. It may be that we will need to go to war, and if we do I will support it.

Listen, understand, then decide. It makes for better decisions.

------------------
Rausrh licks you.
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Mon Oct 14, 2002 5:22 pm

A quote from John Stuart Mill.

<B>War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more mportant than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
</B>

Yes, America serves its own interests. Our interests include the cause of freedom from tyranny - which benefits all people who believe that freedom is an inalienable right. Iraq is ruled by a tyrant. He's going down, and it isn't going to be as bad as some people are saying. It won't be an apocalypse, there won't be thousands of dead American soldiers. American forces can pretty much strike anything in the country that they can see - and we're watching from space. If you want to argue that it isn't 'right' to attack a tyrant, sure, you can make this into a moral argument (although a flimsy one) but you can't really argue that this will become another Vietnam, etc., etc.



------------------
- Krogenar
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Mon Oct 14, 2002 5:38 pm

Krog - you said you knew me from WD . . . who were you there? I think I remember Krogenar's name . . . but not as the primary character I dealt with or interacted with.

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Mon Oct 14, 2002 6:03 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Daz:
<B>Krog - you said you knew me from WD . . . who were you there? I think I remember Krogenar's name . . . but not as the primary character I dealt with or interacted with.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was Krogenar. Image No alts worth mentioning. I was in the Church of Mysteries for about 1.5 years, part of the time as a leader. The old website for it is http://mystra.netfirms.com and I still have some rolenotes posted on the mud. Image Sojourn will be Krog's new home, I'm hoping.


------------------
- Krogenar

[This message has been edited by Krogenar (edited 10-14-2002).]
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Mon Oct 14, 2002 6:32 pm

Ah, OK - Nice. Heh, I was mostly a PKiller, so I never much figured the Church of Mysteries into my scheming . . . no offense, but you guys weren't the most feared of killers :P

Well, I'm glad you came to sojourn - a lot of WD was ripped off from WD. Wait til you see Tiamat. You will laugh your ass off about Tchazzar. Torm wasn't very original in his theft :P

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
Chandigar2
Sojourner
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Chandigar2 » Mon Oct 14, 2002 6:53 pm

More than 1/2 of the work in our company engineering company is work for the military, and we have some former high ranking military officers as board members and division leads.

You know what really scares me? Not that the US is going to go to war with Iraq, not that lives are going to be lost, but the sheer arrogance of the military attitude and lack of foresight. Their idea of a good plan, no joke here whatsoever, is to lay down a 50 mile grid in afghanistan and carpet nuke the country.

Think about that a minute and be afraid.
Kasula
Sojourner
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Kasula » Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:09 pm

This whole BBS post is BS!

First, to say that people are trying to be cool by saying to No a War is utter crap. To say that people who try to make a difference is full of shit is also crap. You have your opinions and you have posted them on BBS many many of times. I may disagree with you but i have never de-value your right to say them or you as a person. You are doing just that. Because people have different opinion than your own does make them evil or cool... It also doesnt make them right and you wrong. Get off your high horse!

To address that statement by John Stuart Mill, probably out of context and very self-serving. I agree with most of what John Stuart Mill says... but you must put things in perspective. Arent people against the war fighting for something they believe in? Are they not being patriotic because they believe America can do better without a war? Iraq is a threat... agreed. Russia was a much bigger threat in the cold war, but did we start a war with them and try to free the people of USSR? Why didnt we do that... there were more people under Russian control than they are in Iraqi control. Hrmmm... China is HUGE threat right now, they have over a billion people that we believe are not "free." Why dont we invade China to free them from tyranny? Your logic fails me!! Please explain!! Why does America only pick on the smaller countries that they know they can pimp slap? That is the definition of a Bully.
Nedle2
Sojourner
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Nedle2 » Mon Oct 14, 2002 8:06 pm

i'm all for smiting Iraq, should have been dealt with 10 years ago in the appropriate manner, i'm not for supporting loose of american life to get it done (yes i know doesnt make sense - although there are plenty of weapons that can accomplish both - just comes down to priorities and do you really have the stomach for this)

i hope you realize that the problem with smiting iraq in the name of national defense and first strike has nothing to do with iraq....if we do it to iraq...why cannt China do it to taiwan, or india to pakistan, or pakistan to india or russia to chechnya...the list is long, and arguably most of them have stronger case of threat then we do with iraq....

im all for double standards(in certain places), the world thrives on them, but only way to enforce a double standard is to be on top....and no one is currently on top and no one is likely to be on top for some time to come

the problem is twisted and complicated ....

nedle the halfling chanter
Nedle2
Sojourner
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Nedle2 » Mon Oct 14, 2002 8:35 pm

oh more comment: (having lived many years in a lot of these coutries in conversation)

"freeing people of country XYZ" is an interesting comment:
1) most peoples that what to be freed we have zero interest in (taliban rule 10 yrs prior till people realized afghan was a country an not some madeup thing in Rambo, congo, etc...)
2) many peoples in resource rich areas always seemed to want to be freed
3) when united states gained its freedom from the brits it was accomplished with significant outside help

nedle the halfling chanter
thanuk
Sojourner
Posts: 1902
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby thanuk » Mon Oct 14, 2002 8:46 pm

The reason we pick on Iraq, and not China, and not Russia in the cold war, and not any other friggin country, is because Osama Bin Laden either lives, or lived, there in the time after 9/11. The friend of your enemy is your enemy. If you see a kid you dont like, do you punch him in the face? No. But if you see the older brother of a kid who sucker punched you and ran away, do you punch HIM in the face? Damn right, and if yer smart you got a roll of quarters in ur hand when u do it. Russia never killed 5000 civilians. China never killed 5000 civilians. More people died in the WTC attack than died in Pearl Harbor. Did you see what happened to the japanese? How is their army doing these days? But i suppose we shoulda tried to understand why the japanese were so mad at us and sent them food and medical supplies instead of nuking the crap outta them. That woulda ended WWII alot faster, right?

------------------
Thanuk Pantherclaw
Erthyne
Sojourner
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Erthyne » Mon Oct 14, 2002 10:52 pm

I found myself agreeing with Kasula in most aspect. Just because someone doesn't agree with the idea of war, doesn't mean they are stupid/non-patriotic/lame/cowardly/selfish.. etc.

Thing is, I think war is needed in extreme circumstances, but it is EQUALLY or MORE SO important that the people in USA actually KNOW why we are fighting.

W. Bush has been sending out really bad messages with his idiotic comments like, "After all, this is the guy that tried to kill my father." Wtf? So the whole US is going to fight a war for HIS family? What type of BS is that?

And I don't believe for 1 second that we are 'freeing' anyone with war. We tried that in the Vietnam war, how many Vietnamese did we actually 'free'? And how many Vietnamese's life did we fork up beyond repair?

This war thing is not a crusade (again, no thanks for W. Bush's stupid comment and choice of words) it is simply a frightned and beatened country's defense and revenge and attempt to gain back the control in Middle East that the government used to and would love to have again but seemed to have lost (let's put aside whether this control is something we have the rights to have in the first place). It's all about us, not anyone else. But that doesn't make anyone who dislikes war a selfish loser.

True, we shouldn't sit here and wait for them to send a bomb to us before we say "oh, there's your evidence.. let's strike back." so I am not too anti against this war idea (keywords, 'too anti') what I cannot stomach though, is people trying to make a war/themselves better than what it is. We are no different than they are... Killing is killing. Image

[This message has been edited by Erthyne (edited 10-14-2002).]
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Mon Oct 14, 2002 11:11 pm

I think when those protestors have a night club or something similar with 200+ people blown up near them like just happened in Bali, they'll be changing their tune and saying nuke the bastards.

[This message has been edited by rylan (edited 10-14-2002).]
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Mon Oct 14, 2002 11:30 pm

Or maybe some suicide terrorists would hijack a plane and fly it into a commercial building killing thousands of americans and close family members. Well, I guess something like that is ridiculous . . that's absurd, no one would do anything like that.

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Mon Oct 14, 2002 11:38 pm

Heh.. yeah, good point there too.
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 1:54 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Chandigar2:
<B>More than 1/2 of the work in our company engineering company is work for the military, and we have some former high ranking military officers as board members and division leads.

You know what really scares me? Not that the US is going to go to war with Iraq, not that lives are going to be lost, but the sheer arrogance of the military attitude and lack of foresight. Their idea of a good plan, no joke here whatsoever, is to lay down a 50 mile grid in afghanistan and carpet nuke the country.

Think about that a minute and be afraid.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, you've convinced me. I am afraid.

Afraid that I don't understand what you could possibly mean. There's no such thing as 'carpet nuking'. No one, and I mean no one, in the military really is considering nuking the ENTIRE COUNTRY. I hear a lot of crazy talk in bars about it 'being time to turn sand into glass' and such, but I don't think there are any generals in the bar listening in, and thinking, 'Hell yeah! Let's just destroy the whole country! Great idea!!'

For anyone to suggest that is demagoguery. As for a 'lack of foresight' you couldn't be more wrong. The U.S. military will win out for a number of reasons. For one, our soldiers aren't being ruled by an insane madman. Two, U.S. soldiers are the best equipped in the world. And third, we've planned for (I would bet) nearly every possible contingency. If someone didn't realize all this, they might think my attitude is cavalier. It isn't. This will most likely be a quick, one-sided battle.




------------------
- Krogenar
Xisiqomelir
Sojourner
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby Xisiqomelir » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:10 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by thanuk:
<B>Russia never killed 5000 civilians. China never killed 5000 civilians.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They did, actually. It was their OWN civilians of course, but they did do it.

------------------
Cherzra- "My only innate is max 10 evils on"
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:21 am

Well Kasula, you raise some interesting points. Let's go through them, one by one.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Kasula:
This whole BBS post is BS!</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great opening. Inspiring.
I disagree, however. To quote John Stuart Mill a second time (more like paraphrase actually): "Let Truth and Falsehood grapple, for who could doubt that Truth will not win out?" I most likely completely misquoted that, but the gist of it is that differing opinions should collide, if truth is to be discerned.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
First, to say that people are trying to be cool by saying to No a War is utter crap.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some people have the opinion that the anti-war protestors have no interest in the facts of the situation. In their minds, 'War... is... bad!' and nothing else matters. Does this mean there are NO relevent (but differing) opinions regarding the pending 'battle'? No. But these people have yet to convince me that Saddam Hussein shouldn't be removed from power. This is my opinion, which I've come to after examining the facts. My opinion is just as worthy of consideration as yours. Call it 'crap' if you want - it's only fair: I think most of the pro-Hussein crowd is full of crap too. Image

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> To say that people who try to make a difference is full of shit is also crap.</font>


I agree. I wouldn't think of silencing anyone's opinion, no matter how silly and shortsighted I thought it was. If you're trying to make a difference, bravo. We each have to follow our consciences, right? I'm trying to make a difference too.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> You have your opinions and you have posted them on BBS many many of times. I may disagree with you but i have never de-value your right to say them or you as a person. You are doing just that. Because people have different opinion than your own does make them evil or cool... It also doesnt make them right and you wrong. Get off your high horse!</font>


Well, I agree with you that everyone's opinion should be heard, and considered. But I also believe that through this sort of discussion we can determine what is the right course of action. I declare that there is a 'right' and 'wrong' view on this important issue. I also believe everyone has the right to hold whatever opinion they like, regardless of my own conclusions.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">To address that statement by John Stuart Mill, probably out of context and very self-serving. I agree with most of what John Stuart Mill says... but you must put things in perspective. Arent people against the war fighting for something they believe in? Are they not being patriotic because they believe America can do better without a war?</font>


No, I don't think the quote was self-serving. I think it highlighted the way I was feeling about some of the protesters. Most of the protestors I have encountered have paired their opinions not with a healthy patriotism, but with a sneering contempt for America, and its values. It's apparent to me that most of these protestors (again - not all) are willing to coddle a tyrant in order to spite a country I love.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Iraq is a threat... agreed. Russia was a much bigger threat in the cold war, but did we start a war with them and try to free the people of USSR? Why didnt we do that...</font>


Because the Soviets had nuclear weapons, and initiating a war with them would have precipitated a nuclear armageddon. Nuclear winters... people covered with radioactive sores wandering through wastelands... cockroaches laughing their asses off... you get the picture. And that's why we didn't invade the U.S.S.R. - it would have ended the world. Hussein, however, aspires to have weapons that he can terrify the world with. The U.S. is hoping to prevent him from reaching that point. To the horror of some, this requires that we ACT, and not wait. I would gladly expend the lives of some of our soldiers to ensure that future Americans don't live in fear of a suitcase bomb given to terrorists by Saddam Hussein.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> there were more people under Russian control than they are in Iraqi control. Hrmmm... China is HUGE threat right now, they have over a billion people that we believe are not "free." Why dont we invade China to free them from tyranny? Your logic fails me!! Please explain!! Why does America only pick on the smaller countries that they know they can pimp slap? That is the definition of a Bully. </font>


The feeling is mutual. I have no idea how your mind could possibly have constructed such a convoluted logical failure. If we followed your logic, I should not put out small fires, only gigantic forest fires. I can do nothing pro-active, to prevent a catastrophe, only wait until it occurs. You believe that Saddam is a threat, and then blithely call the U.S. a bully.

Which leader has committed genocide on his own people, using biological and chemical weapons? Hussein. Which leader maintains DUNGEONS under his PALACES, in which people who are suspected dissidents are locked into metal boxes, and their hands are mutilated with power drills? Hussein. Who watches his 'people' suffered under horrible poverty while he builds more palaces? Hussein. Who sprayed his own son's car with automatic gunfire, paralyzing him below the waist? Hussein.

I predict someone will quote to me that President Bush is 'beholden to the oil interests!' and is therefore the moral comrade of Saddam Hussein. You believe Saddam is a 'threat' but not a great enough threat to warrant any action. Where's the logic in that?




------------------
- Krogenar
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:36 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Nedle2:
i hope you realize that the problem with smiting iraq in the name of national defense and first strike has nothing to do with iraq....if we do it to iraq...why cannt China do it to taiwan, or india to pakistan, or pakistan to india or russia to chechnya...the list is long, and arguably most of them have stronger case of threat then we do with iraq....</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

China has nothing to fear from the island of Taiwan. Taiwan's population is so small in comparison, China has no fear of military action. What the rulers of China do fear, is having to see a small, democratic island, just a few miles away, flourishing under a capitalist system: the bane, the anti-thesis of what they believe. Taiwan doesn't want to invade or attack China! They just want to live! China's antagonism towards Taiwan stems from the fact that the island broke away from the mainland government, and is now making them look like fools by becoming so prosperous. A few years back China developed missile technology that could hit the small island. How did they demonstrate this fact to the people of Taiwan? The fired a missles that hit the water just across their shores.

America's safety is threatened by Hussein because he's very chummy with terrorists. And we've declared war on terrorists, and those who sponsor them.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">im all for double standards(in certain places), the world thrives on them, but only way to enforce a double standard is to be on top....and no one is currently on top and no one is likely to be on top for some time to come</font>


I think America is on top, and will be for some time to come. The sound of gnashing teeth you're hearing? That's the sound of envy, emanating from all the other countries that don't like the fact that we're on top. Militarily, we're the only country right now that could perform this sort of operation. The least that others could do is let us do it. Everyone benefits when a tyrant dies.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
the problem is twisted and complicated ....
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. But I think its not so complicated that we can't afford to take action.



------------------
- Krogenar
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:40 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Daz:
<B> Ah, OK - Nice. Heh, I was mostly a PKiller, so I never much figured the Church of Mysteries into my scheming . . . no offense, but you guys weren't the most feared of killers :P

Well, I'm glad you came to sojourn - a lot of WD was ripped off from WD. Wait til you see Tiamat. You will laugh your ass off about Tchazzar. Torm wasn't very original in his theft :P

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You were a PKiller, eh? I was never into that much. I'm more of a roleplayer myself. You were in Church of Destruction? ... not the most renowned roleplayers in the Realms. Image I know your alt, but I won't out you. Image

I'm a long way from zoning (I'm gittin' real jazzy wit' da lingo, see?) but I'd just as soon give the developers of Sojourn the benefit of the doubt. So far, I'm impressed with their level of sophistication. They clearly have their shit together.


------------------
- Krogenar
Mplor
Sojourner
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Phoenix

Postby Mplor » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:45 am

Don't write off the peaceniks. Their causes are myriad, some I agree with and some I just don't get. But I respect them for taking informed action.

Global commercialism enriches us, but I fear it may eat us in the end. Capitalism is the best economic philosophy the world has ever known, but one significant drawback that has plagued it (like it's historical predecessors) is the division between the Haves and the Have-nots. We are the Haves. The rank-and-file supporting anti-US terror are Have-nots whose hate is borne in envy and resentment.

Is it our fault? No. Will we continue to be targetted by terror because of it? Certainly. Therefore, it's in our best interest to be willing to at least consider even the so-called radical alternatives to our current system. Never forget that that our government is the custodian of the status quo and champion of the Capitalist: He with Money. It's good to question the Man.

As for Iraq: in the long run, how much safer will we be if we overthrow the Iraqi regime? We remove the immediate threat that Hussein will supply terrorists with WoMD. At the same time time we further radicalize the generation of young Muslims already being seduced by their anti-Western Mullahs.

It may still be in our best interests to stomp the bug in front of us and leave the ones in the walls for later on. My point is simply that there are rational objections to be raised, and those that stump for them deserve our respect even if we don't find their arguments convincing.

Mp

------------------
Kasula
Sojourner
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Kasula » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:47 am

Russia and China has killed much more than 5000 civilians in their country and outside their country. For example, Russia during the Purges... killed over 30 million people. Russia invaded Poland, Czech, Afghanistan and etc etc etc. While China has oppressed Mongolia, Tibet, Taiwan, and etc etc etc. All of this was done with America knowing and doing nothing about it. Osama Bin Laden has never stepped foot in Iraq, this is with current information by the US. America is trying desperately to link Iraq and Bin Laden, but its all propaganda. America foreign policy has alway been at best prejudice and at worst just plain racist. America, if she wants to be the superpower she claims to be, must act like one and not a racist Bully. For example: Ruwanda, where 2million people died without America even batting a eyelash and many others...

The sniper in DC killed 8 people and look at the pain it has caused. Just imagine a war... Iraqi and our soldiers are people with families that has every right to live their lives.
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:58 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Erthyne:
<B>Thing is, I think war is needed in extreme circumstances, but it is EQUALLY or MORE SO important that the people in USA actually KNOW why we are fighting.

W. Bush has been sending out really bad messages with his idiotic comments like, "After all, this is the guy that tried to kill my father." Wtf? So the whole US is going to fight a war for HIS family? What type of BS is that?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're absolutely right. It's crucial that the American people know precisely why we would be using military force. Recently, Bush gave a speech addressing that very subject. Normally, when the President of the United States has something to say, the major networks will interupt whatever situation comedy is currently playing, and say: 'And now... the President of the United States.' That didn't happen with Bush's speech. Only Fox News covered the speech. ABC, NBC, CBS ... they didn't cover the story. Not newsworthy enough. Intersting, eh?

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">And I don't believe for 1 second that we are 'freeing' anyone with war. We tried that in the Vietnam war, how many Vietnamese did we actually 'free'? And how many Vietnamese's life did we fork up beyond repair?</font>


Good point. I think we should be clear about why we're REALLY going to kill Saddam Hussein. He's a tyrranical madman who has helped terrorists attack America, and would gladly do so again. That's a good enough reason. I believe that most of the 'let freedom riiiing!!!' stuff is for the soccer mom crowd, in which 'Lost in Space' was filmed completely on location from inside their collective heads. To me, if we remove Hussein we're doing the people of Iraq a favor. It's a secondary benefit of our attack. As for Bush's comment about Hussein trying to kill his father, that just drives home the point of how low and dirty Hussein really is.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
This war thing is not a crusade (again, no thanks for W. Bush's stupid comment and choice of words)</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, the words you hear from Bush is what the media DECIDES to let you hear. Since the vast majority of journalists lean to the political left, its not surprising that their coverage leans to the left as well.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> it is simply a frightned and beatened country's defense and revenge and attempt to gain back the control in Middle East</font>


Whoa? Frightened? No, I don't think so. You might want to believe that, but no, it ain't so. I'll tell you who's just barely holding his fudge back... Saddam! He's hired a bunch of goddamned DOPPLEGANGERS to fend off assassination attempts from his own people! And he's got concrete bunkers built to survive a nuclear blast. He knows that if and when America attacks, he will not survive.

As for being beaten... why would Hussein fear us, if we are 'beaten'? We were blindsided, attacked, and hurt. But we're back on our feet, and Hussein can see us coming. We're going to kill him. Image

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
It's all about us, not anyone else. But that doesn't make anyone who dislikes war a selfish loser.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, here comes that contempt for America. Let's give Saddam the benefit of the doubt before America. We have a right to defend ourselves.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">True, we shouldn't sit here and wait for them to send a bomb to us before we say "oh, there's your evidence.. let's strike back." so I am not too anti against this war idea (keywords, 'too anti') what I cannot stomach though, is people trying to make a war/themselves better than what it is. We are no different than they are... Killing is killing. Image</font>


Thanks for agreeing that something needs to be done BEFORE we are attacked again. Oh, in recent news, over 100 people were killed in an al Qaeda-linked terrorist bombing in Bali. As for war being ugly and dirty, John Stuart Mill acknowledged that fact. But to say that we're no different from our enemy is ridiculous, and naive. I just think you need to re-examine the facts. War is sometimes a necessary evil. If we wait, more people (not all of them Americans) will suffer. Is that a preferable outcome?

[This message has been edited by Erthyne (edited 10-14-2002).][/B][/QUOTE]



------------------
- Krogenar
Kasula
Sojourner
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Kasula » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:08 am

Krog,

I still dont understand. You said I want America to put out the BIG fires... If America wants to play fireman and put out fires; Shouldnt they put out all fires? Big or small... The whole thing about nuclear weapons statement also escapes me too. We didnt invade Russia or China because they had nuclear weapon. Hrmmm so if Iraq or Afghanistan had nuclear weapons we would not attack... that sounds like America is a pussy or a Bully. Iraq has violated human rights and gased his own people which are all bad. But America has nuked their own people and violated human rights too. Hrmmm... How can America judge others when her history is so shaded too. As Jesus said, The person who hasnt sinned may cast the first stone.
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:11 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Mplor:
It's good to question the Man.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

*nods* Well said. I'm all in favor of questioning our way of doing things. That just leads to innovation. Here's where we differ.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
As for Iraq: in the long run, how much safer will we be if we overthrow the Iraqi regime? We remove the immediate threat that Hussein will supply terrorists with WoMD. At the same time time we further radicalize the generation of young Muslims already being seduced by their anti-Western Mullahs.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Further radicalize them? How exactly could that be done? They are already willing to strap bombs to themselves, and fly jumbo jets into skyscrapers. If we attack, things might get worse. That is possible. But if we wait, they will almost certainly become worse. When faced with this situation isn't it rational to go on the offensive?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
It may still be in our best interests to stomp the bug in front of us and leave the ones in the walls for later on.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hussein is the bug in front of us. We'll stomp him, and then pick up the trail to the next batch of terrorists. Works for me.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> My point is simply that there are rational objections to be raised, and those that stump for them deserve our respect even if we don't find their arguments convincing.</font>


They have my respect, but their opinions are uninformed and unconvincing. That's all I'm saying. And so far, I haven't seen a truly rational (unemotional) reason presented by the peaceniks. Their core principle is that war is 'bad' under any and all circumstances. The End. Could a peacenik please stand up and tell me exactly under what conditions war is acceptable? Prove to me that you are being guided by more than the simple statement 'War is evil. Never make evil, never make war.' When is war an option?



------------------
- Krogenar
Kasula
Sojourner
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Kasula » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:22 am

As Mplor said... Capitalism is the most powerful tool America has and eventually it may take over the world Muahahaha. And it will happen naturally, like it happened in Russia and other parts of the world. It will happen in China, Afghanistan and Iraq. No need for blood sled. Let people chose their own destiny.
Erthyne
Sojourner
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Erthyne » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:26 am

Krog,

Either way, people will suffer.

Does anyone want that? Hopefully not.

Will justifying the killing make me feel better? Will the civilians in that area feel better about their heads being blown off their bodies because we decided that war is a necessary evil..? Don't think so...

If we go to war, people will suffer just as if we don't go to war. Human, as least as I see it, are innately selfish. We are not going to sit around and let them attack us, so we attack them. But no matter what we do, someone is bound to suffer. It's just a matter of us or them.

And what make us so different from our enemy.. our view point? Our EDUCATION? Our CIVILIZATION?

My point remains, no matter what the cause, killing will ALWAYS be killing. It's not something one can rationalize or justify... All we are doing is just trying to put a stop to this (hopefully) before more 'Democratic' countries are harmed by this terrorist business.

And who is to say we are not 'terrorists' in our enemy's eyes? But I digress.

My stand on this is: War is probably required in this situation, but the whole hype of USA seems to have divided into either totally PRO-war or totally ANTI-war, I think we need some grey area here..

[This message has been edited by Erthyne (edited 10-14-2002).]
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:29 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Kasula:
<B>Krog,

I still dont understand. You said I want America to put out the BIG fires... If America wants to play fireman and put out fires; Shouldnt they put out all fires?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's impractical for America to patrol the whole world. But its an acknowledged fact that all nations have a right to defend themselves from foreign attack. Maybe if China had attacked America so directly, we would be at war with them. If the U.S.S.R. (if they still existed) had directly attacked us, we might have gone to war with them too. Iraq has suffered under Hussein's rule for years. Does that mean Americans didn't care about those people? No... but now that Hussein's buddies in Al Qaeda have attacked us directly, we have a good reason (in our own interests) to snuff his regime out of existence. If we get to free the people of Iraq, all the better.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Big or small... The whole thing about nuclear weapons statement also escapes me too. We didnt invade Russia or China because they had nuclear weapon. Hrmmm so if Iraq or Afghanistan had nuclear weapons we would not attack... that sounds like America is a pussy or a Bully.</font>


Ah, no. Russia and China did not support a gang of religious thugs in their efforts to terrorize and kill our citizens, as Hussein has done, and continues to do. If you really think America is a 'pussy' you're really out of touch. Most of the envious people in nTH world countries see America as a dangerous cowboy, not a pussy. Nice language too. Potty mouth. Image *snicker*

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Iraq has violated human rights and gased his own people which are all bad.</font>


Yeah! I heard Saddam Hussein jaywalked once too. That was bad too! *tsk* *tsk*

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> But America has nuked their own people and violated human rights too.</font>


What?! I declare this to now be a 'reality free' zone. We (holds on to the computer screen) 'nuked' our own people? When was that? Which history textbook have you been reading? I assume you mean we intentionally nuked our own people? Have we violated human rights? Sure! And we've held ourselves accountable, and seek to change our ways. You can point to slavery, and other past misdeeds, but you can't say America hasn't tried to be fair to others, over time. And we've held OURSELVES responsible. When has Saddam Hussein stood before the people of Iraq and said: 'Sorry about the whole, you know, genocide thing. It was wrong... and, and, I'm sorry, really I am. And the jaywalking... that was wrong too.' (sprays the crowd with automatic weapons fire!) Anyone who can say that America and Hussein are morally equivalent, I declare that you must have a brain the size of a chick pea.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
Hrmmm... How can America judge others when her history is so shaded too. As Jesus said, The person who hasnt sinned may cast the first stone. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh Jesus, help this man! I'm not interesting in judging Saddam, I'm interested in killing him! U.S. General 'Stormin' Norman Schwartkopf (I know I didn't spell his name right) was asked after 9/11 if he thought it was out duty to forgive the terrorists for what they did to us. He replied: 'I think its up to God to decide to forgive them. It's our job to arrange the meeting.'



------------------
- Krogenar
Mplor
Sojourner
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Phoenix

Postby Mplor » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:48 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Krogenar:
Further radicalize them? How exactly could that be done? They are already willing to strap bombs to themselves, and fly jumbo jets into skyscrapers. If we attack, things might get worse. That is possible. But if we wait, they will almost certainly become worse. When faced with this situation isn't it rational to go on the offensive?</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your incredulity suggests you believe the general Muslim populace is already as radical and dangerous as they will ever become. I must disagree. Until recently the people blowing themselves up to hurt us have been a vocal minority funded by a rich minority.

Actions, however, speak louder than rants, and the fundamentalist's siren call has been amplified by perceived successes. Today, the majority of Middle Eastern Muslim youths express sympathy for bin Laden. It's popular to hate America and it's becoming ever more so. An ugly war in Iraq, covered in gruesome detail by Al Jazeera and beamed into every roof-top dish in the Middle East will re-define for you the extent of that radicalism.

I believe the greatest threat to the US and the world in the next 50 years is a thoroughly radicalized Middle East. What made al Qaeda uniquely dangerous was that they were an international terrorist group that had taken over a country. What happens when violent dissent over the Iraqi war spawns popular revolutions that bring Fundamentalist regimes into power in Saudi Arabia and Egypt? We're no longer talking Afghanistan, a bombed out shell of a nation. That should concern us all. And if you think it can't happen because the US supports those governments, meet my suburban neighbor the Shah.

I'm in no way saying that Hussein being ousted isn't a good thing, in a limited view. I'm trying to point out that there are broader dangers that our country is blithely driving toward. It's not as simple as you think.

Mp

------------------
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 3:52 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Erthyne:
<B>Krog,
Either way, people will suffer.
Does anyone want that? Hopefully not.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The feeling Erthyne, is quite mutual. War is horrible. People in Iraq ill inevitably be killed that had nothing to do with the terrorists, or with Saddam Hussein's tyrannical regime. They'll just be at work that day, and die for no good reaons.

But in your understandable lamentation of war's horrible reality, you're forgetting that Americans didn't choose to be in this situation. On September 11th, 2001, over 3,000 people went to work one day, and never came back. Those terrorists on those planes that day, they were at war with us. There was no declaration, and they didn't aim for our soldiers. They aimed at civilians.
Will American soldiers follow the old mantra of 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth'? Will American soldiers target civilians intentionally, or will it more likely be an accident. Which is more horrific, the intentional targeting of innocent people, or the accidental killing of people?

Intent MATTERS. It is simplistic and silly to declare that all death is bad, and therefore NEVER justified. If by removing a regime through some bloodshed we SAVE the lives of others, then it is justified. We have been attacked, and in order to prevent further attacks, we will go on the offensive.

I truly, truly share your sadness that war is necessary. But I can't sit on the floor crying about it. I just can't. I have a family I care about, and I won't, CAN'T sit back and just hope it won't happen again. I would be failing as a son, as an American, as an brother and an uncle, if I just hoped.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>If we go to war, people will suffer just as if we don't go to war. Human, as least as I see it, are innately selfish. We are not going to sit around and let them attack us, so we attack them. But no matter what we do, someone is bound to suffer. It's just a matter of us or them.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I'm selfish to decide that it will be THEM to suffer, and not me - label me selfish. In addition, I will decide that instead of my family being killed, it will be the few madmen that have started this war, rather than someone else.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
And what make us so different from our enemy.. our view point? Our EDUCATION? Our CIVILIZATION?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, we are different. I can see everyone's been drinking the same Kool-Aid. Image We are different, in terms of our culture. We don't attack innocent civilians, and we stand for liberty and freedom from tyranny. And when individual members of our culture fall short, or act contrary to that culture, we are genuinely angered and move to correct our errors and prevent them. That's the difference.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
My point remains, no matter what the cause, killing will ALWAYS be killing. It's not something one can rationalize or justify...
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ethical hypothesis for you, and anyone else willing to participate. You are seated with a man who you discover to be a serial murderer. You are in a position to kill him, but you do not have any other recourse. You cannot call a policeman to arrest him, and you cannot overpower him. But you have an opportunity to thrust a knife in his back and end his life. You know for a fact that he is planning additional murders.

You can:

a) Let him go. (again, police will not be able to stop him before he kills again.)
b) Kill him then and there.

If you choose a) he will surely kill more people. If you choose b) one person will die, and other murders will be prevented.

Some people will choose a) believing that murder is wrong under any and all circumstances. But by allowing him to live, you doom others to be murdered. If we decide that 'good' outcomes are defined as leaving the most people alive after the decision is made, then a rational person would choose the unsavory choice of b) kill the man where he is, here and now. Now, if someone were to gleefully choose b) and thank their lucky stars that they were given such a lovely opportunity, then yes - we have a crazy person on our hands. Just the same, the overall 'net good' would be improved by choosing b). We can cry all we like, but to be responsible we must sometimes perform unsavory tasks: like war.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
And who is to say we are not 'terrorists' in our enemy's eyes? But I digress.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
We're not terrorists. There, I said it. Image



------------------
- Krogenar
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 4:18 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Mplor:
Your incredulity suggests you believe the general Muslim populace is already as radical and dangerous as they will ever become. I must disagree. Until recently the people blowing themselves up to hurt us have been a vocal minority funded by a rich minority.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If all the Arab nations rose up in unison (very, very low chance of that happening), a single U.S. aircraft carrier, and the accompanying destroyer fleet (we have over a dozen aircraft carriers) would be sufficient to lay all these countries low. They have resorted to terrorism because its the ONLY WAY they can really harm us. From within. Militarily, the Arab nation are not of great consequence. I can quote their military inadequacies in a number of ways, if you need me to. The possibility that things might get worse is not a viable excuse for complacency. It's an established cultural fact that the Arab world respects strength.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
Actions, however, speak louder than rants,
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well said. Which is why I support the removal of all governments that cozy up to terrorists. Enough talk. Let's roll.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
and the fundamentalist's siren call has been amplified by perceived successes.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Saddam Hussein is seen by much of the Arab world as a strong man, someone to look up to. Not for much longer. I think they will perceive his failure, and learn from it, hopefully. Some may see his demise as heroic, but that's ok. We'll send them on their way to a glorious afterlife as well.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Today, the majority of Middle Eastern Muslim youths express sympathy for bin Laden. It's popular to hate America and it's becoming ever more so. An ugly war in Iraq, covered in gruesome detail by Al Jazeera and beamed into every roof-top dish in the Middle East will re-define for you the extent of that radicalism.</font>


When I was 6 years old I was stung by a wasp. My grandfather worked for 35 years in Central Park in New York City, pruning and planting trees. When I showed him the sting, he asked me to show him where it happened. He spotted the wasp's hive in the tree, and he told me to go inside. He said he was going to get the hive. I was scared (I love my grandpa!) he would be stung.

Later, he brought me outside to show me the hive. He had put it in a plastic bag, where the whole hive was slowly suffocating. He was stung several times in the process, but he was smiling. Later, he gave me the hive as a present, and I still have it.

He wasn't afraid to suffer a few stings in the course of doing what he had to do. My grandfather didn't say: 'Listen... stay away from those wasps, ok? Find someplace else to play.' I was only six at the time, so I can't tell you everything he was thinking. Maybe he was just thinking of protecting me (and my two sisters) or maybe he was ALSO thinking of the other kids that played nearby too. Either way, he knew he had the skill to climb the tree, and get rid of the danger. And he did it. That requires courage and dedication.

Now, maybe my little story creeped you out, and you think I'm the grandson of some wasp-asphyxiating madman. That's ok. I was just glad he did it.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I believe the greatest threat to the US and the world in the next 50 years is a thoroughly radicalized Middle East. What made al Qaeda uniquely dangerous was that they were an international terrorist group that had taken over a country. What happens when violent dissent over the Iraqi war spawns popular revolutions that bring Fundamentalist regimes into power in Saudi Arabia and Egypt?</font>


If we hit this wasps nest, they may come out and sting us! Better to just let them remain angry anyway, and hope they'll leave us alone!

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I'm in no way saying that Hussein being ousted isn't a good thing, in a limited view. I'm trying to point out that there are broader dangers that our country is blithely driving toward. It's not as simple as you think.</font>


I would LIKE to see the hive go away, maybe through magic, or a genie of some kind. But removing this hive won't remove ALL hives, so we should be cautious.

Sometimes, it's as simple as getting it done. You grab the hive, grimace through the stings that you KNEW you were going to receive, and shove the hive in a plastic bag, to slowly die. As we wait to put them in the bag, they continue to sting us.

Someday, Americans living in Iraq (the 51st state) will remember when a tyrant ruled over the land. I look forward to that day. I think we should remove Hussein, and declare all the Iraqis as American citizens. Image




------------------
- Krogenar
Mplor
Sojourner
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Phoenix

Postby Mplor » Tue Oct 15, 2002 4:43 am

Krogenar, you are objectifying your enemy, in the time-tested tradition of all who are prepared to sanction their destruction. I'll spare you the obligatory and offensive historical metaphors. I will say this, however: the Muslims who hate us are not that different from you and me. They are not wasps that sting because that is simply what they do. Just as we are reacting to the actions of some Muslims, they are reacting to perceived actions by us.

Before we pursue a course of action that will surely escalate our mutual misunderstanding and animosity, we absolutely must consider the consequences. I have read your opinions and those of others more well-informed than either of us, and I am not yet convinced that war is our best long-term option.

Mp

------------------
Erthyne
Sojourner
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Erthyne » Tue Oct 15, 2002 5:18 am

Hat off to Mplor..

For mentioning a point that I tried hard to express but seemed to have failed so far: the point that there are two sides to the matter and also for pointing out that we seem to have generalized our enemies to be all 'muslims' objectified them as nothing but our 'enemies'.

This is something people always do. Once we stop viewing them as a human beings, hatred towards them seems so much easier and so much more profound.

Surely some of the action committed by people belonging to the Muslim community is horrendous, but there are normal day to day people like you and me too.

I guess it's just hard to remember that when most of the media we are exposed seem to be concentrating on reporting how 'evil' they are.

I agree too that war is not a good long-term solution, it never is and never will be.


Krog,
I am not so sure about declaring people from Iraq United States citizens and calling Iraq the 51st State. They have their own culture, whether we see eye to eye with that or not, and they sure as hell have their own ethnical pride. *poke*

[This message has been edited by Erthyne (edited 10-15-2002).]
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Tue Oct 15, 2002 6:09 am

My little brother starts his advanced desert combat training next month. As long as their 'culture' wants to publicly hurt my little brother, I am fully in support of wiping out every living person, guilty or not - until they realize who they decided to fuck with.

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Tue Oct 15, 2002 7:02 am

Hey Krogenar, I have some news for you!


Iraq != Al Qaeda.


*waits for the stunned gasp*

[This message has been edited by cherzra (edited 10-15-2002).]
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Tue Oct 15, 2002 7:09 am

I think many of us know this, however - I can't help but wonder what sort of economical and political connections are tied between the two.

I don't know anymore, I am tired of caring. To hell with it, let Iraq do their thing. Maybe they will be peaceful, maybe not - but if we do nothing, and then they nuke some other lame country, I sure as hell will be pissed because I know the world will cry about why America didn't do anything to stop it.

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
Musi
Sojourner
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 6:01 am

Postby Musi » Tue Oct 15, 2002 12:21 pm

First of all, I don't know how many of you are in the US. But to me (who does reside in the US), I think Bush is stupid. Absolutely nuts and he needs to be removed from office asap! He's trying to improve his failing ratings (they are starting to fall quickly now) and do what daddy didn't 11 years ago Image

I have TREMENDOUS respect for our military. They are the ones protecting us and risking their lives. I don't want to see any of them hurt or dead because our president is in this for his own gain.

Do we need to remove Saddam from power? Or would it be better to take away his weapons? I REALLY don't us to start a war that either A) will get our troops killed or B) piss the rest of the world off at us Image

I think Bush should finish one war (the one on terror) before he goes rushing off to fight another one. (Not comparing countries here) That's what Hitler did and that's why he lost WW2. He tried to take over too much, too quickly. We're not out to overtake Iraq, but to knock down their chances of making weapons of mass destruction.

I think Bush now realizes that the economy is worse than it has been since dear old dad was in office. So how did daddy try to improve his rating while taking people's minds off the economy? Start a war! Of course! Like father, like son Image

We were the laughing stock of the world when Clinton almost got kicked out of office for getting a BJ. Now we have a self serving asshole in office Image so why aren't we doing something to prevent him from getting us all killed? I think that's worse than getting oral sex!!

I think we only have Britain (maybe only Tony Blair's) backing. France, Russia, and China aren't going to back us Image If he stirs up more shit, I can almost guarantee there's going to be more attacks on the US, thanks to him. I, for one, do NOT want to pay for Bush's push to hurry up with this war. The muslim world hates us enough as it is. He must just figure if we bomb the shit out of them, then drop some food, that they'll love us for it. As far as I know, the Afgans still don't like us.

Oh well. I'll end this rant before I think of anything else Image


------------------
Musi "Desperate to get ress" Ailis
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Tue Oct 15, 2002 12:58 pm

russia will back us. they are ONLY supporting Iraq at all become of 50 billion dollars worth of debts and oil agreements.

france? nothing personal, but they aren't the voice of opposition.

china is more of a wildcard, i haven't heard anything about them. i think bush is hoping uk/russia/france will convince china to play along.

as to the war on terror - there seems to be a confusion on that; where this war starts and that war ended - or if/are they one and the same?

------------------
The wardens of the cage disallow all commands except say, petition, project and help
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 1:33 pm

Ok, I'll rebut your points as I always do: one at a time. First up, Mplor.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Krogenar, you are objectifying your enemy, in the time-tested tradition of all who are prepared to sanction their destruction.</font>


I have the courage to identify my opponent, yes. I know that's not very chic right now, very out of style. I must seem like a caveman. But the world isn't ALWAYS a grey area. There are some areas in which the course of action is clear.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> I'll spare you the obligatory and offensive historical metaphors.</font>


Thank you.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I will say this, however: the Muslims who hate us are not that different from you and me. They are not wasps that sting because that is simply what they do. Just as we are reacting to the actions of some Muslims, they are reacting to perceived actions by us.</font>


Yes, I know. All we need is love. My apologies to the 'Kumbaya-I'd-like-to-buy-the-world-a-coke' crowd. I'll make you guys a deal. Convince me of a path besides war that will accomplish the goal of protecting American lives. If you can provide me with an alternative to annihilating the terrorists, I'd be glad to discuss it.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Before we pursue a course of action that will surely escalate our mutual misunderstanding and animosity, we absolutely must consider the consequences. I have read your opinions and those of others more well-informed than either of us, and I am not yet convinced that war is our best long-term option.</font>


Whats your alternative? I'm betting you don't have one. But prove me wrong. Show me that I don't have to kill the terrorists in order to stop them, and I'll thank you.

Now, on to Erthyne. Image

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>Hat off to Mplor..
For mentioning a point that I tried hard to express but seemed to have failed so far: the point that there are two sides to the matter and also for pointing out that we seem to have generalized our enemies to be all 'muslims' objectified them as nothing but our 'enemies'.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You've missed my point. I know that the terrorists you're defending are human beings in a biological sense - but that's where the similarity ends. I don't want (and don't need) to kill 'all muslims'. I never stated that, not once. Look back through all my posts, and you won't find me stating that. You also won't find me objectifying the people of Iraq either.

I think you and Mplor have such a deep mistrust of ANY use of force, that the details are unimportant. The fact that we've been attacked, and that the terrorists are being sheltered by Hussein are immaterial to you two, apparently.

I keep hearing people say in the same breath: 'Yes, Saddam is a threat... but this is a complex, complicated, multi-faceted situation that has two sides... ' ad nauseum.
We need to act. NOW. Before Saddam has a nuclear weapon. He will not become less of a threat as time marches on, his threat will increase.

Happily, the state of American warfare allows us to be nearly surgical in our attacks. We don't need to blow up entire cities. Only the armies and tyrants are in direct harm. True, Saddam will most likely surround himself with as many innocent people as he can - because he's human garbage. That's not the behavior of a caring leader. That's the behavior of a cruel thug, who uses a small child as a shield.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I agree too that war is not a good long-term solution, it never is and never will be.</font>


That's so incredibly naive. This coming conflict in Iraq will not be long-term. We'll remove Saddam's regime, and then begin REBUILDING what we needed to demolish.

Secondly, if force is never, and was never, necessary - then how do you explain the rescuing of the Holocaust survivors at the end of World War II? Had force not been used, none of those people would have survived. They would have been gassed, and incinerated by the Nazis. I know you and Mplor mean well, and are trying to do what's right - I really believe that. I just think you're making a horrible mistake to put your ideals ahead of people, ahead of stark reality.

[quote]<B>Krog,
I am not so sure about declaring people from Iraq United States citizens and calling Iraq the 51st State. They have their own culture, whether we see eye to eye with that or not, and they sure as hell have their own ethnical pride. *poke*</B>[/rant]

(wipes the froth from his mouth) Yeah, you're right, that was over the top. We should just leave the country when we're done scooping the terrorists out of Iraq like seeds from a raw melon. That was over the top. We should offer them the choice, and let them vote on it. Image



------------------
- Krogenar
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 1:42 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
<B>Hey Krogenar, I have some news for you!
Iraq != Al Qaeda.
*waits for the stunned gasp*
[This message has been edited by cherzra (edited 10-15-2002).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

News Flash:Iraq is a country. Al Qaeda is an organization.

Now, bok choy may be similar to cabbage, but that's off topic. Also, hats off to Cherzra on writing an excellent Newbie Guide. In the easy to use PDF format to boot. Image Thanks.

To be serious, though, I think many people have been confusing IRAQ with Saddam Hussein. America isn't attacking IRAQ the country, we're attacking the tyrannical regime led by Saddam Hussein. We have no quarrel with the people who live in Iraq, that aren't terrorists.

Hussein, however, does have terrorist ties. So he's soon to become dog chow. Another tyrant/terrorist bites the dust. *grin*


------------------
- Krogenar
Gromikazer
Sojourner
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Gromikazer » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:03 pm

I have to take a moment, to collect my thoughts so I don't flame anyone by accident.

How many 'civilians' will die before the terrorist attacks of ANY type cease? 1? 100? 1000? A Million?

First, Saddam not only refused to allow UN representitives to moderate his weapons, but also has said that he would 'nuke' Israel if he could. He has killed entire sects of his population, invaded neihboring countries, and held americans prisoner. As if this isn't enough, there have also been numerous financial links going between Saddam and Osama. This is warrant enough for me that a war in the middle east is necessary, and especially on terrorists LIKE Saddam.

People will die, wether we attack or not. Terrorist organizations don't rationalize their attacks to a point of saying "Hey the US has been cool this week, lets not try and attack."

------------------
Gromikazer Terrorforge -Veldruk- Orbdrin D'oloth
Krogenar
Sojourner
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: New York,NY USA
Contact:

Postby Krogenar » Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:09 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Musi:
<B>First of all, I don't know how many of you are in the US. But to me (who does reside in the US), I think Bush is stupid. Absolutely nuts and he needs to be removed from office asap! He's trying to improve his failing ratings (they are starting to fall quickly now) and do what daddy didn't 11 years ago Image

I have TREMENDOUS respect for our military. They are the ones protecting us and risking their lives. I don't want to see any of them hurt or dead because our president is in this for his own gain.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're wrong in a number of ways. For one, Bush's approval rating is very high, and rising. This is what has the democrats so terrified. Republicans have traditionally been very strong on defense, while leftists have ... not. Image Also, elections are around the corner, and they're justifiably terrified.

Then, you point out that you think Bush is a total moron - but you respect the military. If you respect the military, extend that same respect to our elected leaders. Bush is the commander-in-chief - a member of the military himself. Where's your evidence that Bush is stupid? Was he stupid, when, the democrats clamored for him to get congressional support for the Iraq attack, and he.... he said sure! And decided to put it to a vote. This puts every senator on the hot seat. Now they all have to register their vote either for or against the fight. So there can't be any wriggling around during the elections. Everyone will know who voted for the war, and who opposed it. Bush outmanuevered his political opponents. Not bad for a moron.

As for our military personnel, I don't want to see them hurt either. Luckily, we've trained them well, and they are the best equipped army on the planet. They'll do their jobs, and they understand the risks. Have some faith in them.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>
Do we need to remove Saddam from power? Or would it be better to take away his weapons? I REALLY don't us to start a war that either A) will get our troops killed or B) piss the rest of the world off at us Image
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is not high school. It takes courage to go against the tide sometimes. We shouldn't take a poll of all the nations, and then do whatever they think is best. Should we be aware of their feelings? Sure. But they won't prevent us from doing the right thing for ourselves.

If we took weapons from Saddam, he would still be enslaving the people of Iraq, and sooner or later he'd get weapons again and try to use them. There are risks in any serious undertaking.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I think Bush should finish one war (the one on terror) before he goes rushing off to fight another one. (Not comparing countries here) That's what Hitler did and that's why he lost WW2. He tried to take over too much, too quickly. We're not out to overtake Iraq, but to knock down their chances of making weapons of mass destruction.</font>


This is one war we're fighting. The war of terror will require that we destroy those regimes that support terrorism, and give shelter to terrorists: like Saddam Hussein's regime. This is one war. Iraq will be a pushover - not World War III.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I think Bush now realizes that the economy is worse than it has been since dear old dad was in office. So how did daddy try to improve his rating while taking people's minds off the economy? Start a war! Of course! Like father, like son Image</font>


Again, you're not aware of the facts, just the fashionably hip 'talk' of some of the peaceniks. The Gulf War started when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Remember that? Your smug derision of President Bush isn't founded in any facts, just a sense of what is cool to say.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">We were the laughing stock of the world when Clinton almost got kicked out of office for getting a BJ. Now we have a self serving asshole in office Image so why aren't we doing something to prevent him from getting us all killed? I think that's worse than getting oral sex!!</font>


Get us all killed? His action are protecting us. Clinton was (in my opinion) the worst president this country has ever had. He was an embarassment. He tarnished the office of the president with his antics. And he went on national television, looked into the eyes of every American watching, and LIED right to their faces. Ronald Reagan wouldn't walk into the Oval Office without a tie on. Clinton turned it into the Oral Office. And democrats screechingly defended him on the basis that he's the president, we can't remove him, and we can't hold him to such a high standard. People in power should be held to a HIGHER standard, not lower.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Image If he stirs up more shit, I can almost guarantee there's going to be more attacks on the US, thanks to him. I, for one, do NOT want to pay for Bush's push to hurry up with this war.</font>


Pushed around on the playground much? We have to fight back. Even now, terrorists are attacking us however they can. Do you think they aren't already trying their very best?

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> The muslim world hates us enough as it is.</font>


So... they attack us, and your advice to prevent further attacks is to... not get them any more angry at us?


------------------
- Krogenar
Mplor
Sojourner
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Phoenix

Postby Mplor » Tue Oct 15, 2002 4:39 pm

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Krogenar wrote: [b]Yes, I know. All we need is love. My apologies to the 'Kumbaya-I'd-like-to-buy-the-world-a-coke' crowd. I'll make you guys a deal. Convince me of a path besides war that will accomplish the goal of protecting American lives . . . Whats your alternative? I'm betting you don't have one. But prove me wrong. [b]</font>


You know you're a jingoist when war is your default course of action, alternatives to which must be proven. The hawks must always be required to make the case for war, not the doves the case for peace. Our criminal justice system defaults to innocence, and in our war-making we must likewise default to peace. When war is demonstrably necessary, we wage it (and usually win). But, the case for war against Iraq has not been made to my satisfaction, so I continue to express my doubts.

So far, you've answered my concerns that a ground war in the Middle East will more completely polarize Middle Eastern support for anti-US terrorism with the blithe response (paraphrased), "So what? If they cause trouble then we'll go to war with them too, because we can." Your response betrays a gross misunderstanding of the wages of large-scale warfare and a sad failure to grasp the lessons of history.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Krogenar wrote: [b]If you can provide me with an alternative to annihilating the terrorists, I'd be glad to discuss it. . .Show me that I don't have to kill the terrorists in order to stop them, and I'll thank you.[b]</font>


Here you are playing a shell game with the truth. You've made the claim that attacking Iraq is necessary and then you are supporting that claim by citing "the terrorists". I can only presume that "the terrorists" you are referring to are those who have attacked or are attacking the US. Saddam is a thug and provides financial support to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel, but there is no evidence, inferential or otherwise, that he funded, harbored, or was even aware of the September 11 scheme. In fact, the Bush administration admits as much and is very careful not to make that claim.

What the Bush administration does claim is that Iraq is probably developing weapons of mass destruction, which he will likely use to further destabilize the Middle East, and that it's conceivable that he might provide them to terrorist groups targetting the US. That's a lot of maybes for the case for war to be built upon, and I'm not convinced that ridding the world of the dangers posed by Hussein won't, instead, make the world a far more dangerous place instead.

Feel free to make better arguments for war on Iraq. Dissecting your opponents' posts displays your wit but not the strength of your case.

Mp

------------------
Musi
Sojourner
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 6:01 am

Postby Musi » Tue Oct 15, 2002 7:44 pm

On the ABCnews.com site there is an article about how Bush's rating is dropping off significantly recently due to the recession we're in. Must be nice to have all that money and not to give a shit that people are out of work in our own country.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/Iraqpoll020927.html

It DOES say that his ratings are pretty high, but they ARE dropping because he's pushing the war and not things such as the economy, healthcare, education. You know...all the shit that he talked big about before he was elected and has done shit for since his election.

Let's also look at an article about the economy while we're at it:

http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/business/DailyNews/abcmoneypoll020918.html

The people that probably said that the economy is good are the really rich (Bill Gates lost what? 45 BILLION last year?!) and the criminally insane.

Here's another article about what the rest of the world was thinking about the 2000 election:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/ELECTIONS_world0001106.html

Remember when Bush couldn't even remember world leaders names?

I would rather my president get BJs and for people to have jobs, than to be a drunken idiot (remember this guy DOES have DUIs) and get us into a bunch of wars.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/Bush_Arrest001102.html

Also, must be nice to have your brother rig the election too with a bunch of idiots that don't know how to punch a hole in a card. I did! And it wasn't f***ing hard!! Speaking of good ol Jeb and the rest of the gang, it sounds like alcoholism runs in the family, you have W who was caught DD, then his daughters having fake IDs to get into bars, Jeb's daughter ALSO getting a slap on the wrist for alcohol. Sounds to me like it's a family of lushes. Maybe daddy dearest was a drunk and that's why he didn't finish Saddam off when he had the chance?

(EDIT: Another thing I don't understand is why is Bush sitting there saying we're going to attack, we're going to attack. Then someone tells the media where our troops are, what kind of bombs we're going to drop and where. Isn't that supposed to be classified? Like in the Gulf disturbance, (war? don't think it was. Maybe between Iraq and Kuwait, but the US came in, dropped some bombs, and went home) I kept hearing on the news about the different planes we have, the bombs and what they do and how much they weight etc... If you really want to catch someone by surprise (think someone said this earlier) hit them hard and quick and don't tell them you're going to do so. All this bullshit saying we're going to attack. WTF does Bush think Saddam is doing right now? He's hiding any shit that the UN wouldn't like that would give the US a real reason to attack! If we are going to go to war, this is a serious detriment!)

I could go on and on, but politics bores me. They all lie and have all the money and power to do so. I just hate seeing the country go to shit.


------------------
Musi "Desperate to get ress" Ailis

[This message has been edited by Musi (edited 10-15-2002).]
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:38 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Musi:
<B>I would rather my president get BJs and for people to have jobs, than to be a drunken idiot (remember this guy DOES have DUIs) and get us into a bunch of wars.

Also, must be nice to have your brother rig the election too with a bunch of idiots that don't know how to punch a hole in a card. I did! And it wasn't f***ing hard!! Speaking of good ol Jeb and the rest of the gang, it sounds like alcoholism runs in the family, you have W who was caught DD, then his daughters having fake IDs to get into bars, Jeb's daughter ALSO getting a slap on the wrist for alcohol. Sounds to me like it's a family of lushes. Maybe daddy dearest was a drunk and that's why he didn't finish Saddam off when he had the chance?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Theres so much disturbingly wrong with these statements. So he used to drink.. -used to-. Wtf does that have to do with how he runs the country now? Billy Clinton fucked this country over much more than people realize.. in fact he had several chances to get rid of Bin Laden and didn't bother, because he was too busy selling our military technology to China and other countries for big donations to his party. In addition, hes the one that screwed our intelligance and military over hard with so many cuts.. and you wonder why they can't figure out whats going on with 1/3 the people. Oh, and guess what.. the economy has a couple year lag between the current set policies and how the policies work. It was already headed down back when clinton was in office.
Your statement about having Jeb 'rig the election' just shows your own ignorance on the topic. Even indepentant agencies did counts of the ballots after the fact, and found that bush would've -still- won.. convienant how the media didn't bother to cover those stories. As you said.. its not f'ing hard to punch a hole in a ballot. The people there are obviously too stupid to know how to vote correctly, as it happened again in the last election about a month ago in the same Florida counties.. but this time the democrats were screaming that the questionable votes should be thrown out since it would help them. Not to mention how they only wanted the votes of the people in the most liberal counties recounted and not to count the military votes which are predominantly replublican.. hrm.. wonder why the people who protect our country vote republican... I'll let you figure that one out.

Whats it going to take for you to decide to go out and kill these terrorist bastards? A sniper picking off your friends? Getting blown up while at a nightclub? Oh, wait.. guess thats not enough. How about a nuclear weapon in a major city? Waiting for the 'smoking gun' is too late, because the damned thing is already smoking for a reason.. it went off.
Musi
Sojourner
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 6:01 am

Postby Musi » Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:20 pm

This is getting really old, so this will be my last post on this topic.

Do you know Bush personally? Do you know for a fact that he has stopped drinking?

You say Clinton f***ed the country?! How about how daddy Bush stood by while Reagan sold arms to the middle east? Then he didn't do enough to try to correct his earlier inaction.

I know the economy has a 1-2 year lag. So look at the statistics. The first 2 years Clinton was president, the economy sucked. For the next 6 years, business was booming. Then Bush gets in, and the economy starts sinking after a few months.

"Whats it going to take for you to decide to go out and kill these terrorist bastards? A sniper picking off your friends? Getting blown up while at a nightclub? Oh, wait.. guess thats not enough. How about a nuclear weapon in a major city? Waiting for the 'smoking gun' is too late, because the damned thing is already smoking for a reason.. it went off."

I'm not going to go out and kill anyone. What's it going to take for YOU to go out and start killing people? Do you do racial profiling? Do you know the sniper in Virginia? Why don't you go out and try to find him/her/them? I don't know what that has to do with the rest of our country. It's probably some poor bastard that lost his job due to the economy and has gone nuts. If the terrorists want to hit us again, they certainly wouldn't do it one at a time.

You're free to your opinion, just as I am free to mine, so I don't know why you feel like you have to rebut everything I say. Maybe you have nothing better to do, but I do. There's no point in trying to state my OPINION and have someone tell me I'm wrong, so I'm not going to bother checking this topic again.


------------------
Musi "Desperate to get ress" Ailis
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:24 pm

You're making the same mistake most people do.


Iraq != Al Qaeda
Iraq != Terrorists

For all Dubya's rhetoric, he hasn't even proven so much as Osama sending a vacation postcard to Saddam.
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Wed Oct 16, 2002 6:41 pm

Musi, I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just voicing mine also.. its called debate Image

Whats it take for me to go out and kill someone? If I get threatened, you can sure as hell bet I'm gonna defend myself and my family and friends. Racial profiling? Hell yes, thats how the police used to catch people, and thats how they still catch a lot. Profiling was made into a dirty word, but ya know what.. if a certain group of people is responsible for stuff, then you should look at them more closely. To be honest, I'm almost hoping the nut job who is murdering people turns out to be a radical Al Qaeda muslim, because then maybe it'll make people think that profiling isn't so bad when used properly.

Cherzra, yes. Thats why I am for killing the terrorists and everyone in Al Qaeda.. not necessarily Iraq. I do believe Iraq is supporting terrorists and harboring them, but we should take out the appropriate parts of the government and munitions supplies and not go after the whole country.

Return to “S3 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests