Nope New MexicoQuote:
Originally posted by Zaei
Werent there 3 atomic bombs dropped during WWII? The first on an un-inhabited island, as a demonstration, then the two actually on Japan? Or am I on crack?
Z.
Nope New MexicoQuote:
Originally posted by Zaei
Werent there 3 atomic bombs dropped during WWII? The first on an un-inhabited island, as a demonstration, then the two actually on Japan? Or am I on crack?
Z.
Well, Duh, that would be the testing, not the demonstration =). Or am I on crack?
Z.
Ok, Heres the deal.
Saddam has performed attrocious, murdurous acts aganst his own population.
Nerve gas, gunning down, rape, pillage, plunder.
Or so is said.
Now, as to wether he is about to succeed in Nucs, well, he apparently hasn't yet.
I, for one, don't beleive potential nuc capability as a reason for war.
I do beleive gov'ts killing there own people to be a good reason.
Unfortunatly, Bush is using the Nuc argument.
Well, why not India, Pakistan, China, and so on, if Nucs are valid?
Heck, I don't know.
BUT, If it were killing your own Population, then Saddam should be removed.
-Lou
That's OK, and if all that were true to a T, I'd support this argument. But it seems, from several journalistic reports over the last few days, that the Iraqis themselves, not to mention the greater middle east don't want the US to invade.
In their own words "I don't know what the Americans are expecting. Do they really expect that the Iraqi people will welcome them? It is ridiculous". This echoes a pretty consistent opinion amongst reported interviews with Iraqis of all denominations. What makes the US think they have the right to dictate the politics, and the future of a country on the other side of the world?
George Bush is just a dictator, acting in exactly the same way as Saddam. His own people don't fully support this invasion of Iraq, and it seems that the majority are completely against it, not to mention the rest of the world, yet he will still go to war. How is this version of 'democracy' any different to the dictatorship in Iraq?
This attitude is what gets Americans 'into trouble' so to speak. Iraq has not asked for US intervention against any oppressive government, yet it will be forced upon them anyway.
And as to the nukes argument, you're exactly right - why not Pakistan and India? Seems to me those two nations are far more likely to unleask atomic hell than Saddam, who according to all reports doesn't even have nuclear capabilities.
The Iraqis are united in defiance against this impending US invasion. Regardless of what Saddam has done, they seem to hate the US more. Doesn't that tell you something?
A quote from another article (a shopkeeper in an affluent region of Iraq): "You tell the Americans that can accidents in this country kill more people than they do. So we are not frightened of them."
Does this sound like a nation waiting to be saved?
The problem is, there has been no, what do you call it, justification, for what Bush is about to do.
Just alot of , "Well, He's Evil!"!
I'm sorry, when it comes to killing people, I really need a better reason, something verifiable.
Now, as to the NG, Rape, Pillage, Plunder...
The facts show that happened years ago, and not that those crimes have lessened during the time passed, but why now?
Although, if that were the reason, I'd be behind it.
However, There has been no real justification, and I don't want to kill people.
But, I'm only an American, and a Seppo at that.
:(
There, there. It's OK. I once knew a seppo who immigrated to Australia. He's fine now! :)Quote:
Originally posted by NotLKH
But, I'm only an American, and a Seppo at that.
:(
I admit to an extreme case of wishy-washiness as well as having been subjected to media mis-information in this particular topic.
That being said, here are a few things I wonder about:
Do we pull completely out of the mid-east (and other countries) and let them fend for themselves? Do we then get blamed for not helping, but no longer get blamed for taking sides?
I don't think the "opinions" of Iraq's citizens is going to be real accurate when they "know" that making anti-Saddam comments could very well lead to retribution against them and their families.
Given the fact that the same leader is in power who saw nothing wrong with what he did that sparked the Gulf War in the first place, I see no reason why the UN shouldn't be able to look into his mouth for the next 50 years if he is still in power.
I think we had our chance to do something about Saddam back then and now we're stuck with him. I don't think we have a right to go back unless he actually does something or makes a threat that the UN believes he has the capability and willingness to back up. Other than that, tuff ******* Bush. You're dad blew it.
More and more I think that we (everyone on earth or elsewhere) should conduct ourselves so that we're welcome where ever we go. That basically means respecting other people which covers just about everything.
They always have the option of a 'no comment' rather than open defiance against the US. And most western journalists would probably indicate that this was a 'forced' sort of opinion. In several different articles with reports from iraqi taxi drivers to wealthy businessmen, they all openly oppose the US invasion.Quote:
Originally posted by cafeenman
I don't think the "opinions" of Iraq's citizens is going to be real accurate when they "know" that making anti-Saddam comments could very well lead to retribution against them and their families.
There is not one single thing in the entire universe that every American will EVER agree on. So of course not everyone is in support of it. Hell, there are people who are not in suport on this so called "war on terror". When you have such a varied population, this can only be expected.
The thing that I think is REALLY sad is the amount of "patriotism" over here after 9/11. If it takes something like that to make you appreciate your country... something is seriously wrong.
Personally, I would have to say that Bush is simply riding on 9/11. He knows that he "won" the election on something like 100 votes, and after 9/11, his approval went up to something near 75%. He is a politician, and he wants people to vote for him. Of course he is going to keep a blood lust going...
Z.
I clearly indicated the majority support against such a move. A democracy requires a majority concensus.Quote:
Originally posted by Zaei
There is not one single thing in the entire universe that every American will EVER agree on. So of course not everyone is in support of it.
I am of course well aware that everything is never going to be agreed on by everyone. But in this case, it seems the majority oppose what the government wants to do, yet they will do it anyway.
That's a dictatorship, not a democracy.
And my sister tells me to get over being pissed about my experience in the Army and I only got out 6 months ago. :)Quote:
Originally posted by chrisjk
Yep. Because all of us were alive back then. We care deeply about what happened 190 years ago. Seems like only last week. There I was having my tea and scones in the Drawing room when Jeeves came in and gave us the bad news. I remember it well.
Ah, but the government is elected by the people, and so they MUST be doing what we want, because we chose them to do it =). Democracy is flawed, in that elected officials have brains and ambitions, and so wont necessarily do what the voters want. The ONLY way that democracy can REALLY work is if EVERYONE gets a vote in EVERYTHING.
Z.
your probably on crack, but I'm not 100% sure. I heard that they proposed demonstrating one of the two bombs to japan before using it, but they werent sure if it was going to work as they had never dropped one out of an airplane before. They didn't want to look like arses if it didn't work.Quote:
Originally posted by Zaei
Well, Duh, that would be the testing, not the demonstration =). Or am I on crack?
Z.
Why do you think Iran and Venizuala hates the U.S.?
The cause for that answer is the same cause for this thing on Saddam.
There are three great poisons of Mankind - Power, Wealth, and Knowledge. Bush is a person, and therefore wants power. If the citizens of the United States were to offer him absolute dictatorship, would he actually refuse?
Why does people want to become Presidents? Why does some former presidents use everything in their power to try and stay in the seat? Why did Watergate happen? Because of one thing - power. The president has power, and might try to maintain it.
Now, of course, this doesn't apply to everybody (Washington did not really want power), but it's a pretty good generalization.
Influence and economy brings power because they give you control over others. Tragedies and prosperity also brings power through emotions. Wars and conflicts bring power because people will need guidance. Fear and anger bring power through manipulation. Sadness and hate bring power though revenge. Terror and outrage brings power though blindness. Victory and glory bring power though love.
As eveyone knows, 9/11 is a tragedy, and it brought fear and anger. Bush used it well through patiotism. Blaming scapegoats bought hate to America, and Clinton's scandels supplied the outrage. Influence and economy was aleady in place, which leaves terror and conflict. Obviously, these "Iraq did it" events can promote terror and conflict, which can well balance the stock market issue (after all, would anyone try to citicize the president in the middle of a time bomb ready to explode?) No one knows if Iraq really plans on a nuclear war, but saying so makes the people panicky and ready to accept him no matter what.
Except that there are a whole lot of Americans who don't accept him or his ideas about Iraq. Just because he's in the news for saying it doesn't mean everyone supports him.Quote:
Originally posted by Ziedritch
No one knows if Iraq really plans on a nuclear war, but saying so makes the people panicky and ready to accept him no matter what.
Look at this, a quote by the Nazi number two man at the Nuremberg trial. I think it applies well to what's going on right now
Herman Goering, Nazi leader at the Nuremberg trialQuote:
"Why of course the people don't want war.Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
A: Correct, Bush is a golden Idiot. No Arguing that.Quote:
Originally posted by siyan
If we will come to a concensus that American foreign policty is volatile, and that Bush is a golden idiot, I want UN weapons inspectors in the US.
B: You dont Need Weapons inspectors in the US. Your govenrment already knows what we have down to what model of rockets they are sitting on. The US in not secretive of what weapons they have, just where they hide them. As does China, Russiawell the ones they havent forgotten about or misplaced :rolleyes:, China, Great Britian, France, India, Pakistan..... Remember eairlier this year when all of the nuclear powers got togeather and added up how many nukes each other has and how many they would be able to keep? Saddam says he dosn't have any. If he dosnt then why won't he prove it? Planning a suprise attack on his neighbors mabe? Selling suitcase biobombs to terrorists mabe? He wants to test fire a couple off at Iran and Israel before he gets blown back into the stone age, mabe?
Not publicly divulging the information or proving the information incorrect suggests something is out of the ordinary. If all it took to avoid this was to allow comprehensive weapons inspections like he agreed to in the first place to save his life then what is he hiding? He says the inspectors were spies? Spying on what? He's not supposed to have a military. The UN promised to defend his country in case of attack after the first war and I'm damn sure the UN would do a better job at that than he could. What else could we possibly be spying on? Oh forget it, I know, its the Nuke, Bio and chem bombs he's building. Or mabe it's the cash he's hoarding that is supposed to be feeding his people.
Yes, he would HAVE to refuse, otherwise we would chuck his ass out the door in a New York minute =).Quote:
Originally posted by Ziedritch
There are three great poisons of Mankind - Power, Wealth, and Knowledge. Bush is a person, and therefore wants power. If the citizens of the United States were to offer him absolute dictatorship, would he actually refuse?
Why does people want to become Presidents? Why does some former presidents use everything in their power to try and stay in the seat? Why did Watergate happen? Because of one thing - power. The president has power, and might try to maintain it.
The other is called "Potomac Fever". Once someone gets to a place in power in Washington, they NEVER want to leave =).
Z.
On the Gwantanemath Scale of Idiotness, how do Golden Idiot compare to say, Platinum Idiot, Silver Idiot and Bronze Idiot? I'm just trying to put this all in perspective.Quote:
Originally posted by MasterBlaster
A: Correct, Bush is a golden Idiot. No Arguing that.
Politically speaking
Platinum Idiot = Marion Berry
Golden Idiot = GW Bush Tied w/ Al Gore
Silver Idiot = Tony Blair
Bronze Idiot = Jessie "The Body" Ventura
Copper Idiot = Jimmy Carter
Quote:
Originally posted by MasterBlaster
Golden Idiot = GW Bush Tied w/ Al Gore (Gore would say that he actually came out ahead)
:D
Actually, there are a lot of ways a pres. can make us think otherwise, but we know better, DON'T WE? (Actually, we don't)Quote:
Originally posted by Zaei
Yes, he would HAVE to refuse, otherwise we would chuck his ass out the door in a New York minute =).
The other is called "Potomac Fever". Once someone gets to a place in power in Washington, they NEVER want to leave =).
Z.
I guess I'm just a heretic. Heehee.
I think that he'd like us to think that he wasnt a moron, but we still do =).
Z.
Actually, time is reversing....
Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush.... what could be next.... 0.0!
Z.
This is all fair enough, and a possibility. However, it seems to me that Saddam is pretty good at making the most of propaganda opportunities regarding the hostilities towards Iraq coming from the West. Saddam is a bad leader for the country. It seems obvious to us as outsiders, although our vision is probably coloured by our own media propaganda. He has to control the emotions of his people in order to stay in power. If the people are starving, he can blame it on the sanctions, regardless of whether they are the problem. If the West makes threats, he can get the Iraqi people into a patriotic trance, just as Bush has done with the terrorist threats. As Goerring says, it's not difficult to control the attitudes of the general populace.Quote:
Originally posted by MasterBlaster
A: Correct, Bush is a golden Idiot. No Arguing that.
B: You dont Need Weapons inspectors in the US. Your govenrment already knows what we have down to what model of rockets they are sitting on. The US in not secretive of what weapons they have, just where they hide them. As does China, Russiawell the ones they havent forgotten about or misplaced :rolleyes:, China, Great Britian, France, India, Pakistan..... Remember eairlier this year when all of the nuclear powers got togeather and added up how many nukes each other has and how many they would be able to keep? Saddam says he dosn't have any. If he dosnt then why won't he prove it? Planning a suprise attack on his neighbors mabe? Selling suitcase biobombs to terrorists mabe? He wants to test fire a couple off at Iran and Israel before he gets blown back into the stone age, mabe?
Not publicly divulging the information or proving the information incorrect suggests something is out of the ordinary. If all it took to avoid this was to allow comprehensive weapons inspections like he agreed to in the first place to save his life then what is he hiding? He says the inspectors were spies? Spying on what? He's not supposed to have a military. The UN promised to defend his country in case of attack after the first war and I'm damn sure the UN would do a better job at that than he could. What else could we possibly be spying on? Oh forget it, I know, its the Nuke, Bio and chem bombs he's building. Or mabe it's the cash he's hoarding that is supposed to be feeding his people.
So, what I'm saying is, I think he'd refuse entry whether he had the weapons or not. If he's got them, he doesn't want the inspectors in for obvious reasons. If he hasn't got them, it's a tremensously easy way to distract the Iraqi populace from the problems he's causing and shift the blame and the focus. The only reason he ever allowed them in was because he was getting his arse kicked. I don't expect him to allow them in again unless the same happens again.
Please don't say Reagan !!!:eek:Quote:
Originally posted by Zaei
Actually, time is reversing....
Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush.... what could be next.... 0.0!
Z.
One of my friends was working in a Physics Lab recently, and one of his co-workers told him that if a fairly large Nuclear Device were to be detonated ~5 miles above North America, it would knock out all electronic devices in said North America.\
Actually, that has nothing to do with the discussion... What we should REALLY do is drill a big hole into the Earth's mantle, and set off a couple thousand nukes, and just kill everyone =). One, none of us would care (we'd be dead), we wouldnt have anymore of these quandries =).
j/k =).
Z.
You said it, not me =P.Quote:
Originally posted by maxl
Please don't say Reagan !!!:eek:
Z.
I don't really want to get into this, but I think we should let Saddam do whatever the hell he wants over there. If he nukes Israel, then so be it. Once he does that, we won't have to worry about those idiots causing problems in the mid east, then we can have a reason to go in and blow him. It won't be a good reason (defending the dead Israelites) but it will be enough to get some of the American population on the military's side. I think we should stay out until they do something stupid, then if (and that's a big IF) they do do something stupid, then by all means we should go in and do something stupid to them. But, if they are just hoarding money and starving their own people, then that's their problem... less people to deal with if we ever do want to go attack them.
Is that what Bush wants to do? I don't see why everyone is complaining then. The world needs more love. :)Quote:
Originally posted by MidgetsBro
then we can have a reason to go in and blow him.
No suprises here... the same people who think abortion is OK are the same people who think saddam husaine should be left alone....A bunch of communists...the lot of yah.
Have a problems with socialists have we?:rolleyes:Quote:
No suprises here... the same people who think abortion is OK are the same people who think saddam husaine should be left alone....A bunch of communists...the lot of yah.
Definately one of your more ludicrous and less though-out statements. But hey, keep pluggin' tiger. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
No suprises here... the same people who think abortion is OK are the same people who think saddam husaine should be left alone....A bunch of communists...the lot of yah.
I wonder who's the communist? The one who expresses ideas or the one who tries to stop toe one from expressing ideas?Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
No suprises here... the same people who think abortion is OK are the same people who think saddam husaine should be left alone....A bunch of communists...the lot of yah.
If you are pro-democracy, then why are you so anti-opinionist?
Yet another communist exposes his inept abbility to read and then understand what he read.
Microbasic...please explain where exactly it was that i said people weren't allowed to express thier opinions?
You are prefectly allowed to say whatever you want.... and i am perfectly allowed to point out that you and anyone who thinks that sadam should be left alone are communist/democrat/bleeding heart liberal bafoons.
Arc... please explain what abortion has to do with communism? Or illiteracy... Actually, isnt it Saddam himself who is forcing illiteracy on most of his people?
Or is "communist" simply your big word for "person"?
If you dont have any real argument to hold up your point of view, please refrain from insulting people. Its bad taste.
Z.
He's probably one of those cowboys who thinks that anybody who thinks differently than him is a communist even dough he probably doesn't even know what communism is.
lol... I think just this sums up how much you know about what is and isn't communism ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
... are communist/democrat/ ....
Arc, you are perfectly entitled to point out whatever you like, but if you don't back up your opinions with anything but pigeonholing and insults, we're all perfectly entitled to read what you say, chuckle, make fun of you and move on to something more interesting, like contributing to a discussion of a serious issue.