[s]Unregisted User Mario Santos wrote on 03:34, 12th Mar 2003:
The United Nation is an organization that should be respected, as well as the ideas of other member states?.
I forgot to adress this line. I wish i could just edit my posts but anyway.
The United nations should be respected? I sure do respect a nation that has as its leader of the human rights committee that bastion of liberty and justice, Libia. Oh and get this one guess who's heading up the disarmament committee next year. It shouldnt be that hard to figure out since they know all the tricks on how not to disarm, Iraq. And this ever so important security council is headed by the world super power Guinnie(sp?). I dont know how to spell it so I will adress it as peice of shit african country. In peice of shit African country they only have electricity from midnight to 6 am. Needless to say they don't have television. Its not a democracy so why should peice of shit African country's citizens have any impact on major global issues.
The UN is a great idea unfortionately its ahead of its time. The UN will work once the entire world is a democracy. Untill that day there are still evil dictators in this world that have to much power that must be taken out.
Sorry for posting twice.
Home
TheSinner.net
War With Iraq
Re:
by Al on Wed Mar 12, 2003 11:57 pm
It's funny that you should mention Libya. Libya is another perfect example, to add to a very long list, of US foreign policy shortsightedness. The US supported the coup against the British backed king. The leader of the coup was a certain Ghadaffi.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
-
Al
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
** IRAQ - Short Kaboom **
by Shelby on Thu Mar 13, 2003 12:00 am
The war will be short and precise. A country that has lived under tyranny for thirty years will be liberated. They will no longer have to live in fear. We have such luxury to speak of free will. The Iraqi's do not. We will go in, we will find Saddam's huge "stash" and we will get on with the war on terrorism and turn our focus on another mad man in North Korea who has his finger on the button. If we were to avoid this war. . . we would eventually have Saddam's finger on the button and in less time than five years.
All things occur for a reason. Yes? History repeats itself. But this time we are taking these issues seriously, as they should have been taken before S11. The ball is rolling you can not hold it back. Blair is courageous in my eye. He is taking many hits, but after this is over he will be looked up as a steadfast and true watch dog for his England.
All things occur for a reason. Yes? History repeats itself. But this time we are taking these issues seriously, as they should have been taken before S11. The ball is rolling you can not hold it back. Blair is courageous in my eye. He is taking many hits, but after this is over he will be looked up as a steadfast and true watch dog for his England.
-
Shelby
Re:
by Andy_Bayley on Thu Mar 13, 2003 8:56 am
[s]Al wrote on 23:57, 12th Mar 2003:
It's funny that you should mention Libya. Libya is another perfect example, to add to a very long list, of US foreign policy shortsightedness. The US supported the coup against the British backed king. The leader of the coup was a certain Ghadaffi.
[hr][i]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[/i]
do you mean Qadhafi? See i can be a dick on spelling to. I checked out the world fact book it says Libya gained its independance from Italy. So i think you may be mistaken but even if your not it doesnt matter. It's in the past, you cant change the past. We made a mistake, we've made a lot of mistakes we still do more good than bad. Now get out of our way while we fix this mistake.
Andy Bayley
Founder of the Educate the English foundation
It's funny that you should mention Libya. Libya is another perfect example, to add to a very long list, of US foreign policy shortsightedness. The US supported the coup against the British backed king. The leader of the coup was a certain Ghadaffi.
[hr][i]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[/i]
do you mean Qadhafi? See i can be a dick on spelling to. I checked out the world fact book it says Libya gained its independance from Italy. So i think you may be mistaken but even if your not it doesnt matter. It's in the past, you cant change the past. We made a mistake, we've made a lot of mistakes we still do more good than bad. Now get out of our way while we fix this mistake.
Andy Bayley
Founder of the Educate the English foundation
-
Andy_Bayley
Re:
by Cain on Thu Mar 13, 2003 9:29 am
[s]Unregisted User Andy_Bayley wrote on 00:47, 13th Mar 2003:
do you mean Qadhafi?
There are more than a dozen ways to spell Gadaffi and no standard version- this is one of the problems that the CIA are having in the middle east they don't know who everybody is because the Colonel himself is under about twelve different files. How many are the same person? with a high profile person like Colonel Gadhafi, it's hard, but with an low-profile operative that is hard to keep a track of the job becomes nigh-on impossible.
do you mean Qadhafi?
There are more than a dozen ways to spell Gadaffi and no standard version- this is one of the problems that the CIA are having in the middle east they don't know who everybody is because the Colonel himself is under about twelve different files. How many are the same person? with a high profile person like Colonel Gadhafi, it's hard, but with an low-profile operative that is hard to keep a track of the job becomes nigh-on impossible.
I hold an element of surprise
-
Cain
- Posts: 4439
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2003 8:31 am
Re:
by harmless loony on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:05 am
"Let me point out unlike your European friends i will not dodge the question by correcting your grammar or spelling."
I'm sorry, i wasn't aware that i had to have perfect grammar and spelling in order to post on this message board. I was making a general point - not trying to write a word perfect essay.
"Your greatest leader Winston Churchhill (or was Thatcher your greatest?) once said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"
"Your greatest leader"??? wot lead you to think that i was British?? I've never refered to them as great leaders. (And have no plans to do so either)
" History has shown enemies working together for a common goal over time. I wouldnt be surprised if Husayn would give or sell weapons to UBL. In fact Bin Laden has called for muslims to support the infadel Saddam. "
Care to provide us with a link that says that Osama has called for Muslims to support Saddam??
"But even if its true that Al Qu'eda and Saddam dont get along. Saddam still supports terrorists, we know this that should be enough."
Again - where's your evidence? There's some evidence (unfortuantely i dont have the link on me right now) that money from America has helped to support the IRA (which bombed my home town of Warrington and killed 2 innocent children out shopping for mothers day)So in that case is it ok for us to bomb America as we know they were supporting "terrorrists"???
"Perhaps we should give Afghanistan more money, but actually I think that should fall more on countries in Europe who wont be involved in this liberation of Iraq, they have more money to spare. "
Why should the countries of Europe pay up for the aftermath of a war which they don't want to be a part of?? If the American government feel it is neccessary to bomb Iraq then they should see it through and rebuild the country too.
"Rape is on the rise? Give me a fucking break because now thier laws are looser where you dont get your head lopped off for rape thats proof afghanistan is failing. So if rape is on the rise, public executions, mass graves, and over all descrimination against women are on a very steady downfall."
But I thought the purpose of Amercia bombing afghanistan was to make it a better place and to ensure it didn't fail?? Clearly the American government didn't do their job properly.
I'm sorry, i wasn't aware that i had to have perfect grammar and spelling in order to post on this message board. I was making a general point - not trying to write a word perfect essay.
"Your greatest leader Winston Churchhill (or was Thatcher your greatest?) once said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"
"Your greatest leader"??? wot lead you to think that i was British?? I've never refered to them as great leaders. (And have no plans to do so either)
" History has shown enemies working together for a common goal over time. I wouldnt be surprised if Husayn would give or sell weapons to UBL. In fact Bin Laden has called for muslims to support the infadel Saddam. "
Care to provide us with a link that says that Osama has called for Muslims to support Saddam??
"But even if its true that Al Qu'eda and Saddam dont get along. Saddam still supports terrorists, we know this that should be enough."
Again - where's your evidence? There's some evidence (unfortuantely i dont have the link on me right now) that money from America has helped to support the IRA (which bombed my home town of Warrington and killed 2 innocent children out shopping for mothers day)So in that case is it ok for us to bomb America as we know they were supporting "terrorrists"???
"Perhaps we should give Afghanistan more money, but actually I think that should fall more on countries in Europe who wont be involved in this liberation of Iraq, they have more money to spare. "
Why should the countries of Europe pay up for the aftermath of a war which they don't want to be a part of?? If the American government feel it is neccessary to bomb Iraq then they should see it through and rebuild the country too.
"Rape is on the rise? Give me a fucking break because now thier laws are looser where you dont get your head lopped off for rape thats proof afghanistan is failing. So if rape is on the rise, public executions, mass graves, and over all descrimination against women are on a very steady downfall."
But I thought the purpose of Amercia bombing afghanistan was to make it a better place and to ensure it didn't fail?? Clearly the American government didn't do their job properly.
-
harmless loony
- Posts: 1115
- Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 10:42 pm
Re:
by Al on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:26 am
"See i can be a dick on spelling to."
Yes you can. But, when you can't tell the difference between "to" and "too", perhaps you shouldn't.
"I checked out the world fact book it says Libya gained its independance from Italy. So i think you may be mistaken but even if your not it doesnt matter"
After the defeat of Italy in WW2, Libya was confiscated by the Allies. The king came back in 1951. He ruled until the US backed coup in 1969. The leader of the RCC was Ghadaffi.
"We made a mistake, we've made a lot of mistakes we still do more good than bad. Now get out of our way while we fix this mistake"
Yes, you made a mistake. And you keep on making them. Are you ever going to learn from your mistakes, or are you planning on blundering in somewhere else?
"Founder of the Educate the English foundation"
Educate the English? For a start, St Andrews is in Scotland. For some strange reason, referring to the "English" when you mean, I presume, the "British" is a failing common to your compatriots. How would you like all Americans to be referred to as "Texans" or "Californians"? And lastly, if anyone needs taught a lesson it is the American administration.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
Yes you can. But, when you can't tell the difference between "to" and "too", perhaps you shouldn't.
"I checked out the world fact book it says Libya gained its independance from Italy. So i think you may be mistaken but even if your not it doesnt matter"
After the defeat of Italy in WW2, Libya was confiscated by the Allies. The king came back in 1951. He ruled until the US backed coup in 1969. The leader of the RCC was Ghadaffi.
"We made a mistake, we've made a lot of mistakes we still do more good than bad. Now get out of our way while we fix this mistake"
Yes, you made a mistake. And you keep on making them. Are you ever going to learn from your mistakes, or are you planning on blundering in somewhere else?
"Founder of the Educate the English foundation"
Educate the English? For a start, St Andrews is in Scotland. For some strange reason, referring to the "English" when you mean, I presume, the "British" is a failing common to your compatriots. How would you like all Americans to be referred to as "Texans" or "Californians"? And lastly, if anyone needs taught a lesson it is the American administration.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
-
Al
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Ooh, many posts to reply to.
by kensson on Thu Mar 13, 2003 11:52 am
A word from the confused:
- ought to take a moment to count the number of states currently in the USA.
- seems unaware that Russia, far from being extremely neutral, is opposed to a war.
- appears to be arguing that concern for human life is 'anal', rather than something the free world is built on.
- bases his pro-war argument on stamping out terrorism and removing Saddam Hussein.
I agree that Saddam Hussein is insane; I also think that he's far too clever to use any weapons he has unless he is attacked. It seems to me far more dangerous to provoke a madman than to persuade him to disarm progressively - as UNSCOM are doing.
As for the terrorism argument, I won't repeat the points I've made many times before elsewhere on the thread.
Andy Bayley I:
- Thinks bombing Afghanistan to bits was a step forward, and (in his second post) that US responsibility ended with the liberation of Kabul.
- Thinks Saddam Hussein 'probably' supports al-Qa'eda, and (perhaps legitimately) say he (Saddam, not Andy) supports terror, but with no evidence to argue against.
- Thinks boycotting France into recession is far better than persuading them of the justice of a war.
- Thinks soldiers are putting their lives at risk for me
- Thinks that because 52% is less than 60% it still doesn't represent a majority (although it's 3% more than Bush got in the last election...)
Andy Bayley II:
- Quotes Churchill that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
- Seems to be saying that rape is OK, because women aren't so badly discriminated against overall.
- Thinks that the solution to Afghanistan's problems is to throw money at them.
Let me deal with Churchill (one H) first. Since a recent broadcast purportedly from Osama bin Laden called Saddam an infidel and called for his overthrow, doesn't that make Saddam America's friend?
Doonesbury, the other day, reminisced fondly about the first Desert Storm (amusingly reworked by confused as 'dessert Storm', which sounds like some kind of McDonalds pudding) where the allies were behind the war, rather than having to be bribed not to oppose it.
As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry.
Andy Bayley III:
- continues his political career by answering two allegations about CNN that weren't ever made, before turning it into a personal attack.
- also dodges the oil question: if the US controlled Iraq, it would control a massive amount of cheap oil. This would be a massive incentive.
- seems to believe whole-heartedly that anyone who thinks the Palestinians are getting a rough deal may as well get a white hood and start burning crosses.
- decides that France isn't an ally
- doesn't say why he thinks the 'death penalty arguement (sic) is ignorant.
- tries to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict with apparently no effort to understand the problem.
My best friends are the ones who tell me when I'm acting like an arsehole. I then analyse what I'm doing to make them think that and more often than not they're right. I don't throw a hissy fit and stop talking to them.
As for Sharon not starting conflicts, he certainly doesn't do much to try and put an end to them. The more brutally the IDF behaves, the more belligerent the extremists will become and the more support they will have from the average Palestinian in the street.
Andy Bayley IV:
- Thinks the Security Council is headed by Guinea, and rants about its underdevelopment.
The Security Council is headed by Germany, as anyone who was paying attention would have noticed. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is, I believe, Guinean.
[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change
- ought to take a moment to count the number of states currently in the USA.
- seems unaware that Russia, far from being extremely neutral, is opposed to a war.
- appears to be arguing that concern for human life is 'anal', rather than something the free world is built on.
- bases his pro-war argument on stamping out terrorism and removing Saddam Hussein.
I agree that Saddam Hussein is insane; I also think that he's far too clever to use any weapons he has unless he is attacked. It seems to me far more dangerous to provoke a madman than to persuade him to disarm progressively - as UNSCOM are doing.
As for the terrorism argument, I won't repeat the points I've made many times before elsewhere on the thread.
Andy Bayley I:
- Thinks bombing Afghanistan to bits was a step forward, and (in his second post) that US responsibility ended with the liberation of Kabul.
- Thinks Saddam Hussein 'probably' supports al-Qa'eda, and (perhaps legitimately) say he (Saddam, not Andy) supports terror, but with no evidence to argue against.
- Thinks boycotting France into recession is far better than persuading them of the justice of a war.
- Thinks soldiers are putting their lives at risk for me
- Thinks that because 52% is less than 60% it still doesn't represent a majority (although it's 3% more than Bush got in the last election...)
Andy Bayley II:
- Quotes Churchill that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
- Seems to be saying that rape is OK, because women aren't so badly discriminated against overall.
- Thinks that the solution to Afghanistan's problems is to throw money at them.
Let me deal with Churchill (one H) first. Since a recent broadcast purportedly from Osama bin Laden called Saddam an infidel and called for his overthrow, doesn't that make Saddam America's friend?
Doonesbury, the other day, reminisced fondly about the first Desert Storm (amusingly reworked by confused as 'dessert Storm', which sounds like some kind of McDonalds pudding) where the allies were behind the war, rather than having to be bribed not to oppose it.
As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry.
Andy Bayley III:
- continues his political career by answering two allegations about CNN that weren't ever made, before turning it into a personal attack.
- also dodges the oil question: if the US controlled Iraq, it would control a massive amount of cheap oil. This would be a massive incentive.
- seems to believe whole-heartedly that anyone who thinks the Palestinians are getting a rough deal may as well get a white hood and start burning crosses.
- decides that France isn't an ally
- doesn't say why he thinks the 'death penalty arguement (sic) is ignorant.
- tries to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict with apparently no effort to understand the problem.
My best friends are the ones who tell me when I'm acting like an arsehole. I then analyse what I'm doing to make them think that and more often than not they're right. I don't throw a hissy fit and stop talking to them.
As for Sharon not starting conflicts, he certainly doesn't do much to try and put an end to them. The more brutally the IDF behaves, the more belligerent the extremists will become and the more support they will have from the average Palestinian in the street.
Andy Bayley IV:
- Thinks the Security Council is headed by Guinea, and rants about its underdevelopment.
The Security Council is headed by Germany, as anyone who was paying attention would have noticed. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is, I believe, Guinean.
[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change
-
kensson
Re:
by Guest on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:51 pm
I wish someone would just go ahead and push the damn button and get it over with.
Then we can really hate each other by blaming the other for reason's of "why didn't you tell me or why didn't we see it."
If anyone, for one minute thinks the terrorist (of any type) isn't sitting back and laughing their asses off we are all sadly mistaken. While our heads are up our asses arguing over this issue instead of giving our ELECTED officials an alternative means to end this then we all better brace ourselves because a real whipping is just around the corner. An just because we all live in different neighborhoods doesn't mean anyone is safe just because they said "NO".
We need to opening our eyes to see the entire markings that was delivered in the spanking the US received on 911. This is just a message that once again is being over looked like a CIA report. If it happened there it will happen anywhere in this world and the name USA doesn't have to be attached. (in some cases it hasn't been attached) It was the "World Trade Center" with many nations inside. All of whom worked and died side by side. It spared no one who was in that building or in the airplane. That message of terrorism was not only for the US but to the world.
No, wait, that's to easy and simple. Here's a few suggestions we can knock over a few beer/ales and munch on a few french fries after we gathered all our countries flags for one huge bond fire.
Instead......
1.Lets keep showing each other and the world just how much some of us hate each other (thanks to the media) and how much we despise the other countries for their way of thinking or lack of help even though is scares the crap out of all of us. ... (Saddam seen on world news laughing at us)
2. Lets get realllllly tacky by changing food names in our coutries just to try and piss the others off. *rolls her eyes*
**A french fry is a French fry no matter how well McDonalds makes them. And the egg on my French toast still tastes line an egg.**
3. Lets just seperate completely and totally from each other. You stay here and play with your toys and we will stay here and play with our toys.
4.When we each scream for help lets ignore each. Lets make sure you or we hide behind that narrow tree when we spot the bully picking on you.
5. You clean up your own messes and we will clean up ours.
6. Oh and please lets not leave out the phrase " Mine is bigger then yours," or "you have more then I do".
7. Lets completly forget the fact that all our coutries have come together in many periods of time for the sake of humanity or safe keeping from threat of destruction.
Get over the ego trips.
Yes, Britian was the mother country to the now US, but centries ago. From what I gather today so is Africa, China, Japan, Mexico, France, Germany, Russa, Italy just to name few. The US took the "hungry and the masses" when others were turning them away. But in the mean time the American Indian is wondering if they were asked.
We can nick pick and hate each other over this and act like children or preditors fighting over a dried carcase the simple fact is while we are set in viewing only with tunnel vision of our hate for each other there are other night crawlers in the shadows that are watching and waiting for the weak to fall behind.
While I am not for or against this war. I for one am soulfully tired of Saddam flipping the preverbial bird at everyone and daring them to stop him. I am also a mother with 2 children who knows the taste of freedom yet feels the real motherly fear of knowing my child may walk in a mans shoes for the sake of the blind and serve proudly.
Then we can really hate each other by blaming the other for reason's of "why didn't you tell me or why didn't we see it."
If anyone, for one minute thinks the terrorist (of any type) isn't sitting back and laughing their asses off we are all sadly mistaken. While our heads are up our asses arguing over this issue instead of giving our ELECTED officials an alternative means to end this then we all better brace ourselves because a real whipping is just around the corner. An just because we all live in different neighborhoods doesn't mean anyone is safe just because they said "NO".
We need to opening our eyes to see the entire markings that was delivered in the spanking the US received on 911. This is just a message that once again is being over looked like a CIA report. If it happened there it will happen anywhere in this world and the name USA doesn't have to be attached. (in some cases it hasn't been attached) It was the "World Trade Center" with many nations inside. All of whom worked and died side by side. It spared no one who was in that building or in the airplane. That message of terrorism was not only for the US but to the world.
No, wait, that's to easy and simple. Here's a few suggestions we can knock over a few beer/ales and munch on a few french fries after we gathered all our countries flags for one huge bond fire.
Instead......
1.Lets keep showing each other and the world just how much some of us hate each other (thanks to the media) and how much we despise the other countries for their way of thinking or lack of help even though is scares the crap out of all of us. ... (Saddam seen on world news laughing at us)
2. Lets get realllllly tacky by changing food names in our coutries just to try and piss the others off. *rolls her eyes*
**A french fry is a French fry no matter how well McDonalds makes them. And the egg on my French toast still tastes line an egg.**
3. Lets just seperate completely and totally from each other. You stay here and play with your toys and we will stay here and play with our toys.
4.When we each scream for help lets ignore each. Lets make sure you or we hide behind that narrow tree when we spot the bully picking on you.
5. You clean up your own messes and we will clean up ours.
6. Oh and please lets not leave out the phrase " Mine is bigger then yours," or "you have more then I do".
7. Lets completly forget the fact that all our coutries have come together in many periods of time for the sake of humanity or safe keeping from threat of destruction.
Get over the ego trips.
Yes, Britian was the mother country to the now US, but centries ago. From what I gather today so is Africa, China, Japan, Mexico, France, Germany, Russa, Italy just to name few. The US took the "hungry and the masses" when others were turning them away. But in the mean time the American Indian is wondering if they were asked.
We can nick pick and hate each other over this and act like children or preditors fighting over a dried carcase the simple fact is while we are set in viewing only with tunnel vision of our hate for each other there are other night crawlers in the shadows that are watching and waiting for the weak to fall behind.
While I am not for or against this war. I for one am soulfully tired of Saddam flipping the preverbial bird at everyone and daring them to stop him. I am also a mother with 2 children who knows the taste of freedom yet feels the real motherly fear of knowing my child may walk in a mans shoes for the sake of the blind and serve proudly.
-
Guest
Re:
by MotherOf2 on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:55 pm
I wish someone would just go ahead and push the damn button and get it over with.
Then we can really hate each other by blaming the other for reason's of "why didn't you tell me or why didn't we see it."
If anyone, for one minute thinks the terrorist (of any type) isn't sitting back and laughing their asses off we are all sadly mistaken. While our heads are up our asses arguing over this issue instead of giving our ELECTED officials an alternative means to end this then we all better brace ourselves because a real whipping is just around the corner. An just because we all live in different neighborhoods doesn't mean anyone is safe just because they said "NO".
We need to opening our eyes to see the entire markings that was delivered in the spanking the US received on 911. This is just a message that once again is being over looked like a CIA report. If it happened there it will happen anywhere in this world and the name USA doesn't have to be attached. (in some cases it hasn't been attached) It was the "World Trade Center" with many nations inside. All of whom worked and died side by side. It spared no one who was in that building or in the airplane. That message of terrorism was not only for the US but to the world.
No, wait, that's to easy and simple. Here's a few suggestions we can knock over a few beer/ales and munch on a few french fries after we gathered all our countries flags for one huge bond fire.
Instead......
1.Lets keep showing each other and the world just how much some of us hate each other (thanks to the media) and how much we despise the other countries for their way of thinking or lack of help even though is scares the crap out of all of us. ... (Saddam seen on world news laughing at us)
2. Lets get realllllly tacky by changing food names in our coutries just to try and piss the others off. *rolls her eyes*
**A french fry is a French fry no matter how well McDonalds makes them. And the egg on my French toast still tastes line an egg.**
3. Lets just seperate completely and totally from each other. You stay here and play with your toys and we will stay here and play with our toys.
4.When we each scream for help lets ignore each. Lets make sure you or we hide behind that narrow tree when we spot the bully picking on you.
5. You clean up your own messes and we will clean up ours.
6. Oh and please lets not leave out the phrase " Mine is bigger then yours," or "you have more then I do".
7. Lets completly forget the fact that all our coutries have come together in many periods of time for the sake of humanity or safe keeping from threat of destruction.
Get over the ego trips.
Yes, Britian was the mother country to the now US, but centries ago. From what I gather today so is Africa, China, Japan, Mexico, France, Germany, Russa, Italy just to name few. The US took the "hungry and the masses" when others were turning them away. But in the mean time the American Indian is wondering if they were asked.
We can nick pick and hate each other over this and act like children or preditors fighting over a dried carcase the simple fact is while we are set in viewing only with tunnel vision of our hate for each other there are other night crawlers in the shadows that are watching and waiting for the weak to fall behind.
While I am not for or against this war. I for one am soulfully tired of Saddam flipping the preverbial bird at everyone and daring them to stop him. I am also a mother with 2 children who knows the taste of freedom yet feels the real motherly fear of knowing my child may walk in a mans shoes for the sake of the blind and serve proudly.
(if this posted twice I apologize)
Then we can really hate each other by blaming the other for reason's of "why didn't you tell me or why didn't we see it."
If anyone, for one minute thinks the terrorist (of any type) isn't sitting back and laughing their asses off we are all sadly mistaken. While our heads are up our asses arguing over this issue instead of giving our ELECTED officials an alternative means to end this then we all better brace ourselves because a real whipping is just around the corner. An just because we all live in different neighborhoods doesn't mean anyone is safe just because they said "NO".
We need to opening our eyes to see the entire markings that was delivered in the spanking the US received on 911. This is just a message that once again is being over looked like a CIA report. If it happened there it will happen anywhere in this world and the name USA doesn't have to be attached. (in some cases it hasn't been attached) It was the "World Trade Center" with many nations inside. All of whom worked and died side by side. It spared no one who was in that building or in the airplane. That message of terrorism was not only for the US but to the world.
No, wait, that's to easy and simple. Here's a few suggestions we can knock over a few beer/ales and munch on a few french fries after we gathered all our countries flags for one huge bond fire.
Instead......
1.Lets keep showing each other and the world just how much some of us hate each other (thanks to the media) and how much we despise the other countries for their way of thinking or lack of help even though is scares the crap out of all of us. ... (Saddam seen on world news laughing at us)
2. Lets get realllllly tacky by changing food names in our coutries just to try and piss the others off. *rolls her eyes*
**A french fry is a French fry no matter how well McDonalds makes them. And the egg on my French toast still tastes line an egg.**
3. Lets just seperate completely and totally from each other. You stay here and play with your toys and we will stay here and play with our toys.
4.When we each scream for help lets ignore each. Lets make sure you or we hide behind that narrow tree when we spot the bully picking on you.
5. You clean up your own messes and we will clean up ours.
6. Oh and please lets not leave out the phrase " Mine is bigger then yours," or "you have more then I do".
7. Lets completly forget the fact that all our coutries have come together in many periods of time for the sake of humanity or safe keeping from threat of destruction.
Get over the ego trips.
Yes, Britian was the mother country to the now US, but centries ago. From what I gather today so is Africa, China, Japan, Mexico, France, Germany, Russa, Italy just to name few. The US took the "hungry and the masses" when others were turning them away. But in the mean time the American Indian is wondering if they were asked.
We can nick pick and hate each other over this and act like children or preditors fighting over a dried carcase the simple fact is while we are set in viewing only with tunnel vision of our hate for each other there are other night crawlers in the shadows that are watching and waiting for the weak to fall behind.
While I am not for or against this war. I for one am soulfully tired of Saddam flipping the preverbial bird at everyone and daring them to stop him. I am also a mother with 2 children who knows the taste of freedom yet feels the real motherly fear of knowing my child may walk in a mans shoes for the sake of the blind and serve proudly.
(if this posted twice I apologize)
-
MotherOf2
Re:
by Schooler of the Scots on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:56 pm
"I'm sorry, i wasn't aware that i had to have perfect grammar and spelling in order to post on this message board. I was making a general point - not trying to write a word perfect essay. "
I agree I dont care abotu spelling either its the other people here who do.
Your greatest leader"??? wot lead you to think that i was British?? I've never refered to them as great leaders. (And have no plans to do so either)
I assumed you people were from the UK hence the UK in your web adress. Regardless of rather you reffered to him as your greatest leader he was, at least in the minds of most people.
Care to provide us with a link that says that Osama has called for Muslims to support Saddam??
In his last video he called for support in protecting the infadel. Heres a couple of good links.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... odada.html
http://query.nytimes.com/search/article ... A9679C8B63
http://www.nysun.com/sunarticle.asp?artID=608
http://www.observer.co.uk/focus/story/0 ... 39,00.html
"Again - where's your evidence? There's some evidence (unfortuantely i dont have the link on me right now) that money from America has helped to support the IRA (which bombed my home town of Warrington and killed 2 innocent children out shopping for mothers day)So in that case is it ok for us to bomb America as we know they were supporting "terrorrists"?"
supporting the IRA if it was done was wrong. I dont like the moral equivilency arguement though, IF we did it, it was wrong and I would condemn it, if we continued to do it I would want charges brought up against the leader of my country.
"Why should the countries of Europe pay up for the aftermath of a war which they don't want to be a part of?? If the American government feel it is neccessary to bomb Iraq then they should see it through and rebuild the country too."
because they were part of the coalition and wont help us in the IRaq part if they feel its important they should help rebuild afghanistan.
"But I thought the purpose of Amercia bombing afghanistan was to make it a better place and to ensure it didn't fail?? Clearly the American government didn't do their job properly."
I think its normally rude to insult people instead of arguing thier point but that is the most ignorant statement I've ever read. Ask any Afghan if they like thier country better now or under the taliban.
I agree I dont care abotu spelling either its the other people here who do.
Your greatest leader"??? wot lead you to think that i was British?? I've never refered to them as great leaders. (And have no plans to do so either)
I assumed you people were from the UK hence the UK in your web adress. Regardless of rather you reffered to him as your greatest leader he was, at least in the minds of most people.
Care to provide us with a link that says that Osama has called for Muslims to support Saddam??
In his last video he called for support in protecting the infadel. Heres a couple of good links.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... odada.html
http://query.nytimes.com/search/article ... A9679C8B63
http://www.nysun.com/sunarticle.asp?artID=608
http://www.observer.co.uk/focus/story/0 ... 39,00.html
"Again - where's your evidence? There's some evidence (unfortuantely i dont have the link on me right now) that money from America has helped to support the IRA (which bombed my home town of Warrington and killed 2 innocent children out shopping for mothers day)So in that case is it ok for us to bomb America as we know they were supporting "terrorrists"?"
supporting the IRA if it was done was wrong. I dont like the moral equivilency arguement though, IF we did it, it was wrong and I would condemn it, if we continued to do it I would want charges brought up against the leader of my country.
"Why should the countries of Europe pay up for the aftermath of a war which they don't want to be a part of?? If the American government feel it is neccessary to bomb Iraq then they should see it through and rebuild the country too."
because they were part of the coalition and wont help us in the IRaq part if they feel its important they should help rebuild afghanistan.
"But I thought the purpose of Amercia bombing afghanistan was to make it a better place and to ensure it didn't fail?? Clearly the American government didn't do their job properly."
I think its normally rude to insult people instead of arguing thier point but that is the most ignorant statement I've ever read. Ask any Afghan if they like thier country better now or under the taliban.
-
Schooler of the Scots
Re:
by Educator of the English on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:56 pm
[s]Al wrote on 10:26, 13th Mar 2003:
[i]"See i can be a dick on spelling to."
Yes you can. But, when you can't tell the difference between "to" and "too", perhaps you shouldn't.
"I checked out the world fact book it says Libya gained its independance from Italy. So i think you may be mistaken but even if your not it doesnt matter"
After the defeat of Italy in WW2, Libya was confiscated by the Allies. The king came back in 1951. He ruled until the US backed coup in 1969. The leader of the RCC was Ghadaffi.
"We made a mistake, we've made a lot of mistakes we still do more good than bad. Now get out of our way while we fix this mistake"
Yes, you made a mistake. And you keep on making them. Are you ever going to learn from your mistakes, or are you planning on blundering in somewhere else?
"Founder of the Educate the English foundation"
Educate the English? For a start, St Andrews is in Scotland. For some strange reason, referring to the "English" when you mean, I presume, the "British" is a failing common to your compatriots. How would you like all Americans to be referred to as "Texans" or "Californians"? And lastly, if anyone needs taught a lesson it is the American administration.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[/i]
To quote Mel Gibson in Braveheart "If you men are Scottsmen then I am ashamed to call myself one"
[i]"See i can be a dick on spelling to."
Yes you can. But, when you can't tell the difference between "to" and "too", perhaps you shouldn't.
"I checked out the world fact book it says Libya gained its independance from Italy. So i think you may be mistaken but even if your not it doesnt matter"
After the defeat of Italy in WW2, Libya was confiscated by the Allies. The king came back in 1951. He ruled until the US backed coup in 1969. The leader of the RCC was Ghadaffi.
"We made a mistake, we've made a lot of mistakes we still do more good than bad. Now get out of our way while we fix this mistake"
Yes, you made a mistake. And you keep on making them. Are you ever going to learn from your mistakes, or are you planning on blundering in somewhere else?
"Founder of the Educate the English foundation"
Educate the English? For a start, St Andrews is in Scotland. For some strange reason, referring to the "English" when you mean, I presume, the "British" is a failing common to your compatriots. How would you like all Americans to be referred to as "Texans" or "Californians"? And lastly, if anyone needs taught a lesson it is the American administration.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[/i]
To quote Mel Gibson in Braveheart "If you men are Scottsmen then I am ashamed to call myself one"
-
Educator of the English
Re:
by Rush Limbaugh Jr. on Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:58 pm
Andy Bayley I:
- Thinks bombing Afghanistan to bits was a step forward, and (in his second post) that US responsibility ended with the liberation of Kabul.
No I dont but i think its solely our responsibilty.
- Thinks Saddam Hussein 'probably' supports al-Qa'eda, and (perhaps legitimately) say he (Saddam, not Andy) supports terror, but with no evidence to argue against.
Check out the links in my last post if you want more ill give you more.
- Thinks boycotting France into recession is far better than persuading them of the justice of a war.
The French have lead an anti American campaign. The undecided 6 are the ones we need to convince of the justice of a war. The french have made thier mind up.
- Thinks soldiers are putting their lives at risk for me
Any soldier who risks his life for your country is owed your gratitude
- Thinks that because 52% is less than 60% it still doesn't represent a majority (although it's 3% more than Bush got in the last election...)
No but its going down is the point next week it could be 45 percent. And it doesnt matter how bush was elected its in our constitution
Andy Bayley II:
- Quotes Churchill that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
Yah I did
- Seems to be saying that rape is OK, because women aren't so badly discriminated against overall.
No but I think the rise in rape rates is not as big of a problem as the actions of the taliban were.
- Thinks that the solution to Afghanistan's problems is to throw money at them.
Absolutely not im a conservative we are tight with federal money. I do think the country needs help having an industry set up for them though
"As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry."
I will no longer be adressing moral equivilincy arguements. What the US did 20 years ago has no affect on the present situation.
Andy Bayley III:
- continues his political career by answering two allegations about CNN that weren't ever made, before turning it into a personal attack.
perhaps i misread the question.
- also dodges the oil question: if the US controlled Iraq, it would control a massive amount of cheap oil. This would be a massive incentive.
No I havent, the point is if that was our reason why didnt we do it in the first war?
And that if we want cheap oil we could make a deal with Saddam.
- seems to believe whole-heartedly that anyone who thinks the Palestinians are getting a rough deal may as well get a white hood and start burning crosses.
No but I believe anyone who doesnt have sympathy for the Isrealis is anti semitic.
- decides that France isn't an ally
They arent
- doesn't say why he thinks the 'death penalty arguement (sic) is ignorant.
I figured it was obvious. He argued we are not a land of the free because we have the death penalty.
- tries to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict with apparently no effort to understand the problem.
Its a complex issue but the problem will never be solved unless the terrorism is stopped. Barak offered way more than he could have actually given, and Arafat refused. The people in power in the PLO do not want a state of Isreal nor do some of the people who post here.
My best friends are the ones who tell me when I'm acting like an arsehole. I then analyse what I'm doing to make them think that and more often than not they're right. I don't throw a hissy fit and stop talking to them.
I wouldnt look at it as trying to stop us from making a mistake but stabbing us in the back with all the efforts theyve taken to stop this war. And when I see a report like this it makes me think http://heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm.
"As for Sharon not starting conflicts, he certainly doesn't do much to try and put an end to them. The more brutally the IDF behaves, the more belligerent the extremists will become and the more support they will have from the average Palestinian in the street. "
Dont totally disagree there. But if sharon just stops the tanks rolling through towns. Terrorism will continue. If terrorism stops the tanks will stop rolling through towns.
Andy Bayley IV:
- Thinks the Security Council is headed by Guinea, and rants about its underdevelopment.
The Security Council is headed by Germany, as anyone who was paying attention would have noticed. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is, I believe, Guinean.
Nope check your facts http://heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm.
[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change
[/i]
- Thinks bombing Afghanistan to bits was a step forward, and (in his second post) that US responsibility ended with the liberation of Kabul.
No I dont but i think its solely our responsibilty.
- Thinks Saddam Hussein 'probably' supports al-Qa'eda, and (perhaps legitimately) say he (Saddam, not Andy) supports terror, but with no evidence to argue against.
Check out the links in my last post if you want more ill give you more.
- Thinks boycotting France into recession is far better than persuading them of the justice of a war.
The French have lead an anti American campaign. The undecided 6 are the ones we need to convince of the justice of a war. The french have made thier mind up.
- Thinks soldiers are putting their lives at risk for me
Any soldier who risks his life for your country is owed your gratitude
- Thinks that because 52% is less than 60% it still doesn't represent a majority (although it's 3% more than Bush got in the last election...)
No but its going down is the point next week it could be 45 percent. And it doesnt matter how bush was elected its in our constitution
Andy Bayley II:
- Quotes Churchill that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
Yah I did
- Seems to be saying that rape is OK, because women aren't so badly discriminated against overall.
No but I think the rise in rape rates is not as big of a problem as the actions of the taliban were.
- Thinks that the solution to Afghanistan's problems is to throw money at them.
Absolutely not im a conservative we are tight with federal money. I do think the country needs help having an industry set up for them though
"As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry."
I will no longer be adressing moral equivilincy arguements. What the US did 20 years ago has no affect on the present situation.
Andy Bayley III:
- continues his political career by answering two allegations about CNN that weren't ever made, before turning it into a personal attack.
perhaps i misread the question.
- also dodges the oil question: if the US controlled Iraq, it would control a massive amount of cheap oil. This would be a massive incentive.
No I havent, the point is if that was our reason why didnt we do it in the first war?
And that if we want cheap oil we could make a deal with Saddam.
- seems to believe whole-heartedly that anyone who thinks the Palestinians are getting a rough deal may as well get a white hood and start burning crosses.
No but I believe anyone who doesnt have sympathy for the Isrealis is anti semitic.
- decides that France isn't an ally
They arent
- doesn't say why he thinks the 'death penalty arguement (sic) is ignorant.
I figured it was obvious. He argued we are not a land of the free because we have the death penalty.
- tries to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict with apparently no effort to understand the problem.
Its a complex issue but the problem will never be solved unless the terrorism is stopped. Barak offered way more than he could have actually given, and Arafat refused. The people in power in the PLO do not want a state of Isreal nor do some of the people who post here.
My best friends are the ones who tell me when I'm acting like an arsehole. I then analyse what I'm doing to make them think that and more often than not they're right. I don't throw a hissy fit and stop talking to them.
I wouldnt look at it as trying to stop us from making a mistake but stabbing us in the back with all the efforts theyve taken to stop this war. And when I see a report like this it makes me think http://heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm.
"As for Sharon not starting conflicts, he certainly doesn't do much to try and put an end to them. The more brutally the IDF behaves, the more belligerent the extremists will become and the more support they will have from the average Palestinian in the street. "
Dont totally disagree there. But if sharon just stops the tanks rolling through towns. Terrorism will continue. If terrorism stops the tanks will stop rolling through towns.
Andy Bayley IV:
- Thinks the Security Council is headed by Guinea, and rants about its underdevelopment.
The Security Council is headed by Germany, as anyone who was paying attention would have noticed. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is, I believe, Guinean.
Nope check your facts http://heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm.
[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change
[/i]
-
Rush Limbaugh Jr.
Re:
by kensson on Thu Mar 13, 2003 11:57 pm
I said: "The Security Council is headed by Germany, as anyone who was paying attention would have noticed."
I apologise for this factual error and fully accept the egg-on-face scenario it entails.
I would, however, make the point that Guinea's ability to be an effective member - or even leader - of the UN Security Council is not affected by how much electricity or television it has. Andy Bayley also stated that Guinea (or "Piece of Shit African Country," which he seemed to think was an intelligent alternative) isn't a democracy. I quote from the CIA World Factbook ( http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac ... os/gv.html ):
Government type: Republic
...
Executive Branch: ... election results: Lansana CONTE reelected president; percent of vote - Lansana CONTE (PUP) 56.1%, Mamadou Boye BA (UNR-PRP) 24.6%, Alpha CONDE (RPG) 16.6%
Crikey - a republic where the candidate with the most votes wins. How undemocratic is that?
I said:
"As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry."
Andy Bayley said:
I will no longer be adressing moral equivilincy arguements. What the US did 20 years ago has no affect on the present situation.
Now, read back what I said. You'll not the use of a present tense.
http://www.soaw.org/new/
Andy: "Any soldier who risks his life for your country is owed your gratitude "
Kensson: Well, if they were putting their lives on the line for my country, then sure. But they're putting their lives on the line for someone else's country. That's different.
Andy: "The French have led an anti American campaign."
Evidence? As far as I can see, it's the other way round.
(Also, I'm puzzled why Andy Bayley would want to call himself a Scotsman.)
I apologise for this factual error and fully accept the egg-on-face scenario it entails.
I would, however, make the point that Guinea's ability to be an effective member - or even leader - of the UN Security Council is not affected by how much electricity or television it has. Andy Bayley also stated that Guinea (or "Piece of Shit African Country," which he seemed to think was an intelligent alternative) isn't a democracy. I quote from the CIA World Factbook ( http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac ... os/gv.html ):
Government type: Republic
...
Executive Branch: ... election results: Lansana CONTE reelected president; percent of vote - Lansana CONTE (PUP) 56.1%, Mamadou Boye BA (UNR-PRP) 24.6%, Alpha CONDE (RPG) 16.6%
Crikey - a republic where the candidate with the most votes wins. How undemocratic is that?
I said:
"As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry."
Andy Bayley said:
I will no longer be adressing moral equivilincy arguements. What the US did 20 years ago has no affect on the present situation.
Now, read back what I said. You'll not the use of a present tense.
http://www.soaw.org/new/
Andy: "Any soldier who risks his life for your country is owed your gratitude "
Kensson: Well, if they were putting their lives on the line for my country, then sure. But they're putting their lives on the line for someone else's country. That's different.
Andy: "The French have led an anti American campaign."
Evidence? As far as I can see, it's the other way round.
(Also, I'm puzzled why Andy Bayley would want to call himself a Scotsman.)
-
kensson
Re:
by Al on Fri Mar 14, 2003 12:08 am
It puzzles and annoys me when people say criticism of some aspects of Israel's policies is somehow anti-Semitic. It is not. Wanting justice for the Palestinians (who are, after all, the ones who had their country taken away) is not the same as wanting the destruction of Israel.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
-
Al
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Re:
by War_Monger on Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:58 pm
"I would, however, make the point that Guinea's ability to be an effective member - or even leader - of the UN Security Council is not affected by how much electricity or television it has. Andy Bayley also stated that Guinea (or "Piece of Shit African Country," which he seemed to think was an intelligent alternative) isn't a democracy. I quote from the CIA World Factbook ( http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac ... os/gv.html ):
Government type: Republic
...
Executive Branch: ... election results: Lansana CONTE reelected president; percent of vote - Lansana CONTE (PUP) 56.1%, Mamadou Boye BA (UNR-PRP) 24.6%, Alpha CONDE (RPG) 16.6%
Crikey - a republic where the candidate with the most votes wins. How undemocratic is that?"
yeah i checked the world factbook after i posted that, It is a republic. But none the less in a country with no electricity how informed can its citizens be.
"I said:
"As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry."
Andy Bayley said:
I will no longer be adressing moral equivilincy arguements. What the US did 20 years ago has no affect on the present situation.
Now, read back what I said. You'll not the use of a present tense.
http://www.soaw.org/new/"
If the US is supporting guerillas I condemn it but even then if country like haiti or Cuba, where there are gross human rights abuses, and in those cases neither side is ever squeeky clean.
"Andy: "Any soldier who risks his life for your country is owed your gratitude "
Kensson: Well, if they were putting their lives on the line for my country, then sure. But they're putting their lives on the line for someone else's country. That's different."
You should respect the men and women that are willing to lay down thier lives for a cause your elected government deems moral . Regardless of rather you believe in what they are fighting for you should respect that they fight under your countries name.
"Andy: "The French have led an anti American campaign."
Evidence? As far as I can see, it's the other way round."
Whats his name Dominique livilipad( I know thats not close to being right)? He has been going around campaigning the african countries for voting no on the council. That's an anti American Campaign.
Let me tell you how Americans feel. ( The educated ones, half our country doesnt vote, 20 percent of the half that does are liberal extremists who thought we should unilatterally disarm at the height of the cold war.) America was at tacked on september 11th. It was the most horrible day that I can ever remember. America hadn't been attacked since 1941. We fealt safe. Everytime an ally was attacked or needed help Americans have been there to help. When Hitler tried to take over Europe (even though we came later than we should have) we came to the aid of your counties. When the USSR put a blockade up in germany. The US airlifted food to Berlin. We were the ones that brought down the Soviet Union. Now we, the US citizens, feel we've been attacked and our allies, France and Germany aren't there to help us. We see it as you people would rather protect a tyrant than let us defend our country.
That may sound a little irrational but thats how Americans feel. Personally I see a lot of good coming out of this im not as worried about the threat saddam poses as other Americans are.
(Also, I'm puzzled why Andy Bayley would want to call himself a Scotsman.)
Im of Scotish decent, we even have a Bayley Coat of Arms over there. I already feel I need to denounce my German heritage. Well i still got the Irish heritage to fall back on.
Government type: Republic
...
Executive Branch: ... election results: Lansana CONTE reelected president; percent of vote - Lansana CONTE (PUP) 56.1%, Mamadou Boye BA (UNR-PRP) 24.6%, Alpha CONDE (RPG) 16.6%
Crikey - a republic where the candidate with the most votes wins. How undemocratic is that?"
yeah i checked the world factbook after i posted that, It is a republic. But none the less in a country with no electricity how informed can its citizens be.
"I said:
"As for the "he supports terrorism" argument, I do not believe that the USA is squeaky clean on this one either. I'm quite willing to believe that guerrilla groups in Latin America are supported by the US Government. In any case, there are certainly bigger fish to fry."
Andy Bayley said:
I will no longer be adressing moral equivilincy arguements. What the US did 20 years ago has no affect on the present situation.
Now, read back what I said. You'll not the use of a present tense.
http://www.soaw.org/new/"
If the US is supporting guerillas I condemn it but even then if country like haiti or Cuba, where there are gross human rights abuses, and in those cases neither side is ever squeeky clean.
"Andy: "Any soldier who risks his life for your country is owed your gratitude "
Kensson: Well, if they were putting their lives on the line for my country, then sure. But they're putting their lives on the line for someone else's country. That's different."
You should respect the men and women that are willing to lay down thier lives for a cause your elected government deems moral . Regardless of rather you believe in what they are fighting for you should respect that they fight under your countries name.
"Andy: "The French have led an anti American campaign."
Evidence? As far as I can see, it's the other way round."
Whats his name Dominique livilipad( I know thats not close to being right)? He has been going around campaigning the african countries for voting no on the council. That's an anti American Campaign.
Let me tell you how Americans feel. ( The educated ones, half our country doesnt vote, 20 percent of the half that does are liberal extremists who thought we should unilatterally disarm at the height of the cold war.) America was at tacked on september 11th. It was the most horrible day that I can ever remember. America hadn't been attacked since 1941. We fealt safe. Everytime an ally was attacked or needed help Americans have been there to help. When Hitler tried to take over Europe (even though we came later than we should have) we came to the aid of your counties. When the USSR put a blockade up in germany. The US airlifted food to Berlin. We were the ones that brought down the Soviet Union. Now we, the US citizens, feel we've been attacked and our allies, France and Germany aren't there to help us. We see it as you people would rather protect a tyrant than let us defend our country.
That may sound a little irrational but thats how Americans feel. Personally I see a lot of good coming out of this im not as worried about the threat saddam poses as other Americans are.
(Also, I'm puzzled why Andy Bayley would want to call himself a Scotsman.)
Im of Scotish decent, we even have a Bayley Coat of Arms over there. I already feel I need to denounce my German heritage. Well i still got the Irish heritage to fall back on.
-
War_Monger
Re:
by Defender of Truth, Justice, and the Conservative way on Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:58 pm
[s]Al wrote on 00:08, 14th Mar 2003:
It puzzles and annoys me when people say criticism of [i]some aspects of Israel's policies is somehow anti-Semitic. It is not. Wanting justice for the Palestinians (who are, after all, the ones who had their country taken away) is not the same as wanting the destruction of Israel.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[/i]
Wanting a palistinian state is not anti semetic. I want a palistinian state, but not one that can threaten Israel, not one that has an army, or one that has rights like not allowing Israeli planes fly over thier country, and most importantly not one that supports terrorism. The guy who said we are going to war for Israel was using a popular arguement from biggots in my country. But I think people need to realize that the leadership of the palistinians is more of a problem to mideast peace, than the Israel government.
It puzzles and annoys me when people say criticism of [i]some aspects of Israel's policies is somehow anti-Semitic. It is not. Wanting justice for the Palestinians (who are, after all, the ones who had their country taken away) is not the same as wanting the destruction of Israel.
[hr]We are near waking when we dream we are dreaming.
[/i]
Wanting a palistinian state is not anti semetic. I want a palistinian state, but not one that can threaten Israel, not one that has an army, or one that has rights like not allowing Israeli planes fly over thier country, and most importantly not one that supports terrorism. The guy who said we are going to war for Israel was using a popular arguement from biggots in my country. But I think people need to realize that the leadership of the palistinians is more of a problem to mideast peace, than the Israel government.
-
Defender of Truth, Justice, and the Conservative way
Re:
by should check links before I post. on Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:59 pm
I just want to add I checked out your school of americas link. Believe me im against us backing some of the dictators we back in latin america. But I argue everyday about our policies with my history of lattin American proffessor. They site rebel involvement in Panama and Columbia. The Columbian rebels that we fight against are marxist drug dealers. And we all know about our buddy Noriega in Panama. Some of the things that happened in Guatemala are indefensible except I would point out to you that is clintons administration not bush.
-
should check links before I post.
Return to The Sinner's Main Board
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 61 guests