G
Guest
Guest
hey rock, maybe you should look at the footage of people trying to steal the olympic torch.
G
Guest
Guest
"Btw, patriotism sucks. Two million (totally innocent) Iraqi children were brutally murdered by NATO's cluster bombs simply because---well, they pissed off America. No one pisses off America. It's in the Bible. Saddam thinks he is above God, and while he can hide 60ft underground, people hiding in BOMB SHELTERS will be SPECIFICALLY TARGETED by NATO BASTARDS and DIE PAINFULLY simply because THEY WERE BORN."
2 million children ehh? lets see where those estimates come from? are they from saddam's government? yeah we all know those are realiable. ANd you dont make any sense, its not becuase children piss off america, it is because saddam is developing weapons of mass destruction. So god forbid we stop him from doing so, so that maybe your isolationalist ass will live to see another day before the scourge of mass destruction consumes america.
So you are telling me we should let saddam develop sirin nerve gas, anthrax spores, and nuclear weapons, so he can do what with them? dance around the may pole? if you have a death wish put a bullet to your head, but as for me, i would like to see another day. What can weapons of mass destruction do? nothing good.
2 million children ehh? lets see where those estimates come from? are they from saddam's government? yeah we all know those are realiable. ANd you dont make any sense, its not becuase children piss off america, it is because saddam is developing weapons of mass destruction. So god forbid we stop him from doing so, so that maybe your isolationalist ass will live to see another day before the scourge of mass destruction consumes america.
So you are telling me we should let saddam develop sirin nerve gas, anthrax spores, and nuclear weapons, so he can do what with them? dance around the may pole? if you have a death wish put a bullet to your head, but as for me, i would like to see another day. What can weapons of mass destruction do? nothing good.
G
Guest
Guest
oh and according to the new york times 1999 almanac the population of iraq is an estimated 20,722,287 people. So youre saying one tenth of the iraqi population was killed by americans? hmmmm
now lets look at how much of the population would be considered chldren. Since i cant find any facts we will play a game.
say one tenth of the population is children, that means all the children in iraq were killed. Now lets assume 40 percent were children. that means 1 out of four children were killed by americans. In which case i think there would be more outrage worldwide. Anyways, thanks for playing the statistical game with me. NTAC
now lets look at how much of the population would be considered chldren. Since i cant find any facts we will play a game.
say one tenth of the population is children, that means all the children in iraq were killed. Now lets assume 40 percent were children. that means 1 out of four children were killed by americans. In which case i think there would be more outrage worldwide. Anyways, thanks for playing the statistical game with me. NTAC
G
Guest
Guest
>>No, because they put themselves in
>>the way. People should
>>not get in the way
>>of smart bombs.
>>
>
>Now that's about the most stupid
>thing you can do.
Especially since they're "smart" bombs. They *know*, they always *know*!
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
>>the way. People should
>>not get in the way
>>of smart bombs.
>>
>
>Now that's about the most stupid
>thing you can do.
Especially since they're "smart" bombs. They *know*, they always *know*!
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
G
Guest
Guest
sentient bombs. may the lord help us all.
8
8-Ball
Guest
20,722,287 people? Right down to the ones place. Hmm. Well, the only way they could be that accurate is if they (I'm quoting you here) came from Saddam's government, and we all know how reliable those are.
Anthrax spores, nerve gas, yada yada yada. I don't think the diseases that soldiers fighting in the Gulf War got were caused by Saddam's weapons, but the U.S.'s.
An outrage worldwide? The United States has done a lot of craaaazy things. "Our" own president slept with an intern and it actually HELPED his public approval rating. Dropping a nuclear bomb on not one but two cities should have disgusted a lot more people than it really did. Hell, in just about every war which the U.S. has fought in, they've done some pretty un-groovy things and got the media to shut up while they kept on doing it. The first bomb dropped by U.S. bombers on Berlin killed the ONLY elephant in the Berlin Zoo.
On a closing note, that you can be patriotic about a nation that so easily condones the murder of not even two million but one child does little more than disgust me.
Anthrax spores, nerve gas, yada yada yada. I don't think the diseases that soldiers fighting in the Gulf War got were caused by Saddam's weapons, but the U.S.'s.
An outrage worldwide? The United States has done a lot of craaaazy things. "Our" own president slept with an intern and it actually HELPED his public approval rating. Dropping a nuclear bomb on not one but two cities should have disgusted a lot more people than it really did. Hell, in just about every war which the U.S. has fought in, they've done some pretty un-groovy things and got the media to shut up while they kept on doing it. The first bomb dropped by U.S. bombers on Berlin killed the ONLY elephant in the Berlin Zoo.
On a closing note, that you can be patriotic about a nation that so easily condones the murder of not even two million but one child does little more than disgust me.
G
Guest
Guest
>20,722,287 people? Right down to the
>ones place. Hmm. Well, the
>only way they could be
>that accurate is if they
>(I'm quoting you here) came
>from Saddam's government, and we
>all know how reliable those
>are.
right. Its an estimate. I never said it was fact. moving right along.
>Anthrax spores, nerve gas, yada yada
>yada. I don't think the
>diseases that soldiers fighting in
>the Gulf War got were
>caused by Saddam's weapons, but
>the U.S.'s.
Im not talking about Gulf WAr syndrome. I think youve heard about the cases of U.N. inspectors being turned away from weapons depots becuase saddam was harboring chemical and biological weapons. And if you dont think the threat of mass destruction exsists then you are fooloing yourself.
Anyway you mentioned it so ill run with it. Yeah the U.S. used chemical and biological weapons, AND those instances are being reported. Look at the use of agent orange in vietnam. that is becoming apparent now. ANd yes its 35 years late but you know what? i dont think you or i can do anything about it. I think that a large group of people could but only through non violent action lest we discredit our movemnet. you complain about the system but you can change it through voting.
Oh wait, voting is rigged.
IS this the conspiracy theory rhetoric you live by every day? jesus, that pisses me off.
>An outrage worldwide? The United States
>has done a lot of
>craaaazy things. "Our" own president
>slept with an intern and
>it actually HELPED his public
>approval rating.
AND?
>Dropping a nuclear
>bomb on not one but
>two cities should have disgusted
>a lot more people than
>it really did.
They were atomic bombs not nuclear. If you have an encyclopedia im sure you can find the difference. Oh wait the government makes them lie too.
>Hell, in
>just about every war which
>the U.S. has fought in,
>they've done some pretty un-groovy
>things and got the media
>to shut up while they
>kept on doing it.
SO the ends never justify the means. SO we should just let all hell break loose while we take this holier than thou approach? why? becuase we are a bigger nation. If you were some poor dumb colombian you wouldnt worry about politics, or philosophy. The socioeconomic situation and goverment you were raised in has allowed you to be a thinker and you dont have any graciousness for that. You rather just spit on it call it wrong and then crawl in your shell and say that you are so righteous and so much better than it. if you loathe this country so much than leave it, move to iraq, where you will have no freedom, and you can hate america all you want. get off of it.
>first bomb dropped by U.S.
>bombers on Berlin killed the
>ONLY elephant in the Berlin
>Zoo.
And we bombed them again and agian and agian until they would surrender. And who cares about that tidbit of info.
>On a closing note, that you
>can be patriotic about a
>nation that so easily condones
>the murder of not even
>two million but one child
>does little more than disgust
>me.
Once again, the ends never justify the means? If one child must die to stop the destruction of this country, more important this planet then so be it. If it takes 5 million children than so be it.
heres a question for you? should we have not gotten involved in World War II? SO that maybe hitler could have taken over the european continent? so that he would have killed more than 6 million innocents. Again i dont believe people that live under the government are completely innocent if they do not overthrow the dictator.
What disgusts me is the hypocritacal comptempt you have for America. Use the freedom and then dont support the body that gives you this freedom. There are only rights granted by a government none granted by the fact we are human.
On a lighter note id like to state that i hate liberals and conservatives that are blind to the fact they may be wrong. I know i might be wrong, in fact i probably am wrong but im not unyielding to others opinions. I will aknowledge when i am wrong, but only after you can prove it to me. which has not happened.
>ones place. Hmm. Well, the
>only way they could be
>that accurate is if they
>(I'm quoting you here) came
>from Saddam's government, and we
>all know how reliable those
>are.
right. Its an estimate. I never said it was fact. moving right along.
>Anthrax spores, nerve gas, yada yada
>yada. I don't think the
>diseases that soldiers fighting in
>the Gulf War got were
>caused by Saddam's weapons, but
>the U.S.'s.
Im not talking about Gulf WAr syndrome. I think youve heard about the cases of U.N. inspectors being turned away from weapons depots becuase saddam was harboring chemical and biological weapons. And if you dont think the threat of mass destruction exsists then you are fooloing yourself.
Anyway you mentioned it so ill run with it. Yeah the U.S. used chemical and biological weapons, AND those instances are being reported. Look at the use of agent orange in vietnam. that is becoming apparent now. ANd yes its 35 years late but you know what? i dont think you or i can do anything about it. I think that a large group of people could but only through non violent action lest we discredit our movemnet. you complain about the system but you can change it through voting.
Oh wait, voting is rigged.
IS this the conspiracy theory rhetoric you live by every day? jesus, that pisses me off.
>An outrage worldwide? The United States
>has done a lot of
>craaaazy things. "Our" own president
>slept with an intern and
>it actually HELPED his public
>approval rating.
AND?
>Dropping a nuclear
>bomb on not one but
>two cities should have disgusted
>a lot more people than
>it really did.
They were atomic bombs not nuclear. If you have an encyclopedia im sure you can find the difference. Oh wait the government makes them lie too.
>Hell, in
>just about every war which
>the U.S. has fought in,
>they've done some pretty un-groovy
>things and got the media
>to shut up while they
>kept on doing it.
SO the ends never justify the means. SO we should just let all hell break loose while we take this holier than thou approach? why? becuase we are a bigger nation. If you were some poor dumb colombian you wouldnt worry about politics, or philosophy. The socioeconomic situation and goverment you were raised in has allowed you to be a thinker and you dont have any graciousness for that. You rather just spit on it call it wrong and then crawl in your shell and say that you are so righteous and so much better than it. if you loathe this country so much than leave it, move to iraq, where you will have no freedom, and you can hate america all you want. get off of it.
>first bomb dropped by U.S.
>bombers on Berlin killed the
>ONLY elephant in the Berlin
>Zoo.
And we bombed them again and agian and agian until they would surrender. And who cares about that tidbit of info.
>On a closing note, that you
>can be patriotic about a
>nation that so easily condones
>the murder of not even
>two million but one child
>does little more than disgust
>me.
Once again, the ends never justify the means? If one child must die to stop the destruction of this country, more important this planet then so be it. If it takes 5 million children than so be it.
heres a question for you? should we have not gotten involved in World War II? SO that maybe hitler could have taken over the european continent? so that he would have killed more than 6 million innocents. Again i dont believe people that live under the government are completely innocent if they do not overthrow the dictator.
What disgusts me is the hypocritacal comptempt you have for America. Use the freedom and then dont support the body that gives you this freedom. There are only rights granted by a government none granted by the fact we are human.
On a lighter note id like to state that i hate liberals and conservatives that are blind to the fact they may be wrong. I know i might be wrong, in fact i probably am wrong but im not unyielding to others opinions. I will aknowledge when i am wrong, but only after you can prove it to me. which has not happened.
8
8-Ball
Guest
Well, after drudging through the volley of spelling errors probably intended to slow me down, I came to the conclusion that I'll have a hard time convincing you.
I never tried to imply that the U.S. shouldn't have gotten involved in WWII. If they hadn't, the world would be pretty un-fun to live in. However, they held it off for some time with the cabinet's "Oh, how's the war going? You're doing a GREAT job. Really great." attitude and their blatant hypocritical disregard for human rights in throwing every single person of Japanese descent into "segregation camps."
I never said that I thought the country was doing a bad job of running itself. I don't have any desire to blow the head off of the guy in charge of the education department. However, I DO have the desire to blow the head off of Bill Clinton, but not to sacrifice my own life to end his--the bastard isn't worth it.
Sorry if that's what you think, but I believe that giving Saddam more and more reason to hate the U.S. (Like, oh, the screams of thousands of children with their whole lives ahead of them.) isn't going to stop him from trying to nuke the U.S., which I believe he had little intention of doing.
"We" have over one thousand ICBM's armed with warheads powerful enough to blow up cities, but that Saddam has one pisses off America and makes it want to bomb preschools and Chinese embassies.
I wouldn't feel this way if my relatives in Yugoslavia weren't kept up at night by the explosions of cluster bombs in the buildings around them. Really. I might even be patriotic.
I never tried to imply that the U.S. shouldn't have gotten involved in WWII. If they hadn't, the world would be pretty un-fun to live in. However, they held it off for some time with the cabinet's "Oh, how's the war going? You're doing a GREAT job. Really great." attitude and their blatant hypocritical disregard for human rights in throwing every single person of Japanese descent into "segregation camps."
I never said that I thought the country was doing a bad job of running itself. I don't have any desire to blow the head off of the guy in charge of the education department. However, I DO have the desire to blow the head off of Bill Clinton, but not to sacrifice my own life to end his--the bastard isn't worth it.
Sorry if that's what you think, but I believe that giving Saddam more and more reason to hate the U.S. (Like, oh, the screams of thousands of children with their whole lives ahead of them.) isn't going to stop him from trying to nuke the U.S., which I believe he had little intention of doing.
"We" have over one thousand ICBM's armed with warheads powerful enough to blow up cities, but that Saddam has one pisses off America and makes it want to bomb preschools and Chinese embassies.
I wouldn't feel this way if my relatives in Yugoslavia weren't kept up at night by the explosions of cluster bombs in the buildings around them. Really. I might even be patriotic.
G
Guest
Guest
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Nov-27-00 AT 05:56AM (GMT)[p]soree I m sew dum. kan i suk yor dik o wize ande allwayz writee 8-bal. me jest dount tak nuf tym 2 edyt mi pozts lyk yor O sew smarrte az. n fak mi wil knot spel write evr agan, u meen cocsukr.
G
Guest
Guest
>I never tried to imply that
>the U.S. shouldn't have gotten
>involved in WWII. If they
>hadn't, the world would be
>pretty un-fun to live in.
>However, they held it off
>for some time with the
>cabinet's "Oh, how's the war
>going? You're doing a GREAT
>job. Really great." attitude and
>their blatant hypocritical disregard for
>human rights in throwing every
>single person of Japanese descent
>into "segregation camps."
You can't judge yesterday's times by today's standards, it's like judging a culture by our standards.
I don't believe in human rights as a transcendental entity. Rights are given by the government which allows them. There is no "right to free speech," there is *permission* by the government to free speech.
Yes, it was sad that Japanese people were herded into camps because of the fear that they were spies, but those were the ways of thinking in those days. We scoff at the McCarthy era where people were extremely scared of being called communists, but in those days it was a major issue.
If you start judging others by your own standards, you're going down the path of the Inquisition.
>However,
>I DO have the desire
>to blow the head off
>of Bill Clinton, but not
>to sacrifice my own life
>to end his--the bastard isn't
>worth it.
Let me ask you, why? What has he done to you that is so bad? Personally, I think he's doing a good job, and I would gladly give him another four years as president instead of the two clowns that are battling for the position right now.
>Sorry if that's what you think,
>but I believe that giving
>Saddam more and more reason
>to hate the U.S. (Like,
>oh, the screams of thousands
>of children with their whole
>lives ahead of them.) isn't
>going to stop him from
>trying to nuke the U.S.,
>which I believe he had
>little intention of doing.
The United States is protecting its interests. If the USA really wanted to destroy him, there would be nothing left of his bunker or his military. Saddam is pretty pissed that his invasion of Kuwait was put to an end, do you expect him to just be nice about the whole situation? He has already proven that he has no qualms over using nerve gas in SCUD missiles. Quite frankly I'd rather have his missiles shut down by inspectors than having to spend a million dollars per patriot missile to intercept them.
>"We" have over one thousand ICBM's
>armed with warheads powerful enough
>to blow up cities, but
>that Saddam has one pisses
>off America and makes it
>want to bomb preschools and
>Chinese embassies.
You're confusing the Gulf War with the Balkan war. Hitting the Chinese embassy was a mistake on part because of using old map data inside the cruise missile.
As for bombing preschools, either don't build them near strategic targets or give us the location of them so we don't hit them. We can't be responsible for ill-placed buildings.
>I wouldn't feel this way if
>my relatives in Yugoslavia weren't
>kept up at night by
>the explosions of cluster bombs
>in the buildings around them.
>Really. I might even be
>patriotic.
That's sad and all but quite frankly, that's the pits! Deal with it. You have to view the grander picture of things. End ALWAYS justifies the mean. You have to make sacrifices and deal with the fact that not everyone is going to be happy about those sacrifices. If taking out a preschool in Iraq means putting an end to Saddam, so be it.
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
>the U.S. shouldn't have gotten
>involved in WWII. If they
>hadn't, the world would be
>pretty un-fun to live in.
>However, they held it off
>for some time with the
>cabinet's "Oh, how's the war
>going? You're doing a GREAT
>job. Really great." attitude and
>their blatant hypocritical disregard for
>human rights in throwing every
>single person of Japanese descent
>into "segregation camps."
You can't judge yesterday's times by today's standards, it's like judging a culture by our standards.
I don't believe in human rights as a transcendental entity. Rights are given by the government which allows them. There is no "right to free speech," there is *permission* by the government to free speech.
Yes, it was sad that Japanese people were herded into camps because of the fear that they were spies, but those were the ways of thinking in those days. We scoff at the McCarthy era where people were extremely scared of being called communists, but in those days it was a major issue.
If you start judging others by your own standards, you're going down the path of the Inquisition.
>However,
>I DO have the desire
>to blow the head off
>of Bill Clinton, but not
>to sacrifice my own life
>to end his--the bastard isn't
>worth it.
Let me ask you, why? What has he done to you that is so bad? Personally, I think he's doing a good job, and I would gladly give him another four years as president instead of the two clowns that are battling for the position right now.
>Sorry if that's what you think,
>but I believe that giving
>Saddam more and more reason
>to hate the U.S. (Like,
>oh, the screams of thousands
>of children with their whole
>lives ahead of them.) isn't
>going to stop him from
>trying to nuke the U.S.,
>which I believe he had
>little intention of doing.
The United States is protecting its interests. If the USA really wanted to destroy him, there would be nothing left of his bunker or his military. Saddam is pretty pissed that his invasion of Kuwait was put to an end, do you expect him to just be nice about the whole situation? He has already proven that he has no qualms over using nerve gas in SCUD missiles. Quite frankly I'd rather have his missiles shut down by inspectors than having to spend a million dollars per patriot missile to intercept them.
>"We" have over one thousand ICBM's
>armed with warheads powerful enough
>to blow up cities, but
>that Saddam has one pisses
>off America and makes it
>want to bomb preschools and
>Chinese embassies.
You're confusing the Gulf War with the Balkan war. Hitting the Chinese embassy was a mistake on part because of using old map data inside the cruise missile.
As for bombing preschools, either don't build them near strategic targets or give us the location of them so we don't hit them. We can't be responsible for ill-placed buildings.
>I wouldn't feel this way if
>my relatives in Yugoslavia weren't
>kept up at night by
>the explosions of cluster bombs
>in the buildings around them.
>Really. I might even be
>patriotic.
That's sad and all but quite frankly, that's the pits! Deal with it. You have to view the grander picture of things. End ALWAYS justifies the mean. You have to make sacrifices and deal with the fact that not everyone is going to be happy about those sacrifices. If taking out a preschool in Iraq means putting an end to Saddam, so be it.
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
My take on this...
The reason would be independence. Remember, the USA has been taking more and more of a "we're not the world's 991"-attitude and quite frankly, the mental image of the USA as a kind of big protector has long since been smashed into little kibbles and bits. USA is too wrong too often (Korea, Vietnam, ESPECIALLY Vietnam).
But personally, I think us Europeans should accept the fact that we're no longer a world power and move on. We're stuck in the past, when we still ruled the world. You know, from before WW2 (since the USA was pretty much turned only inside and not to outside). Even us Dutch had our Golden Age in the 17th century.
In my opinion, I think we should happily accept all help we can get from the USA and try to keep our economic infrastructure to collapse.
I just wished us Dutch could have kept our nice and neutral position, but that wouldn't be realistic....
Still, this country is doing pretty well for itself. With the Benelux alliance, the good state of our economy, good state of social welfare, etc. etc.
Just like us to go and waste our money on stuff like this.
The reason would be independence. Remember, the USA has been taking more and more of a "we're not the world's 991"-attitude and quite frankly, the mental image of the USA as a kind of big protector has long since been smashed into little kibbles and bits. USA is too wrong too often (Korea, Vietnam, ESPECIALLY Vietnam).
But personally, I think us Europeans should accept the fact that we're no longer a world power and move on. We're stuck in the past, when we still ruled the world. You know, from before WW2 (since the USA was pretty much turned only inside and not to outside). Even us Dutch had our Golden Age in the 17th century.
In my opinion, I think we should happily accept all help we can get from the USA and try to keep our economic infrastructure to collapse.
I just wished us Dutch could have kept our nice and neutral position, but that wouldn't be realistic....
Still, this country is doing pretty well for itself. With the Benelux alliance, the good state of our economy, good state of social welfare, etc. etc.
Just like us to go and waste our money on stuff like this.
>>I never tried to imply that
>>the U.S. shouldn't have gotten
>>involved in WWII. If they
>>hadn't, the world would be
>>pretty un-fun to live in.
>>However, they held it off
>>for some time with the
>>cabinet's "Oh, how's the war
>>going? You're doing a GREAT
>>job. Really great." attitude and
>>their blatant hypocritical disregard for
>>human rights in throwing every
>>single person of Japanese descent
>>into "segregation camps."
Let me get that straight: Americans are at war with Japan, Pearl Harbor is in ruins, people are dying, generic 'asian' face is at propaganda posters, and you think any president would dare to let Japanese immigrants just walk around?! Even if he would, they could be lynched, for god sake! This is not hypocracy (though it was at that time).
>I don't believe in human rights
>as a transcendental entity.
>Rights are given by the
>government which allows them.
>There is no "right to
>free speech," there is *permission*
>by the government to free
>speech.
>
>Yes, it was sad that Japanese
>people were herded into camps
>because of the fear that
>they were spies, but those
>were the ways of thinking
>in those days. We
>scoff at the McCarthy era
>where people were extremely scared
>of being called communists, but
>in those days it was
>a major issue.
>
>If you start judging others by
>your own standards, you're going
>down the path of the
>Inquisition.
But isn't that what we all are doing?
>>However,
>>I DO have the desire
>>to blow the head off
>>of Bill Clinton, but not
>>to sacrifice my own life
>>to end his--the bastard isn't
>>worth it.
>
>Let me ask you, why?
>What has he done to
>you that is so bad?
> Personally, I think he's
>doing a good job, and
>I would gladly give him
>another four years as president
>instead of the two clowns
>that are battling for the
>position right now.
Damn right! What the hell is wrong with Clinton?!
>>Sorry if that's what you think,
>>but I believe that giving
>>Saddam more and more reason
>>to hate the U.S. (Like,
>>oh, the screams of thousands
>>of children with their whole
>>lives ahead of them.) isn't
>>going to stop him from
>>trying to nuke the U.S.,
>>which I believe he had
>>little intention of doing.
>
>The United States is protecting its
>interests. If the USA
>really wanted to destroy him,
>there would be nothing left
>of his bunker or his
>military. Saddam is pretty
>pissed that his invasion of
>Kuwait was put to an
>end, do you expect him
>to just be nice about
>the whole situation? He
>has already proven that he
>has no qualms over using
>nerve gas in SCUD missiles.
> Quite frankly I'd rather
>have his missiles shut down
>by inspectors than having to
>spend a million dollars per
>patriot missile to intercept them.
1. People make MONEY on war. Especially in the last decade.
2. US was a peacemaker, not a direct enemy of Saddam Husein. It considers itself peacemaker, so it will stop WAR, not Husein.
3. Reminds me of Johar Dudayev, Chechyen 'rebel leader' who was killed (presumably, because it's too unreal) during a missile strike on his camp. And yes, I know it's not exactly the same situation.
>>"We" have over one thousand ICBM's
>>armed with warheads powerful enough
>>to blow up cities, but
>>that Saddam has one pisses
>>off America and makes it
>>want to bomb preschools and
>>Chinese embassies.
What, one Cold War wasn't enough for you?! In case you don't remember (doubtful), Cold War was Cold only because Russia and US were holding guns at the heads of their enemy. Now, Saddam has one (where did you hear that?) and nothing prevents US from attacking Iraq. Prevention is best.
Nobody bombs embassies of nuclear-weapons posessing foreign nations. It was a mistake.
Nobody bombs preschools unless it has an agenda to destroy population of their enemy. And if someone does, it's called genocide and it has other signs other than bombed preschools.
>As for bombing preschools, either don't
>build them near strategic targets
>or give us the location
>of them so we don't
>hit them. We can't
>be responsible for ill-placed buildings.
War is war. We build smart bombs, cruise missiles, pilotless aircrafts to make war as antiseptic as we can, but it's impossible.
>>I wouldn't feel this way if
>>my relatives in Yugoslavia weren't
>>kept up at night by
>>the explosions of cluster bombs
>>in the buildings around them.
>>Really. I might even be
>>patriotic.
>
>That's sad and all but quite
>frankly, that's the pits!
>Deal with it. You
>have to view the grander
>picture of things. End
>ALWAYS justifies the mean.
>You have to make sacrifices
>and deal with the fact
>that not everyone is going
>to be happy about those
>sacrifices. If taking out
>a preschool in Iraq means
>putting an end to Saddam,
>so be it.
>
>-Xotor-
Actually, I'd say that end never justifies the means, but if everybody would think so, there would be no humans!
>>the U.S. shouldn't have gotten
>>involved in WWII. If they
>>hadn't, the world would be
>>pretty un-fun to live in.
>>However, they held it off
>>for some time with the
>>cabinet's "Oh, how's the war
>>going? You're doing a GREAT
>>job. Really great." attitude and
>>their blatant hypocritical disregard for
>>human rights in throwing every
>>single person of Japanese descent
>>into "segregation camps."
Let me get that straight: Americans are at war with Japan, Pearl Harbor is in ruins, people are dying, generic 'asian' face is at propaganda posters, and you think any president would dare to let Japanese immigrants just walk around?! Even if he would, they could be lynched, for god sake! This is not hypocracy (though it was at that time).
>I don't believe in human rights
>as a transcendental entity.
>Rights are given by the
>government which allows them.
>There is no "right to
>free speech," there is *permission*
>by the government to free
>speech.
>
>Yes, it was sad that Japanese
>people were herded into camps
>because of the fear that
>they were spies, but those
>were the ways of thinking
>in those days. We
>scoff at the McCarthy era
>where people were extremely scared
>of being called communists, but
>in those days it was
>a major issue.
>
>If you start judging others by
>your own standards, you're going
>down the path of the
>Inquisition.
But isn't that what we all are doing?
>>However,
>>I DO have the desire
>>to blow the head off
>>of Bill Clinton, but not
>>to sacrifice my own life
>>to end his--the bastard isn't
>>worth it.
>
>Let me ask you, why?
>What has he done to
>you that is so bad?
> Personally, I think he's
>doing a good job, and
>I would gladly give him
>another four years as president
>instead of the two clowns
>that are battling for the
>position right now.
Damn right! What the hell is wrong with Clinton?!
>>Sorry if that's what you think,
>>but I believe that giving
>>Saddam more and more reason
>>to hate the U.S. (Like,
>>oh, the screams of thousands
>>of children with their whole
>>lives ahead of them.) isn't
>>going to stop him from
>>trying to nuke the U.S.,
>>which I believe he had
>>little intention of doing.
>
>The United States is protecting its
>interests. If the USA
>really wanted to destroy him,
>there would be nothing left
>of his bunker or his
>military. Saddam is pretty
>pissed that his invasion of
>Kuwait was put to an
>end, do you expect him
>to just be nice about
>the whole situation? He
>has already proven that he
>has no qualms over using
>nerve gas in SCUD missiles.
> Quite frankly I'd rather
>have his missiles shut down
>by inspectors than having to
>spend a million dollars per
>patriot missile to intercept them.
1. People make MONEY on war. Especially in the last decade.
2. US was a peacemaker, not a direct enemy of Saddam Husein. It considers itself peacemaker, so it will stop WAR, not Husein.
3. Reminds me of Johar Dudayev, Chechyen 'rebel leader' who was killed (presumably, because it's too unreal) during a missile strike on his camp. And yes, I know it's not exactly the same situation.
>>"We" have over one thousand ICBM's
>>armed with warheads powerful enough
>>to blow up cities, but
>>that Saddam has one pisses
>>off America and makes it
>>want to bomb preschools and
>>Chinese embassies.
What, one Cold War wasn't enough for you?! In case you don't remember (doubtful), Cold War was Cold only because Russia and US were holding guns at the heads of their enemy. Now, Saddam has one (where did you hear that?) and nothing prevents US from attacking Iraq. Prevention is best.
Nobody bombs embassies of nuclear-weapons posessing foreign nations. It was a mistake.
Nobody bombs preschools unless it has an agenda to destroy population of their enemy. And if someone does, it's called genocide and it has other signs other than bombed preschools.
>As for bombing preschools, either don't
>build them near strategic targets
>or give us the location
>of them so we don't
>hit them. We can't
>be responsible for ill-placed buildings.
War is war. We build smart bombs, cruise missiles, pilotless aircrafts to make war as antiseptic as we can, but it's impossible.
>>I wouldn't feel this way if
>>my relatives in Yugoslavia weren't
>>kept up at night by
>>the explosions of cluster bombs
>>in the buildings around them.
>>Really. I might even be
>>patriotic.
>
>That's sad and all but quite
>frankly, that's the pits!
>Deal with it. You
>have to view the grander
>picture of things. End
>ALWAYS justifies the mean.
>You have to make sacrifices
>and deal with the fact
>that not everyone is going
>to be happy about those
>sacrifices. If taking out
>a preschool in Iraq means
>putting an end to Saddam,
>so be it.
>
>-Xotor-
Actually, I'd say that end never justifies the means, but if everybody would think so, there would be no humans!
[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif] |
8
8-Ball
Guest
It is no use arguing with you people. This will be my last argument. You are idiotic slaves of the media. If you really want to be so patriotic, how about walking up to an Iraqi mother who had her baby killed by a cluster bomb and telling her about how the ends justify the means.
So he says he'll use nerve gas in SCUD missiles, well why the fuck not? The U.S. will bomb five-year-olds simply because their preschool was as "ill-placed building," so why can't Saddam at least OWN a nuke?
Bill Clinton is a GOOD president? Bombing children is GOOD? No, it's not, and neither is bombing my family. You make me sick, that you can tell me it was alright to keep them up at night with the sound of the crashing of cluster bombs simply because "We had to do it and the U.S. is always right."
So he says he'll use nerve gas in SCUD missiles, well why the fuck not? The U.S. will bomb five-year-olds simply because their preschool was as "ill-placed building," so why can't Saddam at least OWN a nuke?
Bill Clinton is a GOOD president? Bombing children is GOOD? No, it's not, and neither is bombing my family. You make me sick, that you can tell me it was alright to keep them up at night with the sound of the crashing of cluster bombs simply because "We had to do it and the U.S. is always right."
G
Guest
Guest
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Nov-29-00 AT 06:57AM (GMT)[p]if saddam can own a nuke then why cant we kill children? 
and the craziness continues. oh if really want peoples attentions 8-ball take a hint from me, dont make any sense until more people agree with your lack of sense.
and you are biased becuase your serbian relatives are being bombed. come to terms with that. the world isnt friendly, people die due to war. Better to be dishing death out, than recieveing.
and the craziness continues. oh if really want peoples attentions 8-ball take a hint from me, dont make any sense until more people agree with your lack of sense.and you are biased becuase your serbian relatives are being bombed. come to terms with that. the world isnt friendly, people die due to war. Better to be dishing death out, than recieveing.
G
Guest
Guest
>It is no use arguing with
>you people. This will be
>my last argument. You are
>idiotic slaves of the media.
I think you're influenced by the propaganda these humanity groups and disgruntled countries try to put out. Get a clue about the *real* picture and try to appreciate what you have.
>If you really want to
>be so patriotic, how about
>walking up to an Iraqi
>mother who had her baby
>killed by a cluster bomb
>and telling her about how
>the ends justify the means.
How about walking up to the Israeli who is throwing up with mucus pouring out of every body cavity because he inhaled nerve gas? Saddam already proved he could launch such missiles.
>So he says he'll use nerve
>gas in SCUD missiles, well
>why the fuck not?
I'm sorry, you must be disillusioned or something. Read the above quote again.
>The
>U.S. will bomb five-year-olds simply
>because their preschool was as
>"ill-placed building,"
Really, do you believe that the United States TARGETTED five year olds? Why would ANYONE do that? It's like saying a country will nuke major cities first. Get real. Military targets are FIRST priority. Why waste money and munitions killing people who are not a threat?
>so why can't
>Saddam at least OWN a
>nuke?
Would you give a terrorist a gun in a presidential parade? I think the question answers itself.
>Bill Clinton is a GOOD president?
>Bombing children is GOOD? No,
>it's not, and neither is
>bombing my family.
Get over it. The only reason you're disgruntled is that your family was in the wrong place at the wrong time. BIG FAT FUCKING DEAL. It happens all the time, and if you think your situation is special, I have news for you: IT IS NOT. Man has killed man from the dawn of time, and innocents get hurt in the scuffle.
If the United States was a ruthless aggressor, that country would be a smouldering nuclear pit. The United States could have *nuked* Iraq and NO COUNTRY would have interfered. Even the Soviet Union would have looked the other way. Maybe a few condemnations but no one is going to launch war for that. It is not worth their own country to stand up for another.
That is where the United States is different. Rather than sit around and soak up money on our fat ass, we go out of our way to help other countries. Kosovo? We were there. Kuwait? We were there too. Even rummy countries like Ethiopia. Yeah, there are a few casualties, but the end result is that less people get hurt than the alternative. If you're on the receiving end, well that's too bad, deal with it.
You want us to back off? How about when another country invades your and starts slaughtering civilians? Should we look the other way because we might hurt a few of THEIR civs?
>You make
>me sick, that you can
>tell me it was alright
>to keep them up at
>night with the sound of
>the crashing of cluster bombs
>simply because "We had to
>do it and the U.S.
>is always right."
You're looking at this from a one-sided perspective. You fail to see that it is in the interest of a COUNTRY to prevent a potentially serious war by sacrificing a few.
Maybe you get out and experience *real* life and stop criticizing things you don't understand. You don't run a country by simply asking people to do things, you provide action.
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
>you people. This will be
>my last argument. You are
>idiotic slaves of the media.
I think you're influenced by the propaganda these humanity groups and disgruntled countries try to put out. Get a clue about the *real* picture and try to appreciate what you have.
>If you really want to
>be so patriotic, how about
>walking up to an Iraqi
>mother who had her baby
>killed by a cluster bomb
>and telling her about how
>the ends justify the means.
How about walking up to the Israeli who is throwing up with mucus pouring out of every body cavity because he inhaled nerve gas? Saddam already proved he could launch such missiles.
>So he says he'll use nerve
>gas in SCUD missiles, well
>why the fuck not?
I'm sorry, you must be disillusioned or something. Read the above quote again.
>The
>U.S. will bomb five-year-olds simply
>because their preschool was as
>"ill-placed building,"
Really, do you believe that the United States TARGETTED five year olds? Why would ANYONE do that? It's like saying a country will nuke major cities first. Get real. Military targets are FIRST priority. Why waste money and munitions killing people who are not a threat?
>so why can't
>Saddam at least OWN a
>nuke?
Would you give a terrorist a gun in a presidential parade? I think the question answers itself.
>Bill Clinton is a GOOD president?
>Bombing children is GOOD? No,
>it's not, and neither is
>bombing my family.
Get over it. The only reason you're disgruntled is that your family was in the wrong place at the wrong time. BIG FAT FUCKING DEAL. It happens all the time, and if you think your situation is special, I have news for you: IT IS NOT. Man has killed man from the dawn of time, and innocents get hurt in the scuffle.
If the United States was a ruthless aggressor, that country would be a smouldering nuclear pit. The United States could have *nuked* Iraq and NO COUNTRY would have interfered. Even the Soviet Union would have looked the other way. Maybe a few condemnations but no one is going to launch war for that. It is not worth their own country to stand up for another.
That is where the United States is different. Rather than sit around and soak up money on our fat ass, we go out of our way to help other countries. Kosovo? We were there. Kuwait? We were there too. Even rummy countries like Ethiopia. Yeah, there are a few casualties, but the end result is that less people get hurt than the alternative. If you're on the receiving end, well that's too bad, deal with it.
You want us to back off? How about when another country invades your and starts slaughtering civilians? Should we look the other way because we might hurt a few of THEIR civs?
>You make
>me sick, that you can
>tell me it was alright
>to keep them up at
>night with the sound of
>the crashing of cluster bombs
>simply because "We had to
>do it and the U.S.
>is always right."
You're looking at this from a one-sided perspective. You fail to see that it is in the interest of a COUNTRY to prevent a potentially serious war by sacrificing a few.
Maybe you get out and experience *real* life and stop criticizing things you don't understand. You don't run a country by simply asking people to do things, you provide action.
-Xotor-
[div align=center]
http://www.poseidonet.f2s.com/files/nostupid.gif
[/div]
G
Guest
Guest
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Nov-29-00 AT 03:35PM (GMT)[p]>You fail to see that it is in the interest of a COUNTRY to prevent a potentially serious war by sacrificing a few.
Could you explain it to me, because I fail to see the big picture too. What was the US's interest in preventing war in Serbia/Yugoslavia ?
The few US citizens living there could be easliy evacuated.
The US has no serious economical interest in that area.
The neighbor countries in Europe could easily protect themselves without US help.
Maybe there's something I don't know, but then again, I not a politician.
"Don't worry men, they can't hit us here"
Could you explain it to me, because I fail to see the big picture too. What was the US's interest in preventing war in Serbia/Yugoslavia ?
The few US citizens living there could be easliy evacuated.
The US has no serious economical interest in that area.
The neighbor countries in Europe could easily protect themselves without US help.
Maybe there's something I don't know, but then again, I not a politician.
"Don't worry men, they can't hit us here"
>It is no use arguing with
>you people. This will be
>my last argument. You are
>idiotic slaves of the media.
Alas. Without media, we have no information besides first-hand experience. So the only people who are not slaves are witnesses and clueless.
>If you really want to
>be so patriotic, how about
>walking up to an Iraqi
>mother who had her baby
>killed by a cluster bomb
>and telling her about how
>the ends justify the means.
War is war. People get killed. People don't like to be killed. People say "you !@#$% you are killing us!" Then they get guns and shoot back. And soldiers say "What the fuck?! We're not cattle to stand here while these !@#$% are killing our buddies!" And they too get guns and fire back. And civilians get killed. Civilians don't like to be killed.........
Let's have NO war, or have a war and don't BITCH about how it's fought.
>So he says he'll use nerve
>gas in SCUD missiles, well
>why the fuck not?
So that he'll kill women, children and old? Or kill soldiers? Now how is that better? They too are someone's children.
>The U.S. will bomb five-year-olds simply
>because their preschool was as
>"ill-placed building," so why can't
>Saddam at least OWN a
>nuke?
It was an accident. Can't you understand?
>Bill Clinton is a GOOD president?
Just found out that he sucks, because he banned import of assault rifles. I wanted to get me AK103.
>Bombing children is GOOD?
Sometimes, but not for US and not at the present time.
>No, it's not, and neither is
>bombing my family. You make
>me sick, that you can
>tell me it was alright
>to keep them up at
>night with the sound of
>the crashing of cluster bombs
>simply because "We had to
>do it and the U.S.
>is always right."
It's not always right, but if you say "We had to do it and the U.S. is wrong"... Well that would be stupid.
>you people. This will be
>my last argument. You are
>idiotic slaves of the media.
Alas. Without media, we have no information besides first-hand experience. So the only people who are not slaves are witnesses and clueless.
>If you really want to
>be so patriotic, how about
>walking up to an Iraqi
>mother who had her baby
>killed by a cluster bomb
>and telling her about how
>the ends justify the means.
War is war. People get killed. People don't like to be killed. People say "you !@#$% you are killing us!" Then they get guns and shoot back. And soldiers say "What the fuck?! We're not cattle to stand here while these !@#$% are killing our buddies!" And they too get guns and fire back. And civilians get killed. Civilians don't like to be killed.........
Let's have NO war, or have a war and don't BITCH about how it's fought.
>So he says he'll use nerve
>gas in SCUD missiles, well
>why the fuck not?
So that he'll kill women, children and old? Or kill soldiers? Now how is that better? They too are someone's children.
>The U.S. will bomb five-year-olds simply
>because their preschool was as
>"ill-placed building," so why can't
>Saddam at least OWN a
>nuke?
It was an accident. Can't you understand?
>Bill Clinton is a GOOD president?
Just found out that he sucks, because he banned import of assault rifles. I wanted to get me AK103.
>Bombing children is GOOD?
Sometimes, but not for US and not at the present time.
>No, it's not, and neither is
>bombing my family. You make
>me sick, that you can
>tell me it was alright
>to keep them up at
>night with the sound of
>the crashing of cluster bombs
>simply because "We had to
>do it and the U.S.
>is always right."
It's not always right, but if you say "We had to do it and the U.S. is wrong"... Well that would be stupid.
[img align=center" src="//redrival.com/aptyp/ftclogo-t.gif] |
8
8-Ball
Guest
Deal with it? DEAL WITH IT? "If you're on the receiving end, deal with it." What the hell is THAT? Okay, I deal with a cluster bomb specifically targeted at my Iraqi bomb shelter.
MY OWN FAMILY WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME? Okay, that's supposed to convince me that the U.S. are the good guys? So Uncle Sam can bomb my family just because some Albanians want a city? Here's another one of my 101 reasons to hate Bill Clinton: HYPOCRISY! He says that we shouldn't use violence to solve problems, but he did it plenty of times!
A few casualties? They're going to suffer A FEW casualties? Well, I suppose two million counts as a few. Yup.
I am NOT saying that the U.S. should just sit around and do nothing while another country invades. I am saying that it should not poke its nose into the business of other countries and donate money only when the winning side has the larger number of citizens in the U.S. of the two countries.
Then again...
>Even the Soviet Union
You do believe that the Soviet Union still exists. I mean, it disbanded some time ago...
Kuwait? The Iraqis shouldn't have invaded, but hey, the U.S. sure as hell would have in their position. Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, goddamnit!
Have you seen the "war footage" of the end of the Gulf War? Ever notice that ALL of the Iraqi tanks and trucks are on roads and headed BACK TO IRAQ? Maybe they were retreating? The U.S. wouldn't let its people know that, of course, since they planned to blow up the Iraqi military while it waved write flags in the air.
You're not bastards, it's just that one of the spoils of war is the pen with which to write history, and the U.S. gets this pen in every single situation, using it to evilly portray their enemies.
MY OWN FAMILY WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME? Okay, that's supposed to convince me that the U.S. are the good guys? So Uncle Sam can bomb my family just because some Albanians want a city? Here's another one of my 101 reasons to hate Bill Clinton: HYPOCRISY! He says that we shouldn't use violence to solve problems, but he did it plenty of times!
A few casualties? They're going to suffer A FEW casualties? Well, I suppose two million counts as a few. Yup.
I am NOT saying that the U.S. should just sit around and do nothing while another country invades. I am saying that it should not poke its nose into the business of other countries and donate money only when the winning side has the larger number of citizens in the U.S. of the two countries.
Then again...
>Even the Soviet Union
You do believe that the Soviet Union still exists. I mean, it disbanded some time ago...
Kuwait? The Iraqis shouldn't have invaded, but hey, the U.S. sure as hell would have in their position. Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, goddamnit!
Have you seen the "war footage" of the end of the Gulf War? Ever notice that ALL of the Iraqi tanks and trucks are on roads and headed BACK TO IRAQ? Maybe they were retreating? The U.S. wouldn't let its people know that, of course, since they planned to blow up the Iraqi military while it waved write flags in the air.
You're not bastards, it's just that one of the spoils of war is the pen with which to write history, and the U.S. gets this pen in every single situation, using it to evilly portray their enemies.
G
Guest
Guest
wait a second, you said the message before this was your last. no matter. Learn to live in an inhumane, did spell that right? , world. Just be sure youre on the right side when the world is going to hell due to terrorists, and weaposn of mass destruction. You may be left out in the cold to die if you continue your ways against america.
, world. Just be sure youre on the right side when the world is going to hell due to terrorists, and weaposn of mass destruction. You may be left out in the cold to die if you continue your ways against america.