US MILITARY ACTION IN IRAQ Y or N?
- Doug the Unforgiven
by Doug the Unforgiven » Sat Mar 01, 2003 9:47 am
Originally posted by Doug the Unforgiven
Oh, I get it. Anton wasn't comparing the US to Nazi-Germany, he was just comparing Bush to Hitler, then comparing Old Glory to the Swastika.
I said this a few pages back. Such comparisons are either outlandish or delusional, or both.
First, I don't dispute for a second that vast swathes of the rank-and-file are in thrall to the corporate/state run press (the 'free press' as it likes to glorify itself).
How else to account for - let me put this charitably - the lack of factual content and accuracy, as well as dearth of historical context of the arguments I come across in this forum? --Anton
With this kind of statement you seem to confirm what we said about your "information" coming from conspiracy theory websites. Where else would you get your info if the free press is so corrupt?
You set yourself up as the all-knowing arbiter of truth. Your sources are impeccable, while the rest of us are just a bunch hopeless rubes. How can we argue with you if all our info is being spoon-fed to us, while you have this awesome source material that none of the rest of us have access to?
This, partially, is why it's not worth my time. You can call me a chicken if you wish, though I'm not the one running around with my head chopped off.
- Doug the Unforgiven
by Doug the Unforgiven » Sat Mar 01, 2003 10:10 am
Don't feel too bad, Allister. You saw the light and joined the team.
I felt the same way as you after I voted for Clinton for governor in '90 and then for Pres. in '92. I got my eyes opened around '94 and I thank God every day for it.
Thanks for mentioning Kosovo. And don't forget Clinton launching hundreds of cruise missiles at Iraq with barely a peep from any opposition. Here's an editorial that attempts to explain some of this:
Clinton's Iraq war
Sorry if I've already posted this link somewhere.
It's funny how conspiracy theorists are laughed at during a Democrat presidency, but are taken so seriously during a Republican one.
I felt the same way as you after I voted for Clinton for governor in '90 and then for Pres. in '92. I got my eyes opened around '94 and I thank God every day for it.
Thanks for mentioning Kosovo. And don't forget Clinton launching hundreds of cruise missiles at Iraq with barely a peep from any opposition. Here's an editorial that attempts to explain some of this:
Clinton's Iraq war
Sorry if I've already posted this link somewhere.
It's funny how conspiracy theorists are laughed at during a Democrat presidency, but are taken so seriously during a Republican one.
by bayotanzk » Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:24 am
Anton,
I enjoy the fact that people express their opinion all over the world, without political persecution. A wonderful right to enjoy. But the fact remains that as an American, I could not give a crap what anyone else thinks of our country or president. We elected the gentleman to office and it is our choice if we do it again.
My concern is our freedom and safety. I feel as do many others that iraq and sadam is a threat to that freedom. Be assured that no protest from anyone will change the outcome of the current situation. We will, with or without allies, take out sadam and instill a democratic form of government. Then we will leave. It is just a matter of time.
Glad that you feel stongly that your opinion is right, but you are not and it doesn't matter if you freeze to death protesting, perhaps you have nothing better to do and want to feel a part of something. I do not know or really care! We will do what we feel is nessesary to insure our safety. There is only one country in the world that could stop the US and it has a population over 2 billion, anyone else, well give it a try!
Even the arab states have asked sadam to step down!!!!!!!!!!!
They know what is going to happen, and we will find out what france and germany have been selling to iraq against UN sanctions.
I enjoy the fact that people express their opinion all over the world, without political persecution. A wonderful right to enjoy. But the fact remains that as an American, I could not give a crap what anyone else thinks of our country or president. We elected the gentleman to office and it is our choice if we do it again.
My concern is our freedom and safety. I feel as do many others that iraq and sadam is a threat to that freedom. Be assured that no protest from anyone will change the outcome of the current situation. We will, with or without allies, take out sadam and instill a democratic form of government. Then we will leave. It is just a matter of time.
Glad that you feel stongly that your opinion is right, but you are not and it doesn't matter if you freeze to death protesting, perhaps you have nothing better to do and want to feel a part of something. I do not know or really care! We will do what we feel is nessesary to insure our safety. There is only one country in the world that could stop the US and it has a population over 2 billion, anyone else, well give it a try!
Even the arab states have asked sadam to step down!!!!!!!!!!!
They know what is going to happen, and we will find out what france and germany have been selling to iraq against UN sanctions.
486 dx 50 -32 megs ram -8 meg vid card -120 meg HD -14"vga monitor, dos 5.0
- rust
by rust » Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:46 pm
Being new to your forums I happend across this thread.
Started at the beginning.While going from the 7-8th page
my head caught on fire.Had to run outside and slam it in
to a 2foot snow bank to put out the fire.I knew then I
had to stop there for fear of another short circuit.So I went
to the end to see if there was an end as it was to far in the
distance to see.BTW I voted yes .Everything I could have
said has already been said by others better than I could.
Although I was scared by the democrats/communists
lurking about in the shadows.Shine some more light on
them so we can watch them scurry for cover.
Started at the beginning.While going from the 7-8th page
my head caught on fire.Had to run outside and slam it in
to a 2foot snow bank to put out the fire.I knew then I
had to stop there for fear of another short circuit.So I went
to the end to see if there was an end as it was to far in the
distance to see.BTW I voted yes .Everything I could have
said has already been said by others better than I could.
Although I was scared by the democrats/communists
lurking about in the shadows.Shine some more light on
them so we can watch them scurry for cover.
by Kristov » Sat Mar 01, 2003 2:18 pm
Anton...you know..you ALMOST had a chance of actually appearing(at least) that you had a clue and were actually informed...until you wrote
'Of course, the reason 'we' don't is becasuse their 'government' is a puppet regime under total US colonial control and does exactly what their told....unlike Hussein who, though once an honoured ally of the US - when it suited Washington's purpose i.e. the Iran / Iraq War - began to pursue a nationalist (and, God forbid, socialist!) economic agenda'
The last line, specifically, totally debunks anything you may have or will say. Saddam is not a socialist, Iraq is not a socialist state, and trying to portray it as one is just..well..beyond the realm of stupidity.
Take your bs and peddle it elsewhere son, I grew up on a cattle ranch, and I know what I smell.
'Of course, the reason 'we' don't is becasuse their 'government' is a puppet regime under total US colonial control and does exactly what their told....unlike Hussein who, though once an honoured ally of the US - when it suited Washington's purpose i.e. the Iran / Iraq War - began to pursue a nationalist (and, God forbid, socialist!) economic agenda'
The last line, specifically, totally debunks anything you may have or will say. Saddam is not a socialist, Iraq is not a socialist state, and trying to portray it as one is just..well..beyond the realm of stupidity.
Take your bs and peddle it elsewhere son, I grew up on a cattle ranch, and I know what I smell.
The enemy is attacking, let us prey.
by bayotanzk » Sat Mar 01, 2003 5:01 pm
ANTON,
IF TURKEY IS OUR PUPPET REGIME, WHY DID THEY VOTE TO NOT ALLOW THE UNITED STATES TO USE TURKEY AS A POINT FOR OUR INVASION? REAL ROCKET SCIENCE YOU ARE USING IN YOUR STATEMENTS!
IF TURKEY IS OUR PUPPET REGIME, WHY DID THEY VOTE TO NOT ALLOW THE UNITED STATES TO USE TURKEY AS A POINT FOR OUR INVASION? REAL ROCKET SCIENCE YOU ARE USING IN YOUR STATEMENTS!
486 dx 50 -32 megs ram -8 meg vid card -120 meg HD -14"vga monitor, dos 5.0
- Doug the Unforgiven
by Doug the Unforgiven » Sat Mar 01, 2003 9:58 pm
Originally posted by COL.BUKKAKE
As the wise and all knowing Jeanine Garafola said "It wasnt hip to protest against Clinton" Just got to love her morals:D
I'm surprised that the Bush/US haters didn't put a bullet in her head for that one. With that one statement she completely destroyed any legitimacy that the current "peace" movement may have had.
And Kristov, thank you for your last post. It does have a familiar smell, doesn't it...
by bayotanzk » Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:48 pm
this is the latest with the Arab states:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79980,00.html
Things are getting interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, check this crap out; "Curses upon America, curses upon the American administration, but not the American people," Al-Douri said. iraqi rep to above conference. Well, from this American, "may the bombs of many B 52's "land in iraq, upon sadams inner circle, and spare the iraqi people." Yea right. If you believe that I have a bridge you can buy!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79980,00.html
Things are getting interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, check this crap out; "Curses upon America, curses upon the American administration, but not the American people," Al-Douri said. iraqi rep to above conference. Well, from this American, "may the bombs of many B 52's "land in iraq, upon sadams inner circle, and spare the iraqi people." Yea right. If you believe that I have a bridge you can buy!
486 dx 50 -32 megs ram -8 meg vid card -120 meg HD -14"vga monitor, dos 5.0
by bayotanzk » Sun Mar 02, 2003 12:00 pm
Hey guys I have to apologize, Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, the gov't made it all up, your conspiracry theory was right, but where are the missles being destoyed come from? Oh I know the inspectors brought them with them to destroy on iraqi territory. It all makes sense now!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80013,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80013,00.html
486 dx 50 -32 megs ram -8 meg vid card -120 meg HD -14"vga monitor, dos 5.0
- Doug the Unforgiven
by Doug the Unforgiven » Sun Mar 02, 2003 9:54 pm
Bayotanzk, you obviously are being duped by legitimate news sources. Perhaps you should consult a crystal ball or other imaginary news sources. Only by living in complete ignorance can you understand just how corrupt the whole system is.
- MeatShield
by MeatShield » Sun Mar 02, 2003 10:49 pm
In two days, Iraq has destroyed 10 of the banned weapons, about a tenth of its stock of the missiles
wow, I just step away for a day to watch sports and I come back to this!?! 10 missles now found? Wasn't only 2 missles about 4 days ago?
I guess the stonger we press, the more crap will be sqeezed out of the woodwork..
- Keekanoo
by Keekanoo » Mon Mar 03, 2003 5:15 pm
*dusts himself off and looks around*
Hmm....what the hell happened to this place? All the links changed... I was begining to construct an 'extremist left-wing' consipiracy theory.....
Speaking of which....I find it interesting that while people snidely refer to those 'left wing conspiracy' rags (newspapers magazines, articles, essays) as being {implied} the refuge of crack-pots and delusional deviants, these same people have the hubris to believe that their mainstream media sources are above reproach.
Apparently few here have read such books as Orwell's 1984 or Huxley's Brave New World. Let alone such other bastions of any home library like Marshall McLuhan's Understanding Media. *I wouldn't recomend the latter book as it's written by a butcher of the english language--a fellow so lost in his esoteric eccentricities that sifting amongst the debris and carnage of his words for the extremely interesting subject matter is harder than deciphering a income tax form*
I no more believe left-wing publications than I do right-wing. In point of fact, though essential to a balanced political diet, I find decoding the misinformation on both sides overly bothersome. As I've stated before--I'm not there, I don't know for sure.
Still, to address a topic earlier presented, it's clearly much easier to control the mass-media sources in the states (given that they are owned by the same bunch) than it is to control the internet and it's access to literally hundreds of millions of sources.
Which leads one to wonder how much longer we will have freedom on the internet to exchange ideas. Personally I'd give it another decade before the whole thing is clamped down tight 'for security reasons'.
Forgive me, I'm meandering: But then again, somewhere along the line I was researching some material which delt with mass-control. The idea was postulated that it's important to feed the mass tiny streams of rebellious literature/media. Given that the masses are so well indoctrinated in the rhetoric of the Gov't (this is a neutral statement and can be used by any 'governing' body--whether it be the owner of a restraunt to his staff or the gov't of a country), there is no real fear that the masses will be swayed by this anti-propoganda. In point of fact, as demonstrated easily over the past 10,000 years or so of human social dynamics, the masses actually become riled by these 'outside influences' and work themselves up into an even more intense patriotism.
This same pyschological phenomena is also related to movies of violence. When we watch violent movies, whether they are tapping in to patriotic feelings, anti-patriotic feelings, or subjects of personal import to any of us (ie--some murderer who preys on children--this has no political background), we become insensed with the subject, angred, and--here's the crux--voyeuristically experience rage/anger through the actor/subject.
So what? You ask. That's obvious you say. Yes, it is. So why bring it up. Why bring up all of our little, and not so little, mundane daily difficulties--the guy who pissed us off on the expressway, the lady who butted into the coffee line, the boss who wanted a rush project, the boss who threatened to fire us for not doing our job properly, the taxes we paid at the grocery store, etc, etc etc.... all the way deeper and deeper until we tap into intangible concepts of patriotism, religion, etc.
We transport out this myriad of interwoven emotional states and transfer it into the voyueristic orgy of watching Arnold blow up some bad guys (some? did I say some? I'm sorry--a massive amount of colateral damage). Sounds absurd, doesn't it. Yet monitor yourself the next time you watch someone like Arny take out whole swathes of the 'enemy'. Monitor how you feel afterwards. Are you pumped? Yes, but it's like iceing on an empty cake. Under it you are spent. Ready to go to bed. Ready to face the next days drudgery. You'll have a brief exchange with your lover, or your friends, acting out some of the movies' more intense moments, living, in that little fantasy world we've all had since children, a moment in the glory of carnage.
Hmm....what the hell happened to this place? All the links changed... I was begining to construct an 'extremist left-wing' consipiracy theory.....
Speaking of which....I find it interesting that while people snidely refer to those 'left wing conspiracy' rags (newspapers magazines, articles, essays) as being {implied} the refuge of crack-pots and delusional deviants, these same people have the hubris to believe that their mainstream media sources are above reproach.
Apparently few here have read such books as Orwell's 1984 or Huxley's Brave New World. Let alone such other bastions of any home library like Marshall McLuhan's Understanding Media. *I wouldn't recomend the latter book as it's written by a butcher of the english language--a fellow so lost in his esoteric eccentricities that sifting amongst the debris and carnage of his words for the extremely interesting subject matter is harder than deciphering a income tax form*
I no more believe left-wing publications than I do right-wing. In point of fact, though essential to a balanced political diet, I find decoding the misinformation on both sides overly bothersome. As I've stated before--I'm not there, I don't know for sure.
Still, to address a topic earlier presented, it's clearly much easier to control the mass-media sources in the states (given that they are owned by the same bunch) than it is to control the internet and it's access to literally hundreds of millions of sources.
Which leads one to wonder how much longer we will have freedom on the internet to exchange ideas. Personally I'd give it another decade before the whole thing is clamped down tight 'for security reasons'.
Forgive me, I'm meandering: But then again, somewhere along the line I was researching some material which delt with mass-control. The idea was postulated that it's important to feed the mass tiny streams of rebellious literature/media. Given that the masses are so well indoctrinated in the rhetoric of the Gov't (this is a neutral statement and can be used by any 'governing' body--whether it be the owner of a restraunt to his staff or the gov't of a country), there is no real fear that the masses will be swayed by this anti-propoganda. In point of fact, as demonstrated easily over the past 10,000 years or so of human social dynamics, the masses actually become riled by these 'outside influences' and work themselves up into an even more intense patriotism.
This same pyschological phenomena is also related to movies of violence. When we watch violent movies, whether they are tapping in to patriotic feelings, anti-patriotic feelings, or subjects of personal import to any of us (ie--some murderer who preys on children--this has no political background), we become insensed with the subject, angred, and--here's the crux--voyeuristically experience rage/anger through the actor/subject.
So what? You ask. That's obvious you say. Yes, it is. So why bring it up. Why bring up all of our little, and not so little, mundane daily difficulties--the guy who pissed us off on the expressway, the lady who butted into the coffee line, the boss who wanted a rush project, the boss who threatened to fire us for not doing our job properly, the taxes we paid at the grocery store, etc, etc etc.... all the way deeper and deeper until we tap into intangible concepts of patriotism, religion, etc.
We transport out this myriad of interwoven emotional states and transfer it into the voyueristic orgy of watching Arnold blow up some bad guys (some? did I say some? I'm sorry--a massive amount of colateral damage). Sounds absurd, doesn't it. Yet monitor yourself the next time you watch someone like Arny take out whole swathes of the 'enemy'. Monitor how you feel afterwards. Are you pumped? Yes, but it's like iceing on an empty cake. Under it you are spent. Ready to go to bed. Ready to face the next days drudgery. You'll have a brief exchange with your lover, or your friends, acting out some of the movies' more intense moments, living, in that little fantasy world we've all had since children, a moment in the glory of carnage.
by Kristov » Mon Mar 03, 2003 7:14 pm
Uhhhhh...huh...
Ok..not sure wtf Keekano went off on there, interesting stuff I suppose, if a bit off in some aspects(Christianity was one of those little rebellious things that rather grew more then a bit, as was Lutheran's doctrines, etc, etc..history is full of this sort of 'small rebel' stuff that dominated rather then incised the populace).
The rest of the postulate is obviously flawed since it's derived from a flawed thesis to start with..nuff said.
No mention of the facts to date are represented in the post, nor any references to the actual subject at hand, beyond how the media is full of bs(which I think we ALL acknowledge).
Saddam lied about the missiles the UN said he had on worldwide TV. Then he turned around and said he DID have them, they WERE in violation of the sanctions, and he destroyed 10 of the 100+ he has on hand. Then he stopped, saying if war is about to happen, there's no point in destroying them.
Uh..HELLO, MCFLY?!?! If you destroy the missles, you are following the UN sanctions, and it's your NON-COMPLIANCE with these that are the problem....
What in the 9 hells is with this lunatic...I don't have the weapons..oh..I DO have them, I'll destroy them so you won't attack me...hang on, I'll keep them just in case you attack me!
Yeah, Saddam and his regime haven't lied about ANYTHING...and my mother is a virgin.
Ok..not sure wtf Keekano went off on there, interesting stuff I suppose, if a bit off in some aspects(Christianity was one of those little rebellious things that rather grew more then a bit, as was Lutheran's doctrines, etc, etc..history is full of this sort of 'small rebel' stuff that dominated rather then incised the populace).
The rest of the postulate is obviously flawed since it's derived from a flawed thesis to start with..nuff said.
No mention of the facts to date are represented in the post, nor any references to the actual subject at hand, beyond how the media is full of bs(which I think we ALL acknowledge).
Saddam lied about the missiles the UN said he had on worldwide TV. Then he turned around and said he DID have them, they WERE in violation of the sanctions, and he destroyed 10 of the 100+ he has on hand. Then he stopped, saying if war is about to happen, there's no point in destroying them.
Uh..HELLO, MCFLY?!?! If you destroy the missles, you are following the UN sanctions, and it's your NON-COMPLIANCE with these that are the problem....
What in the 9 hells is with this lunatic...I don't have the weapons..oh..I DO have them, I'll destroy them so you won't attack me...hang on, I'll keep them just in case you attack me!
Yeah, Saddam and his regime haven't lied about ANYTHING...and my mother is a virgin.
The enemy is attacking, let us prey.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests