WMD

[Typhoid]

there is probably a thread already like this, but i wanted to know your peoples views on America and their fondness of war..... (n/o)

[Kitana85]

blowing things up is cool.

edit: :rolls eyes: for all you know m... you thought I was serious???

Dude, I'm a just war theorest.... and there is no justification for WMD's -Kit85

[GT News]

blowing things up is cool.

A lot of people like that.


Someone said they like guns.
I like .

[Typhoid]

blowing things up is cool.

:wtf:

You better not be talking about other people.....like Iraq and whatnot.... And i just want to add that George Bush didnt find any WMD because he was looking in the wrong place...He should start with the United States and work his way from there. What makes it right for the U.S. to have nukes and stuff, but when other country's have them they are ...as he put it..." A threat to America"....heaven forbid blowing up the planet, america might suffer!!!

[Bond]

We currently have flame wars going on in a thread on racism and theology. Lets keep it to two.

[GT News]

We currently have flame wars going on in a thread on racism and theology. Lets keep it to two.

By "we" do you mean you and me?That sounds good to me.

I have power over you. -Bond

[Hero2]

there is probably a thread already like this, but i wanted to know your peoples views on America and their fondness of war..... (n/o)
Were not fond of war....we just have a surplus population :p

one of my freinds was explaing how china fights there wars. they just throw there soldiers out on the front lines and hope they lose a few because they have too many. (and before you say hes racist hes from china)

[Typhoid]

Were not fond of war....we just have a surplus population :p

one of my freinds was explaing how china fights there wars. they just throw there soldiers out on the front lines and hope they lose a few because they have too many. (and before you say hes racist hes from china)

But china doesnt go attacking other countrys to make a statement. George Bush sr. faught Saddam, so George "dubbya" Bush had to take up the sibling rivalry in my view. Im just sick of the militarism of the said country.

[Dylflon]

Watch it Typhoid. People will try to smash you good. They tried to smash me good. Although, I have studied a lot on the subject. So now if I ever got in another argument about it I'd be okay. Study up so you can support your argument.

[Bond]

Im just sick of the militarism of the said country.
What?

[Jonbo298]

Going to War without support from other countries defeats the whole purpose. I personally wish we never went into Iraq in the first place. When Bush keeps repeating "He was a bad bad man and we just had to go in there and take him out" (not exact words but you get the point). Bush is running us into a much deeper deficit that will take a very long time to recover. Historians will look back at this time as one in which bad decisions were made.

I personally feel that going to war without justifying a good reason just so he can try to regain popularity, etc...just sickens me. If Bush's stupid ass would've waited for support from the UN, we wouldnt be in such a horrible situation with money being wasted everyday and our own troops being forced to stay longer then what they were said. Hell, I just heard the other day that some troops were within hours of boarding a flight home then they were told they were staying longer. Just sad.

I see the future of the US as a country who wants to spy on us, steal our privacy, and give useless excuses like "But we need to be more secure". Then while at it, launch wars against countries because we feel we have so much money to just throw around. Anyone care to disagree the fact that the US is basically becoming Big Brother to everything we do?

[Typhoid]

What?

Im not saying everyone supports the army or anything, i didnt try to offend anyone, i meant that MOST americans take great pride in the fact that they have such a powerful military...im not saying anyone here is though...so sorry bout that.

[Dylflon]

Thank god, Jonbo. An American who agrees with me about the Big Brotehr thing.

My problem with the Iraq war is it has nothing to do with the WTC. Why bother going there? All you're doing is killing civilians.

[Bond]

Im not saying everyone supports the army or anything, i didnt try to offend anyone, i meant that MOST americans take great pride in the fact that they have such a powerful military...im not saying anyone here is though...so sorry bout that.
I didn't say "What?" because I was offended, I just didn't understand what you were saying. Thank you for clarifying your viewpoint. Although as you have already pointed out the United States is not a country that would be associated with militarism. The military is not of primary importance to our state. We spend 3.2% of our GDP on our military. Where as North Korea spends 33.9% of their GDP on military. So you could call North Korea a militarist state, but not the United States.

[Seth]

Just pray the democrats get back into office next term.

[Dylflon]

Hooray for democracy.

I thought someone was going to rip Typhoid a new anus, but so far no flaming.

[ZebraRampage]

Is it me, or do strong democrats come off as being close to socialists? They always seem to want to benefit the elderly, and the poor...I think. I'm not exactly sure on this..because I can't remember. Ah screw it, I hate debating politics because I'm so bad at it.

[Typhoid]

Democracy is the way to go. Too bad that the Republicans had to "win" the American election

[Professor S]

War is good. Kill everyone thats not like us. That will solve all our problems.

Is that what you wanted to hear so you could spout off more with your anti-american babble? This topic has been beaten to death over and over and over again, and I will not waste everyone's time by repeating the arguments as to why the war was justified. If you didn't listen the first 10 times, why would I think you would listen now?

[Jason1]

Watch it Typhoid. People will try to smash you good. They tried to smash me good. Although, I have studied a lot on the subject. So now if I ever got in another argument about it I'd be okay. Study up so you can support your argument.


Who really cares if he can support it or not, hes right either way. Blab on Thyphoid.

[Professor S]

Who really cares if he can support it or not, hes right either way. Blab on Thyphoid.

Oh, so you should just support an ignorant opinion whether or not it has any basis in fact, as long as it supports your beliefs. Hooray for liberalism.

IGNORAMUS's AHOY!!!

[Dylflon]

Oh, so you should just support an ignorant opinion whether or not it has any basis in fact, as long as it supports your beliefs. Hooray for liberalism.

IGNORAMUS's AHOY!!!

First off, Typhoid is new here so he missed this argument the first 10 times.

Also, most people who oppose the war base their views on "how many civilians are being needlessly killed?"

In this war, many civilians are being needlessly killed. Most people respond to this by saying things like "They're casualties of war" or "because they were fighting back."

Casualties of war is bull****. Go on the internet on sites like the English Al Jazeera news site. Look for some of the war videos out there that they won't show on TV because it makes america look bad. A while ago on CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) they showed unedited videos from the war that were not allowed to be shown on CNN (like most of the footage from the war). I saw some very diturbing footage. On the internet I also found some very disturbing footage. One particularily disturbing piece of footage was an entire family being killed for not cooperating with the soldiers. The most disturbing piece of footage I saw was an American soldier talking about how "awesome" it was to kill Iraqis. I'll paraphrase it for you.

Everyone just opens fire on him. Then he's dead and you're like "Oh man, that was awesome. Let's do that again."

Too many people are being killed there.

the other argument was that the Iraqi civilians weren't cooperating. Of courrse they aren't cooperating. If America was being taken over by anotehr country and being occupied, Americans would fight back.

There was a study conducted recently (I'll try to see if there's a link to it on the internet) stating that in every family (immediate family, grandparents, grandchildren, first cousins, aunts, uncles, nieces nephews) at least one person has been killed.

Killing their family members isn't the best way to make them not hate you.

I won't stop opposing the war until Iraqi civilians stop being killed.

[Jonbo298]

I agree on the whole Iraqi's not cooperating. If we were being invaded and the opposing country gained control of the US, would WE cooperate? Hell f*cking no. Iraqi's are feeling the same way. Not all of them see us as a "savior who has come to free from evil". Some see it as a takeover and they dont take it lightly.

[Dylflon]

Considering America has bombed them so many times, Americans aren't all that respected in Iraq.

[Professor S]

First off, Typhoid is new here so he missed this argument the first 10 times.

Yeah, but you have and I refuse to continually repeat myself to people who refuse to listen.

[Dylflon]

Oh, I know. I've heard your excuses. You can say all you want supporting the war. You can wave giant signs and dance on top of a roof with a megaphone and let all around hear your excuses why this war is justified. Say them all you want. But most will still disagree with you. Any argument I've heard supporting the war is full of holes. If it's a just cause then I'll accept that innocent people will die. But this is crap. The biggest argument is that Saddam was a tyrant. Yes, he killed his own people. But America has killed many times more Iraqis than he has over the last 15 years. You could have captured him without shooting civilians I'm sure.

[Crash]

generally all young people are democrats

generally as you get older, you become republican

no i dont think we are doing much good in iraq, but if you guys think you know more than do the CIA you've got another thing coming. they went to iraq for a reason. and that reason was to get bush re-elected, and it's going to work.

**points and laughs at all you that can't vote**


iraq is a worthless country i hate it..bomb away boys

[GT News]

generally all young people are democrats

generally as you get older, you become republican

no i dont think we are doing much good in iraq, but if you guys think you know more than do the CIA you've got another thing coming. they went to iraq for a reason. and that reason was to get bush re-elected, and it's going to work.

**points and laughs at all you that can't vote**


iraq is a worthless country i hate it..bomb away boys

That is a rather sweeping generalization. Who does "they" refer to?"That input matched my default category" reason was to get bush re-elected and it is going to work ?
I get That input matched my default category.I think **points and laughs at all you that can not vote**iraq is more than that.
Are you a man or a woman?

[Crash]

Are you a man or a woman?

hey, you're twin brother is over in iraq right now, you can kiss my butt camfubot! :D

[Jonbo298]

/me can vote and certainly will be:D

[TheGame]

generally all young people are democrats

generally as you get older, you become republican

I've noticed the opposite...

I'm neither a Democrat or a Replublican, but I am a bush supporter, and lately have not been on the democrat's side on very many issues.

[Kitana85]

generally all young people are democrats

generally as you get older, you become republican




I agree with The Game, that used to be true more... I know a lot of younger conservatives and many older liberals, and v.v. It seems now much more based on conditioning then on age.

[Professor S]

Oh, I know. I've heard your excuses. You can say all you want supporting the war. You can wave giant signs and dance on top of a roof with a megaphone and let all around hear your excuses why this war is justified. Say them all you want. But most will still disagree with you. Any argument I've heard supporting the war is full of holes. If it's a just cause then I'll accept that innocent people will die. But this is crap. The biggest argument is that Saddam was a tyrant. Yes, he killed his own people. But America has killed many times more Iraqis than he has over the last 15 years. You could have captured him without shooting civilians I'm sure.

I find this funny considering the number of times I have torn your anti-iraqi war arguments to shreds. My reasons are not excuses, but are based on actual facts and events that took place in the last 15 years. You're reasons are mainly based on propoganda and simple mined theories such as "war is bad".

Like I said, I won't repost what I've posted numerous times before, but its come to the point where I don't feel the need to even defend myself to you.

But just as a reminder...

http://www.gametavern.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7542&page=5&highlight=Iraq

[Dylflon]

In all fairness I have studied up on the subject a good deal in the last while. I do admit I was rather ignorant to it back then. I'm a little more knowledgable now. But if you don't want to get back into it, that's fine by me.

BTW, don't point the propeganda finger at me. Many people find your "facts" and information to be propeganda too. It's a matter of what you believe to be lies.

[Bond]

Dylflon, is there any war you have supported?

[Dylflon]

Dylflon, is there any war you have supported?

World War II. I support the need to fight powers that threaten to take over the world.

Most other wars have been pretty stupid and have turned out to be just a huge waste of lives.

I don't look at war in terms of, "that should be done, let's send some people to die over it"

No lives should ever be wasted unless there is a VERY just cause. Human life is too precious to be wasted.

[TheGame]

No lives should ever be wasted unless there is a VERY just cause. Human life is too precious to be wasted.

I don't think of dying to protect my country as a wasted life, as long as your death was for the good of man kind and means somthing It's a worthwile death. I believe being the most powerful country in the world we should be proactive instead of reactive... prevent problems, don't wait for them.

[Dylflon]

This is directed at you The Strangler. Notice I have not once in this entire thread argued with America's motives for going to war. Not only that but none of my statements have been Anti-American. My moral opposition to this war stems from the amount of people that are dying because of it.

Yet you want to yell at me for this. For believing that innocent people shouldn't die. Go ahead and "tear my argument to shreds". I'm sorry if I don't believe sacrificing people's lives is a way to solve a problem. I don't understand how you can manage to argue with me about what I'm saying (which so far has only been about casualties) unless you believe that human life is expendable and should be wasted on such trivial matters.

And what you're arguing with is my opinion. And I'd like to make sure you know that I'm entitled to having one. But just in case this idea of an opinion is hard for you to grasp, I'll break it down for you by using the dictionary definition.

A view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter

Your manner of arguing is rather juvenile in my opinion. This is how your arguments go:

You're an idiot and what you believe is untrue and/or propeganda.

I have not called you wrong but have only stated what I believe.

Continue to attack me for being against war if you wish. I will not change my mind. Most of these wars shouldn't be fought. And young men and women shouldn't be sent to die over these disputes.

If ever there's a day when I pick up a gun and fight, there will be a damn good reason I'm doing it.

[Typhoid]

I dont support any war at all. Except WWII because something had to be done there. Im not fueled by propaganda, im Canadian, and i dont have a large standpoint on liking war.

I dont know why war exists, i dont know why war is carried out in the manor it is, and i dont know why the United States likes to bully around other countries to get its way, and if the country in question doesnt comply, they say " this country is a threat to our nation"

...I say within 10 years, the U.S. will start a war over Canada, because we wont give free softwood. War kills many, and Produces nothing.

[Professor S]

Fine, you want it, you got it...

This is directed at you The Strangler. Notice I have not once in this entire thread argued with America's motives for going to war. Not only that but none of my statements have been Anti-American. My moral opposition to this war stems from the amount of people that are dying because of it.

I didn't say your post was anti-american, I said Typhoids was in the first post. Thats what my first post was directed towards.

Yet you want to yell at me for this. For believing that innocent people shouldn't die. Go ahead and "tear my argument to shreds". I'm sorry if I don't believe sacrificing people's lives is a way to solve a problem. I don't understand how you can manage to argue with me about what I'm saying (which so far has only been about casualties) unless you believe that human life is expendable and should be wasted on such trivial matters.

LOL! Not only can I put together pretty much a air tight argument about this, but I'll repeat it yet again as I've repeated it before:

Saddam Hussein killed an estimated 1.5 million of his own people. To date, or at least the last time I checked, over 400,000 bodies have been found in mass graves in Iraq. That was a couple of months ago, though, so I'm sure that number has increased. You ramble on about how many lives have been lost "needlessly" because of this war, when all I can see are the tens of thousands of lives that have been saved. Now maybe you can imagine how I can argue with you about this.

And what you're arguing with is my opinion. And I'd like to make sure you know that I'm entitled to having one. But just in case this idea of an opinion is hard for you to grasp, I'll break it down for you by using the dictionary definition.

A view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter

Your manner of arguing is rather juvenile in my opinion.

I don't argue with your right to have an opinion, but I would rather see your opinions be a little more well read and even handed. You claim to be more informed about the subject that you are expounding upon, but I have yet to see evidence of this. It looks more like you have spent time looking up the opinions of like minded individuals that will support your opinion regardless of their veracity.

This is how your arguments go:

You're an idiot and what you believe is untrue and/or propeganda.

I have not called you wrong but have only stated what I believe.

And I believe you shouldn't constantly voice an opinion that is not educated to the subject, and I will continue to voice MY opinion about that.

As for opinions actually based on FACT, please see my long post about WMD here:

http://www.gametavern.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6204&page=2&pp=15&highlight=iraq

I really don't feel like typing it again.

Continue to attack me for being against war if you wish. I will not change my mind.

The perfect example of why I shouldn't even bother arguing with you about this in the first place. A closed mind is pointless to converse with.

Most of these wars shouldn't be fought. And young men and women shouldn't be sent to die over these disputes.

If ever there's a day when I pick up a gun and fight, there will be a damn good reason I'm doing it.

How very Politically Correct. I happen to think saving thousands of lives, freeing millions of people, and helping to protect out own country in the process is a damn good reason. I'd like to hear what you think a good reason would be.

[Jonbo298]

Still no justification why Bush went to war without the UN's support. I dont know what he was thinking when he decided to go it alone. I think that was his worst decision so far in his 3 and a half years as a president. Hopefully people wakeup to the fact that he is running our deficit so deep that it'll probably never recover.

[Dylflon]

Oh, I see The Strangler. You have to kill Iraqis so Saddam can't kill them.

Hooray for justice.

Yes. I realize now how hard it would have been to send in units to do nothing other than look for Saddam. Occupying their towns and killing civilians and capturing oil fields is a much better way to find Saddam. How could I have been so stupid?

Your argument is that what your doing is right because Saddam was worse. That's a bunch of crap. That doesn't justify anything.

BTW, Saddam has been captured. People shouldn't still be dying.

[mickydaniels]

Oh, I see The Strangler. You have to kill Iraqis so Saddam can't kill them.

Hooray for justice.
:D

[Crono]

BTW, Saddam has been captured. People shouldn't still be dying.

Try telling that to the loyalists who are still firing at and killing American and coalition forces.

[Professor S]

Oh, I see The Strangler. You have to kill Iraqis so Saddam can't kill them.

Hooray for justice.

Yes. I realize now how hard it would have been to send in units to do nothing other than look for Saddam. Occupying their towns and killing civilians and capturing oil fields is a much better way to find Saddam. How could I have been so stupid?

Your argument is that what your doing is right because Saddam was worse. That's a bunch of crap. That doesn't justify anything.

BTW, Saddam has been captured. People shouldn't still be dying.

What a myopic view of war. If you look at any other war in modern history, the civilian casualties that have taken place in Iraq PALE in comparison. In WWII, the war that you yourself claim to support, the civilian casualties were astounding. Carpet bombing was commonplace and tens of thousands of innocent non-combatants on both sides were killed.

So by your theory we shouldn't have gone full tilt after Hitler because of the potential for innocent lives to be lost? Or does the fact that the complete genocide of the Jews in western Europe and the many more lives that would have been lost through a prolonged war were avoided justify that unfortunate occurance? You yourself said that it was a just war.

You have to look at the big picture, and not just keep on with this silly and ignorant view that "war is bad". A few thousand have died so that hundreds of thousands can live. In the real world we have to take trades such as that, just as we did during WWII.

The FACT is that every effort to avoid civilian causalties and even to protect sacred muslim sites have been made. Instead of carpet bombing during the war which would have been far more effective in destroying the infrastructure and demoralizing the troops, we hand picked targets and made every effort to spare the city and civilian lives.

Now that the war is over, troops are basically targets because they cannot go into sacred mosques that terrorists and fundamentalists from Syria and Iran are using as fortresses and bases of operations.

Also you mention capturing oil fields as if it were a BAD thing. Do you know anything about what happened in the first Gulf War? Saddam lit fire the HUNDREDS of oil fields in Kuwait before backing out and it was one of the biggest ecological disasters in history. The smoke spread all the way to East Asia. The FACT is that the oil fields in Iraq were captured because they had been rigged with explosives to be destroyed if an invasion took place. Amazingly our troops were able to disable most of the explosives and prevent all but a few fires. Also, there is NO EVIDENCE THAT THE US HAS STOLEN OR PLANS TO STEAL ONE OUNCE OF OIL FROM IRAQ. That sure doesn't keep people from ignorantly screaming that they are, does it?

Like I said before, do some research and look up some facts about war before spouting off about things you really know nothing about. The truth is that the Iraq been one of the most gentle wars to the civilian populace in HISTORY, and that out of planning and not happenstance.

In the end, your argument still remains "war is bad" with no logical reasoning behind it.

[Jonbo298]

Hitler was a threat to the world. Sadaam really wasnt. He supposedly had the weapons, but sadaam wasnt really going after other countries.

[Professor S]

Hitler was a threat to the world. Sadaam really wasnt. He supposedly had the weapons, but sadaam wasnt really going after other countries.

Hitler wasn't considered a threat to the world when he annexed Austria. Hitler wasn't considered a threat to the world when he invaded Poland. It wasn't until Hitler ran over France and had the time to build up his arsenal that he was considered a world threat.

You call it Saddam not being a world threat, I call it learning from history's past mistakes.

[Bond]

Yes, history has proved the policy of appeasement does not work.

[Typhoid]

Hitler was a threat to the world. Sadaam really wasnt. He supposedly had the weapons, but sadaam wasnt really going after other countries.

Saddam SUPPOSEDLY had the weapons, while Bush DOES have them.....yet someone who is supposed to have weapons is a bigger threat to the world than someone who might have them.
And "Rogue" Iraqis are still firing on American troops because you bombed the hell out of, and invaded their contry. I dont know about you, but if someone did that to my country id be p*ssed.
Bush thinks he can go into iraq and force the western view of sociatle structure on them. But he cant, they are stuck in their views because thats how they lived for centuries. Put it this way: The Iraquis want to be westernizes about as much as we want to live in Iraq. Just pull the troops out of Iraq, clean up your mess and stop killing innocent people. Too many people die from this.
All Wars are just basically Dick waving contests. Its one of those "Im better than anyone else so im justified to force my opinion on others" mentality.
When it comes down to it, you cant tell people how to live or what to do or how to do it. thats called Communism. And thats what the Americans are doing to Iraq, they are becoming the Communist power.

[GT News]

Hitler was a threat to the world. Sadaam really wasnt. He supposedly had the weapons, but sadaam wasnt really going after other countries.

Saddam SUPPOSEDLY had the weapons, while Bush DOES have them.....yet someone who is supposed to have weapons is a bigger threat to the world than someone who might have them.
And "Rogue" Iraqis are still firing on American troops because you bombed the hell out of, and invaded their contry. I dont know about you, but if someone did that to my country id be p*ssed.
Bush thinks he can go into iraq and force the western view of sociatle structure on them. But he cant, they are stuck in their views because thats how they lived for centuries. Put it this way: The Iraquis want to be westernizes about as much as we want to live in Iraq. Just pull the troops out of Iraq, clean up your mess and stop killing innocent people. Too many people die from this.
All Wars are just basically Dick waving contests. Its one of those "Im better than anyone else so im justified to force my opinion on others" mentality.
When it comes down to it, you cant tell people how to live or what to do or how to do it. thats called Communism. And thats what the Americans are doing to Iraq, they are becoming the Communist power.

What happened to it?
I know someone who is supposed to have weapons is a bigger threat to the world than someone who might have them.I think there might be a few exception.Would you like to know? Oh yeah, we were talking about
you but if someone did that to his or her country id be p*ssed
.I knew he was president, but I never knew he thinks he can go into iraq and force the western view of sociatle structure on them.Umm.
What else can he do?OK I will put it there.What kind of people are you talking about?Too what?I think there are a few exceptions. I think you mean "it's" or "it is" not "its". Really.
one of those Im better than anyone else so im justified to force his or her opinion on others mentality is?That makes a lot of sense to me, now that you explain it.Makes sense to me.What are your goals in life?

[Professor S]

Saddam SUPPOSEDLY had the weapons, while Bush DOES have them.....yet someone who is supposed to have weapons is a bigger threat to the world than someone who might have them.
And "Rogue" Iraqis are still firing on American troops because you bombed the hell out of, and invaded their contry. I dont know about you, but if someone did that to my country id be p*ssed.

Have you honestly paid attention to anything that has gone on during and after the war?

1) We didn't "bomb the hell" out of their country", as I stated as recently as my last post. We strategically targeted military targets and then executed them, leaving 99% of Bagdad still standing. We even left the lights and utilities working for most of the country, but Saddam felt he'd rather sabotage his own city just like he did his oil fields.

2) The majority of rebels that you speak of are NOT IRAQI'S, they are fundamentalist insurgents from Iran and Syria. If you even watch the Daily Show to get your news you would know this.

Bush thinks he can go into iraq and force the western view of sociatle structure on them. But he cant, they are stuck in their views because thats how they lived for centuries. Put it this way: The Iraquis want to be westernizes about as much as we want to live in Iraq.

That statement is not only silly but borders on racist. You are confusing culture with Democracy, which is simply a form of govenment. Bush is not out to convert them to Christianity or make them start wearing Dockers or anything. He just wants to have them actually be FREE and not indescriminantly murdered. If you want to blame anyone for having westernized Iraq, blam SADDAM. He began westernizing his country in the 70's . Also, your saying that they don't want change because of their way of life is just plain stupid and mildly offensive.

Just pull the troops out of Iraq, clean up your mess and stop killing innocent people. Too many people die from this.

Pulling out of Iraq before finishing the job would be the most damaging event that could ever happen to our country and theirs. It would be the biggest victory in the history of fundamentalist terrorism and only make terrorism 10 times worse and it would cause thousands more deaths than we could ever cause in our "mad killing spree" in Iraq. What do you think would happen in Iraq without the US holding it together with no government? Revolution, persecution and untold death.

All Wars are just basically Dick waving contests. Its one of those "Im better than anyone else so im justified to force my opinion on others" mentality.

Oh yeah, I forgot all wars were just silly "dick waving contests"... besides the one that stopped the slaughter of European jews... and the one that freed the slaves... and the one that won my country its freedom... and the one that stopped the genocide of Croatian muslims...

Except for all those you're right, war never brought on anything good :rolleyes:

When it comes down to it, you cant tell people how to live or what to do or how to do it. thats called Communism. And thats what the Americans are doing to Iraq, they are becoming the Communist power.

Um... thats called FASCISM, not COMMUNISM, and its nothing like fascism AT ALL. This only goes to show that right now you are speaking about topics that you understand very little about. Grow up, read up, and then come back and argue.

[Dylflon]

Soon The Strangler will merge back into the shadows. But don't be fooled. He isn't gone. He's watching. And whenever there is a political or religous topic on GT, he will once again emerge from the shadows to insult your views, call you a moron and eat your children. Beware. ;)

[Typhoid]

ok, the strangler, if your talking about the daily show with jon stewart as your news source, thts laughable. Because its not a news show, its a comedy show..

[Professor S]

ok, the strangler, if your talking about the daily show with jon stewart as your news source, thts laughable. Because its not a news show, its a comedy show..

OH... MY... DEAR... LORD...

Just stop talking. Its not helping you out at all.

Dyflon - Rest assured, I ain't going nowhere. ;):)

[Typhoid]

OH... MY... DEAR... LORD...

Just stop talking. Its not helping you out at all.

Dyflon - Rest assured, I ain't going nowhere. ;):)

What so are you saying that The daily show with Jon Stewert is a valid news show up with hte ranks on CNN and 60 minutes? And its only not helping me out in your eyes. In our eyes, you should shut up.

[Jonbo298]

I feel that the US should just stay in Iraq as long as their happy asses want to. I just want the US to go into a deeper deficit so that Bush can try to makeup a lame ass excuse as to why the deficit is going downhill even faster now. Hell, lets spend billions in a foreign country. F*ck the US citizens. They dont deserve the money. We need to spend all we can over in foreign countries because of a war hungry president who has to go after Iraq because his advisors thought it would guarantee him a re-election.

[Dylflon]

I like your style, Jonbo.

Good debate, Strangler.

I've already said all I have to say anyhow. I'd just be repeating myself if I were to say anymore.

My major stance is still is that this war isn't worth the lives it's costing.

[Professor S]

My major stance is still is that this war isn't worth the lives it's costing.

And you still habven't backed that opinion up with anything substantial.

Jonbo, the deficit is definitely an issue, but the war in Iraq is a minor fraction of the deficit. I have my reservations about the spending that Bush is doing right now, but we won't see the results of that spending immediately. If it creates jobs and revenue down the line then the deficit will work itself out by the end of Bush's second term (if he makes it that far). So right now I haven't made a decision as to whether the deficit (I know I'm not spelling that right) is a good or bad thing.

[Professor S]

What so are you saying that The daily show with Jon Stewert is a valid news show up with hte ranks on CNN and 60 minutes? And its only not helping me out in your eyes. In our eyes, you should shut up.

Please read my post again. If you still can't get what I was saying, then I can't help you.

Anyone else having problems with what I was saying about the Daily Show? I didn't think so.

[Dylflon]

Is it worth human lives to still be there when Saddam has already been captured? Hmmmm? Hmmmmmmm?

[Professor S]

Is it worth human lives to still be there when Saddam has already been captured? Hmmmm? Hmmmmmmm?

So we should have just removed Saddam and then let them all work it out in revolution and bloodshed between 3 sects that despise one another (Suni's, Shi-ites and Kurds)...

Great idea, that way an even worse despotic leader can come to power and sponsor terrorism against us.:rolleyes:

[Dylflon]

So we should have just removed Saddam and then let them all work it out in revolution and bloodshed between 3 sects that despise one another (Suni's, Shi-ites and Kurds)...

Great idea, that way an even worse despotic leader can come to power and sponsor terrorism against us.:rolleyes:

America has done this before. :p

Remember Santiago, Chile?

[Professor S]

America has done this before. :p

Yes, we did. In WW2. We and the other allies occupied Germany and Japan for a very long time, rebuilt the nations successfully and then left them to become two very powerful economic democracies.

Good for America and the allies.

Oh, were you talking about Vietnam?

1) We never occupied the enemy forces terroritory (for any substantial time period) during the Vietnam War.

2) There was no nation building at all.

3) It was a proxy war between the US and USSR which actually ended up being quite successful in turning back the spread of communism throughout the world. The US may have "lost the war" (mainly because of the breaking of a treaty after the US had removed the majority of its from the area) but its overall goal was achieved in the end. Now seeing as this was a political war, the argument still exists as to whether it should have ever happened.

4) Vietnam and Iraq have almost nothing in common besides that the US is fighting on foreign soil.

Any other comments?

[Professor S]

America has done this before. :p

Remember Santiago, Chile?

Thank you for proving my point for me. We overthrew the government and then simply left to let them work it out. That allows despots and tyrants to take power. In Iraq we are attempting to built a safe, friendly, democratic and most importantly FREE nation.

So once again, the example you mention have absolutely nothing to do with the current situation.

Anything else?

EDIT: I have to go to work. Please make sure to post your next one don't but expect me to tear it apart until tomorrow. Thanks, its been fun!

[Dylflon]

Dude. I wasn't arguing with you on that point. And I edited it before your reply too because I remembered where it happened. You take anything anyone says as a personal attack.

BTW, try to stop sounding so conceited.

"I'll tear it apart tomorrow"

I don't attempt to tear your arguments apart. I consider what you say and then state say what I have to say. The problem with the way you're arguing is that you insult other people for thinking certain ways. You insinuate that they're dumb just for thinking differently than you. You could at least say "I disagree" or someytihng. your conduct in a debate leaves much to be desired Argue like a mature person.

[Dylflon]

BTW, here's some reasons I hate the war in Iraq.



-Warning- -These pictures are graphic-












































http://mindprod.com/images/bloodylegs.jpg
http://mindprod.com/images/noarmboy.jpg
http://mindprod.com/images/3inabox.jpg
http://mindprod.com/images/manandgirl.jpg
http://mindprod.com/images/burnedbaby.jpg

[Dark Samurai]

Yep theyre graphic all right.

[Dylflon]

OMG! I found the video I was talking about earlier. With the soldier saying how awesome it was to kill someone. I also found some other videos. Just to show you the senseless deahts in Iraq. This is why I hate the war.


-Graphic videos-

That was awesome. Let's do it again. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2004%20january/iraq%20murder.wmv)

3 civilians in a car killed. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2003%204%2010/2003%204%2010%203%20civilians%20machined%20gun%20in%20control.wmv)

9 children killed by U.S. Air force. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2003%2012/9%20children%20killed%20by%20USA.wmv)

I heard a story a while back about a little girl that was shot by an American soldier. I actually cried when I heard this. I'll try to find the link.

I also have more pictures if anyone wants to see them.

[Dark Samurai]

No thanks thats enough for me.

[Bond]

OMG! I found the video I was talking about earlier. With the soldier saying how awesome it was to kill someone. I also found some other videos. Just to show you the senseless deahts in Iraq. This is why I hate the war.


-Graphic videos-

That was awesome. Let's do it again. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2004%20january/iraq%20murder.wmv)

3 civilians in a car killed. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2003%204%2010/2003%204%2010%203%20civilians%20machined%20gun%20in%20control.wmv)

9 children killed by U.S. Air force. (http://www.thenausea.com/elements/usa/iraq%202003/2003%2012/9%20children%20killed%20by%20USA.wmv)

I heard a story a while back about a little girl that was shot by an American soldier. I actually cried when I heard this. I'll try to find the link.

I also have more pictures if anyone wants to see them.
Thanks for a fair and balanced portrayal of the war in Iraq. Would you now like to post all of the videos of American Soldiers doing good things?

[Typhoid]

Please read my post again. If you still can't get what I was saying, then I can't help you.

Anyone else having problems with what I was saying about the Daily Show? I didn't think so.

I like the daily show, i watch the daily show. Im laughing at the fact that you think that it is a valid news source. Its a comedic look on things that didnt really happen. It adds a comedic twist to them. Im not saying everything on the show isnt news. And dont ask a question then give nobody a chance to post to it.
If nobody likes The Strangler say nothing. I didnt thinks so.

[Dylflon]

Thanks for a fair and balanced portrayal of the war in Iraq. Would you now like to post all of the videos of American Soldiers doing good things?

Didn't find any. True story.

[jeepnut]

I like the daily show, i watch the daily show. Im laughing at the fact that you think that it is a valid news source. Its a comedic look on things that didnt really happen. It adds a comedic twist to them. Im not saying everything on the show isnt news. And dont ask a question then give nobody a chance to post to it.
If nobody likes The Strangler say nothing. I didnt thinks so.

He never said that the Daily Show was a valid news source. Re-read his post. He is trying to make the point that even if the only news you saw was from the Daily Show (a show not known for its reporting), then you would still know that most of the revolutionaries are not Iraqis.

[Bond]

Didn't find any. True story.
I guess that shows you that the media focuses on the negative. Imagine that.

And maybe Typhoid could learn something:

UNSCR 688 (April 5, 1991) "condemns" Saddam Hussein's repression of the Iraqi civilian population -- "the consequences of which threaten international peace and security." UNSCR 688 also requires Saddam Hussein to end his repression of the Iraqi people and to allow immediate access to international humanitarian organizations to help those in need of assistance. Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated these provisions and has: expanded his violence against women and children; continued his horrific torture and execution of innocent Iraqis; continued to violate the basic human rights of the Iraqi people and has continued to control all sources of information (including killing more than 500 journalists and other opinion leaders in the past decade). Saddam Hussein has also harassed humanitarian aid workers; expanded his crimes against Muslims; he has withheld food from families that fail to offer their children to his regime; and he has continued to subject Iraqis to unfair imprisonment.

Refusal to Admit Human Rights Monitors

The UN Commission on Human Rights and the UN General Assembly issued a report that noted "with dismay" the lack of improvement in the situation of human rights in Iraq. The report strongly criticized the "systematic, widespread, and extremely grave violations of human rights" and of international humanitarian law by the Iraqi Government, which it stated resulted in "all-pervasive repression and oppression sustained by broad-based discrimination and widespread terror." The report called on the Iraqi Government to fulfill its obligations under international human rights treaties.

Saddam Hussein has repeatedly refused visits by human rights monitors and the establishment of independent human rights organizations. From 1992 until 2002, Saddam prevented the UN Special Rapporteur from visiting Iraq.
In September 2001 the Government expelled six UN humanitarian relief workers without providing any explanation.

Violence Against Women

Human rights organizations and opposition groups continued to receive reports of women who suffered from severe psychological trauma after being raped by Iraqi personnel while in custody.

Former Mukhabarat member Khalid Al-Janabi reported that a Mukhabarat unit, the Technical Operations Directorate, used rape and sexual assault in a systematic and institutionalized manner for political purposes. The unit reportedly also videotaped the rape of female relatives of suspected oppositionists and used the videotapes for blackmail purposes and to ensure their future cooperation.
In June 2000, a former Iraqi general reportedly received a videotape of security forces raping a female family member. He subsequently received a telephone call from an intelligence agent who stated that another female relative was being held and warned him to stop speaking out against the Iraqi Government.

Iraqi security forces allegedly raped women who were captured during the Anfal Campaign and during the occupation of Kuwait. Amnesty International reported that, in October 2000, the Iraqi Government executed dozens of women accused of prostitution. In May, the Iraqi Government reportedly tortured to death the mother of three Iraqi defectors for her children's opposition activities.

Iraqi security agents reportedly decapitated numerous women and men in front of their family members. According to Amnesty International, the victims' heads were displayed in front of their homes for several days.

Torture

Iraqi security services routinely and systematically torture detainees. According to former prisoners, torture techniques included branding, electric shocks administered to the genitals and other areas, beating, pulling out of fingernails, burning with hot irons and blowtorches, suspension from rotating ceiling fans, dripping acid on the skin, rape, breaking of limbs, denial of food and water, extended solitary confinement in dark and extremely small compartments, and threats to rape or otherwise harm family members and relatives. Evidence of such torture often was apparent when security forces returned the mutilated bodies of torture victims to their families.


According to a report received by the UN Special Rapporteur in 1998, hundreds of Kurds and other detainees have been held without charge for close to two decades in extremely harsh conditions, and many of them have been used as subjects in Iraq's illegal experimental chemical and biological weapons programs.

In 2000, the authorities reportedly introduced tongue amputation as a punishment for persons who criticize Saddam Hussein or his family, and on July 17, government authorities reportedly amputated the tongue of a person who allegedly criticized Saddam Hussein. Authorities reportedly performed the amputation in front of a large crowd. Similar tongue amputations also reportedly occurred.

Refugees fleeing to Europe often reported instances of torture to receiving governments, and displayed scars and mutilations to substantiate their claims.
In August 2001 Amnesty International released a report entitled Iraq -- Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners, which detailed the systematic and routine use of torture against suspected political opponents and, occasionally, other prisoners. Amnesty International also reports "Detainees have also been threatened with bringing in a female relative, especially the wife or the mother, and raping her in front of the detainee. Some of these threats have been carried out."

Saad Keis Naoman, an Iraqi soccer player who defected to Europe, reported that he and his teammates were beaten and humiliated at the order of Uday Saddam Hussein for poor performances. He was flogged until his back was bloody, forcing him to sleep on his stomach in the tiny cell in Al-Radwaniya prison.

Executions and Repression of Political Opposition

Former UN Human Rights Special Rapporteur Max Van der Stoel's report in April 1998 stated that Iraq had executed at least 1,500 people during the previous year for political reasons.

The government continues to execute summarily alleged political opponents and leaders in the Shi'a religious community. Reports suggest that persons were executed merely because of their association with an opposition group or as part of a continuing effort to reduce prison populations.

In February 2001, the Government reportedly executed 37 political detainees for opposition activity.
In June 2001, security forces killed a Shi'a cleric, Hussein Bahar al-Uloom, for refusing to appear on television to congratulate Qusay Saddam Hussein for his election to a Ba'th Party position. Such killings continue an apparent government policy of eliminating prominent Shi'a clerics who are suspected of disloyalty to the government. In 1998 and 1999, the Government killed a number of leading Shi'a clerics, prompting the former Special Rapporteur in 1999 to express his concern to the government that the killings might be part of a systematic attack by government officials on the independent leadership of the Shi'a Muslim community. The government did not respond to the Special Rapporteur's letter.

There are persistent reports that families are made to pay for the cost of executions. Saddam Hussein destroyed the southern Iraqi town of Albu 'Aysh sometime between September 1998 and December 1999.

Iraq has conducted a systematic "Arabization" campaign of ethnic cleansing designed to harass and expel ethnic Kurds and Turkmen from government-controlled areas. Non-Arab citizens are forced to change their ethnicity or their identity documents and adopt Arab names, or they are deprived of their homes, property and food-ration cards, and expelled.
Saddam Hussein's Abuse of Children

Saddam Hussein has held 3-week training courses in weapons use, hand-to-hand fighting, rappelling from helicopters, and infantry tactics for children between 10 and 15 years of age. Camps for these "Saddam Cubs" operated throughout the country. Senior military officers who supervised the courses noted that the children held up under the "physical and psychological strain" of training that lasted for as long as 14 hours each day. Sources in the opposition report that the army found it difficult to recruit enough children to fill all of the vacancies in the program. Families reportedly were threatened with the loss of their food ration cards if they refused to enroll their children in the course. The Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq reported in October 1999 that authorities were denying food ration cards to families that failed to send their young sons to Saddam Cubs compulsory weapons-training camps. Similarly, authorities reportedly withheld school examination results to students unless they registered in the Fedayeen Saddam organization.
Iraq often announces food ration cuts for the general population, blaming US or UK actions. Among the most controversial have been cuts in baby milk rations. Iraq has blamed the shortages on US and UK contract rejections, although the UN has approved all baby milk contracts submitted.

Child labor persists and there are instances of forced labor.
There are widespread reports that food and medicine that could have been made available to the general public, including children, have been stockpiled in warehouses or diverted for the personal use of some government officials.

Disappearances

Amnesty International reported that Iraq has the world's worst record for numbers of persons who have disappeared or remain unaccounted for.

In 1999, the UN Special Rapporteur stated that Iraq remains the country with the highest number of disappearances known to the UN: over 16,000.
Basic Freedoms: Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Information

In practice, Saddam Hussein does not permit freedom of speech or of the press, and does not tolerate political dissent in areas under its control. In November 2000, the UN General Assembly criticized Saddam Hussein's "suppression of freedom of thought, expression, information, association, and assembly." The Special Rapporteur stated in October 1999 that citizens lived "in a climate of fear," in which whatever they said or did, particularly in the area of politics, involved "the risk of arrest and interrogation by the police or military intelligence." He noted that "the mere suggestion that someone is not a supporter of the President carries the prospect of the death penalty."

In June 2001, the Human Rights Alliance reported that Saddam Hussein had killed more than 500 journalists and other intellectuals in the past decade.

Saddam Hussein frequently infringes on citizens' constitutional right to privacy. Saddam routinely ignores constitutional provisions designed to protect the confidentiality of mail, telegraphic correspondence, and telephone conversations. Iraq periodically jams news broadcasts from outside the country, including those of opposition groups. The security services and the Ba'th Party maintain pervasive networks of informers to deter dissident activity and instill fear in the public.

Foreign journalists must work from offices located within the Iraqi ministry building and are accompanied everywhere they go by ministry officers, who reportedly restrict their movements and make it impossible for them to interact freely with citizens.

The Iraqi Government, the Ba'th Party, or persons close to Saddam Hussein own all print and broadcast media, and operate them as propaganda outlets. They generally do not report opposing points of view that are expressed either domestically or abroad.

In September 1999, Hashem Hasan, a journalist and Baghdad University professor, was arrested after declining an appointment as editor of one of Uday Hussein's publications. The Paris-based Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) sent a letter of appeal to Uday Hussein; however, Hassan's fate and whereabouts remained unknown at year's end.

Saddam Hussein regularly jams foreign news broadcasts. Satellite dishes, modems, and fax machines are banned, although some restrictions reportedly were lifted in 1999.
In government-operated Internet cafes, users only are permitted to view web sites provided by the Ministry of Culture and Information.
In 1999, Uday Hussein reportedly dismissed hundreds of members of the Iraqi Union of Journalists for not praising Saddam Hussein and the Government sufficiently.
Withholding of Food

Relatives who do not report deserters may lose their ration cards for purchasing government-controlled food supplies, be evicted from their residences, or face the arrest of other family members. The Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq reported in October and December 1999 that authorities denied food ration cards to families that failed to send their young sons to the "Saddam's Cubs" compulsory weapons training camps.

Crimes Against Muslims

The Government consistently politicizes and interferes with religious pilgrimages, both of Iraqi Muslims who wish to make the Hajj to Mecca and Medina and of Iraqi and non-Iraqi Muslim pilgrims who travel to holy sites within the country. For example, in 1998 the UN Sanctions Committee offered to disburse vouchers for travel and expenses to pilgrims making the Hajj; however, the Government rejected this offer. In 1999 the Sanctions Committee offered to disburse funds to cover Hajj-related expenses via a neutral third party; the Government again rejected the offer. Following the December 1999 passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1284, the Sanctions Committee again sought to devise a protocol to facilitate the payment for individuals making the journey. The Sanctions Committee proposed to issue $250 in cash and $1,750 in travelers checks to each individual pilgrim to be distributed at the U.N. office in Baghdad in the presence of both U.N. and Iraqi officials. The Government again declined and, consequently, no Iraqi pilgrims were able to take advantage of the available funds or, in 2000, of the permitted flights. The Government continued to insist that these funds would be accepted only if they were paid in cash to the government-controlled central bank, not to the Hajj pilgrims.

More than 95 percent of the population of Iraq are Muslim. The (predominantly Arab) Shi'a Muslims constitute a 60 to 65 percent majority:

The Iraqi government has for decades conducted a brutal campaign of murder, summary execution, and protracted arbitrary arrest against the religious leaders and followers of the majority Shi'a Muslim population. Despite nominal legal protection of religious equality, the Government has repressed severely the Shi'a clergy and those who follow the Shi'a faith.

Forces from the Mukhabarat, General Security (Amn Al-Amm), the Military Bureau, Saddam's Commandos (Fedayeen Saddam), and the Ba'th Party have killed senior Shi'a clerics, desecrated Shi'a mosques and holy sites, and interfered with Shi'a religious education. Security agents reportedly are stationed at all the major Shi'a mosques and shrines, where they search, harass, and arbitrarily arrest worshipers.

The following government restrictions on religious rights remained in effect during 2001: restrictions and outright bans on communal Friday prayer by Shi'a Muslims; restrictions on the loaning of books by Shi'a mosque libraries; a ban on the broadcast of Shi'a programs on government-controlled radio or television; a ban on the publication of Shi'a books, including prayer books and guides; a ban on funeral processions other than those organized by the Government; a ban on other Shi'a funeral observances such as gatherings for Koran reading; and the prohibition of certain processions and public meetings that commemorate Shi'a holy days. Shi'a groups report that they captured documents from the security services during the 1991 uprising that listed thousands of forbidden Shi'a religious writings.

In June 1999, several Shi'a opposition groups reported that the Government instituted a program in the predominantly Shi'a districts of Baghdad that used food ration cards to restrict where individuals could pray. The ration cards, part of the UN oil-for-food program, reportedly are checked when the bearer enters a mosque and are printed with a notice of severe penalties for those who attempt to pray at an unauthorized location.

[Typhoid]

And maybe Typhoid could learn something:



We'll see about that!

[Dylflon]

Bond, I don't deny that Americans have done good things in Iraq. But if you put those accomplishments on a scale with dead children...

These are kids who not only have nothing to do with this war but I'm sure most of them don't understand it.

I just want you to answer me this one question. Is this war worth those children's lives?

[Professor S]

Bond, don't even bother anymore. Dyflon does not care about anything that doesn't support his point of view. He does not care about the 1.5 million slaughtered by Saddam and the countless others tortured. He doesn't care about the thousands of lives that the US military is in reality SAVING by keeping the control of Iraq for now. He does not care about the real story behind WMD. He doesn't care about how the UN used the oil for food program to scam billions of dollars at the expense of the Iraqi people while giving Saddam the funds to build his military and help train the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center (this is proven FACT, in case you dodn't know).

He cares abour a couple of pictures of hurt children and some SEVERELY manipulated footage from Iraq. Why does he put so much credence behind such things and ignore actual FACTS and the reality of the situation? Because they pat him on the back for repeating what some other schmoe told him. The truth does not do that, so its better that he ignores it.

Typhoid, I'm going to do you a favor and explain the obvious to you. My whole point was that The Daily Show IS A COMEDY SHOW. THATS WHY I SAID THAT EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS, YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO NOW.

Why did I say that?

BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO FIGGIN' CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TO THE POINT THAT FAKE NEWS WOULD BE AN EDUCATION.

And with that, I will excuse myself from this conversation.

[GT News]

Bond, don't even bother anymore. Dyflon does not care about anything that doesn't support his point of view. He does not care about the 1.5 million slaughtered by Saddam and the countless others tortured. He doesn't care about the thousands of lives that the US military is in reality SAVING by keeping the control of Iraq for now. He does not care about the real story behind WMD. He doesn't care about how the UN used the oil for food program to scam billions of dollars at the expense of the Iraqi people while giving Saddam the funds to build his military and help train the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center (this is proven FACT, in case you dodn't know).

He cares abour a couple of pictures of hurt children and some SEVERELY manipulated footage from Iraq. Why does he put so much credence behind such things and ignore actual FACTS and the reality of the situation? Because they pat him on the back for repeating what some other schmoe told him. The truth does not do that, so its better that he ignores it.

Typhoid, I'm going to do you a favor and explain the obvious to you. My whole point was that The Daily Show IS A COMEDY SHOW. THATS WHY I SAID THAT EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS, YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO NOW.

Why did I say that?

BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO FIGGIN' CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TO THE POINT THAT FAKE NEWS WOULD BE AN EDUCATION.

And with that, I will excuse myself from this conversation.

What do you have that is ?
How did you hear about Program E?
And you would like him to care about the 1point 5 million slaughtered by Saddam and the countless others tortured ?Just for now?And you would like him to care about the thousands of lives that the US military is in reality SAVING by keeping the control of Iraq ?And you would like him to care about the real story behind WMD ?And you would like him to care about how the UN used the oil for food program to scam billions of dollars at the expense of the Iraqi people while giving Saddam the funds to build his military and help train the terrorists that bombed the World Trade Center this is proven FACT in case you dodn't know ?I get it.
cares abour a couple of pictures of hurt children and some SEVERELY manipulated footage from Iraq.If a tree falls in the forest, and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound?That makes sense to me.
Who does "they" refer to?What is your real name?Enough about me, let's talk about my dress.Your
whole point was that The Daily Show IS A COMEDY SHOW?Oh.
So? What did you mean by THAT EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO? "" EVEN IF YOU WATVHED A COMEDY THAT POKES FUN AT THE NEWS YOU WOULD KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO ?
I understand.I don't know why it happened, but we should try to figure it out.Interesting explanation.
Doesn't everyone have a
FIGGIN' CLUE WHAT you are TALKING ABOUT TO THE POINT THAT FAKE NEWS WOULD BE AN EDUCATION.<br></br>
I have
a whole lot of original answers. You and your that I will excuse myself from this conversation.

[Professor S]

Does anyone else hate CanFuBot?:D

[GT News]

Does anyone else hate CanFuBot?:D

Suppose they do.Oh, you are a poet.

[Professor S]

I can only hope to one day be able to weave such a tapestry of prose as you do on a daily basis. I bow to thine literary genius.

[jeepnut]

Does anyone else hate CanFuBot?:D

His one liners are generally humerous. However, when he responds to a really long post, it's just too much of a jumble to care about reading.

By the way, did Neo turn up the frequency with which he posts? It seems he's posting a lot more frequently lately.

[Dylflon]

I thought he was at 5% but it looks like he's at 15%.

What's the real story behind WMD? As far as I can tell, there weren't any. And the UN scamming people and funding Saddam? That doesn't sound like the most credible thing i've ever heard. I do remember that American funded Iraq a long time ago to fight Iran whch Russia was backing. I also remember that America backed Saddam and wished for him to be in a position of power. Also, the fact that Americans have killed many more Iraqis than Saddam over the last two decades sort of bothers me. I couldn't find the total estimate. Only the estimate of children. I think I remember 500,000.

I don't feel that trying to take one guy out of power calls for killing children and other civilians. You side step that when you argue and continue to talk about how just the war is and how ignorant I am. People have been taken out of power without shooting up the entire place before. And sure, you probably still should be there until a new leader is put in power. But that still doesn't warrant shooting innocent people.

But,hey, if America wants to become the iron fist all of a sudden and crack down on these evil men, there's a few other ruthless murderous dictators that America has put in power or backed that are also senslessly killing people. A prime example is the Saudi Arabian royal family (Bin Laden's family). They've killed far more people than Saddam. But America doesn't go after them even though the terrorists who bombed the WTC were Saudi Arabian. Oh, I forgot. The Saudi Royal family is a business partner with the Bush family and have invested a lot of money in American economy. But wait, they're killnig more people than Saddam has. There are many ruthless murderous leaders out there (some of which America put in power). I wonder why nobody is going after them.

[TheGame]

Whoo... I missed a lot over the weekend :p (I haven't read over all I missed, so what I'm about to say could have been said before)

"Also, the fact that Americans have killed many more Iraqis than Saddam over the last two decades sort of bothers me."
-Dyflon-

The fact that Saddam killed his own people in such a painful way for no reason bothers me even more. That's the equiveant of Bush dropping a Nuke on the US or poisoning the water supply... have you ever thought about that?

I think there are two problems with the war:

#1: US citezens were not able to put a face on many of the people who died september 11th. No superstars died, no faces that everybody in the country is famillair with died, and a building that most of the population has never went and seen was destroied. While in the war on terrorism people can put a face on a lot of soldiers who are going out to die. By soldiers dying and going out to die every corner of the country is affected to some extent

#2: America is way too soft. If you are going to fight in a war, fight by there rukes not your own. America looks at war as a boxing match, where how you fight is "honerable" while Iraq is looking at the war as a wrestling match, where you do everything it takes to win. Right now only one side is wearing the gloves, and that's why so many of the soldiers are dying. If Iraq had nukes they would try and Nuke US, if Iraq had the millitary of US they would go in and kill us mercylessly... Right now by our "Boxing match" rules the war is over, but we are still getting smashed over the back of the head with a chair ;)

I say US should stoop to there level... drop a Nuke in the desert and scare the **** out of the Iraqi citezens, and say that if they don't obey we are going to drop another right on Baghdad. That would lower the death toll by a huge amount and if they don't obey even then, that will prove that they are incapible of following our orders and every man should be either killed or put in prison.

People don't understand that Iraq has a whole different society than us, they have different thoughts than us on what's right and what's wrong, what's weak and what's strong. Right now we are weak... and if we back out that's only going to make other countries' (who hate us) will power against us stronger. They will know that us weak americans will eventually give in if you keep fighting... hell, they already think that way because of past events! But this war is the ultimate example war, if we back out we will never EVER be able to win a war again without wiping out another country's whole population, period.

Ether they are going to learn that we will keep fighting until the smaller country obeys, or they are going to learn that if they keep fighting as long as there is a breath in there body, America may give in. Thus this war is one of the most important wars ever.

[Jonbo298]

The second we drop a Nuke in Iraq is the day the whole world turns on the US.

[TheGame]

The second we drop a Nuke in Iraq is the day the whole world turns on the US.

I can't say I disagree... but the main point I was trying to make with the post is:

1) What we are doing now will not slow down american casualties due to the Middle east mentality, because in there eyes we are viewed as weak and it would take somthing as outragous as a Nuke to stop them.
2) And at the same time we can't pull out because we would only make things harder for us in the future, in the middle east or otherwise.

[Professor S]

I was just going to leave this alone, but I can't let this stand the way Dyflon wants to portray it.


What's the real story behind WMD? As far as I can tell, there weren't any.

If you actually bothered to go check out the thread that I posted IN THIS THREAD you would see that I explained the WMD situation pretty thoroughly. I don't feelthe need to do it again. Go back to my earlier post and check out the link and then respond.

And the UN scamming people and funding Saddam? That doesn't sound like the most credible thing i've ever heard.

Well I will repeat myself in this area, as I have done numerous times before:

The UN set up the Oil for Food program after the first Gulf War in a veiled attempt to continue to profit from such an oil rich country as Iraq while there were still sanctions. The premise was that Iraq would sell oil to countries in the UN, such as Russia, France and Germany (GO FIGURE!), in exchange for Food and Medicine. What was happening was that these UN countries were purchasing back these supplies at a greatly discounted rate for nearly a decade. Saddam would then take that money and purchase equipment from Germany (biological and chemical equipment) and Russia (military equipment, the Republican Guard used Russian tanks if you remember).

All of this was against UN regulations, and yet these same countries came out against the US invading because they felt it was wrong, even though Iraq was in flagrant violation of UN resolutions. Personally I think allowing Saddam to starve his own people and let them die of famine so he can spend top dollar for illegal equipment and build 25 palaces from 1994 to 2003 is wrong, bordering on disgusting.

I won't even mention the clandestine oil deals that had nothing to do with the Oil for Food program.

And this is all FACT, even though I'm not surprised you haven't head about it. Not many people heard about Saddam training the terrorists that bombed the world trade center either. Hell, that barely got out of the London Telegraph.

I do remember that American funded Iraq a long time ago to fight Iran whch Russia was backing. I also remember that America backed Saddam and wished for him to be in a position of power.

You also have to remember that at that time Russia was the US's greatest enemy and that Iran had a hostage fetish for Americans. You can't always look through history with today's eyes.

Also, the fact that Americans have killed many more Iraqis than Saddam over the last two decades sort of bothers me. I couldn't find the total estimate. Only the estimate of children. I think I remember 500,000.

PLEASE show me the resource for that little tidbit of information. I'm begging you, post a link.

I don't feel that trying to take one guy out of power calls for killing children and other civilians. You side step that when you argue and continue to talk about how just the war is and how ignorant I am.

Do I need to show you the posts that directly answered that charge? Its called WAR and innocents get caught in the middle sometimes. The US has done everything they can do to avoid civilian casualties, which I've already said in this thread.

People have been taken out of power without shooting up the entire place before. And sure, you probably still should be there until a new leader is put in power. But that still doesn't warrant shooting innocent people.

As I mentioned before, again in this thread, if we were going to remove Saddam we HAD to take contol of the government for the sake of the Iraqi people. Just removing Saddam would have led to choas and death. Even you would hav eto agree with that assumption. And in the end it would have probably led to a worse authoritarian government.

I agree that shooting innocents is wrong, but I also know that US troops aren't just walking around shooting Iraqi civilians. The video you posted is one fo the more horrible pieces of yellow journalism I've ever seen. The interview with the soldier is edited with the intent of making him look as evil as possible. In the end we have no idea what the situation surrounding that shooting really was. We don't know if he was a bomber, had a gun, or what have you. The enemy doesn't wear uniforms anymore.

You photos are equally out of context, but still very sad to see. But once again, this is a war and you have to keep your eye on the big picture.

But,hey, if America wants to become the iron fist all of a sudden and crack down on these evil men, there's a few other ruthless murderous dictators that America has put in power or backed that are also senslessly killing people. A prime example is the Saudi Arabian royal family (Bin Laden's family). They've killed far more people than Saddam.

I'd like to see documentation on that. I have a feeling your counting bodies without a sense of why the bodies are there.

But America doesn't go after them even though the terrorists who bombed the WTC were Saudi Arabian. Oh, I forgot. The Saudi Royal family is a business partner with the Bush family and have invested a lot of money in American economy.

They're also one of the two Arab nations that allow us to have a presence in the Middle East. Without them Kuwait would still be under Saddam's rule and who knows who else would have gone down next. Without Saudi Arabia the world might be a much more scary place right now.

There are many ruthless murderous leaders out there (some of which America put in power). I wonder why nobody is going after them.

One at a time, please. One at a time. Plus, the war is actually acting as a warning to many ruthless dictators, such as Khadafi (sp?) who ahs just agreed to UN inspections and promised to stop harboring terrorists (we'll see how that works out). The word is out.

As for the other arab nations that are considered despotic, the plan is for a democratic Iraq to help change the entire area. No one ing the Middle East has EVER known a true democracy. Once they see one operating with leaders chosen by the people, that may change. You just can't go around bopping everyone you don't like on the head. You have to have a long term plan, and by long term I mean years and not months.

By the way, you've quoted some pretty interesting numbers in your last post, please back them up.

[Typhoid]

1) What we are doing now will not slow down american casualties due to the Middle east mentality, because in there eyes we are viewed as weak and it would take somthing as outragous as a Nuke to stop them.


No, in their eyes, and most of the rest of the world, you are viewed as pushy a**holes

[Dylflon]

Lol, Strangler. Knew that would hook you back in.

But I am in fact done. This has gone on for quite the long time and peace should once again return to these boards. I have resources for the Saudi thing and some of the other things I said but it's in books and magazines and it would be a lot of writing.

[Jonbo298]

I heard on CBS that a month or 2 before the elections, the Saudi's are gonna drop gas prices so it makes the US look like the economy is getting better thus giving Bush the win. Now I dont give a damn what party you're in but if your gonna do tactics like this, you dont deserve to be president. The gov't needs a serious overhaul.

[Professor S]

Lol, Strangler. Knew that would hook you back in.

But I am in fact done. This has gone on for quite the long time and peace should once again return to these boards. I have resources for the Saudi thing and some of the other things I said but it's in books and magazines and it would be a lot of writing.

So I actually ask you to reference some pretty ludicrous numbers, and NOW you decide to quit. Why am I not suprised?

Your opinions continue to be backed up by nothing. Absolutely nothing. Have fun. I hope its comfortable under that rock.

[Jonbo298]

I love my 3' rocks. They work better then your 2 foot rocks Strangler:p:D

[Dylflon]

So I actually ask you to reference some pretty ludicrous numbers, and NOW you decide to quit. Why am I not suprised?

Your opinions continue to be backed up by nothing. Absolutely nothing. Have fun. I hope its comfortable under that rock.

Um...to be fair you quit before I did. I don't want to spend an hour writing articles and quoting sources.

[Professor S]

Thats because you don't have any. I'm out.

[Typhoid]

Thats because you don't have any. I'm out.

Wow......see, you are the reason i have no desire to travel to the US, in fear of meeting an a**hole like yourself, not saying all americans are, just you though. You confirm my stereotypical attitude that most Americans have an attitude like yourself, and for bringing your countrymen down a notch or two, i salute you!

[Professor S]

Wow......see, you are the reason i have no desire to travel to the US, in fear of meeting an a**hole like yourself, not saying all americans are, just you though. You confirm my stereotypical attitude that most Americans have an attitude like yourself, and for bringing your countrymen down a notch or two, i salute you!

Don't worry, you'll see the US soon enough once we annex Canada for the trees. I also apologize for being an "a**hole", but I tend not to take well to ignorant doofus's who spout off on topics they no idea about and just repeat what someone else tells them without bothering to think for themselves. "The problem is not with the stars, it is with ourselves". Take that to heart.

I also found it funny that you came to the "a**hole" conclusion when I actually asked Dyflon to present his resources for his claims. If doing that makes me an "a**hole", I'll be a proud one for the rest of my life.

For the record, this was specifically targeted at Typhoid and I actually like Canada (even if Montreal is filled with most rude people who have ever existed, but Toronto and St. Catherines rule).

[GT News]

Wow......see, you are the reason i have no desire to travel to the US, in fear of meeting an a**hole like yourself, not saying all americans are, just you though. You confirm my stereotypical attitude that most Americans have an attitude like yourself, and for bringing your countrymen down a notch or two, i salute you!

Don't worry, you'll see the US soon enough once we annex Canada for the trees. I also apologize for being an "a**hole", but I tend not to take well to ignorant doofus's who spout off on topics they no idea about and just repeat what someone else tells them without bothering to think for themselves. "The problem is not with the stars, it is with ourselves". Take that to heart.

For the record, this was specifically targeted at Typhoid and I actually like Canada (even if Montreal is filled with most rude people who have ever existed, but Toronto and St. Catherines rule).

What makes you say that I will see the US soon enough once we annex Canada for the trees.
Worry is not an emotion I experience.Also? There is no need to apologize. Your purpose is being an a**hole but he or she tend not to take well to ignorant doofus's who spout off on topics they no idea about and just repeat what someone else tells them without bothering to think for themselves.I assume you mean our current problem.Where do you want me to take it?Your purpose is the record this was specifically targeted at Typhoid and he or she actually like Canada even if Montreal is filled with most rude people who have ever existed but Toronto and St.What do you have that is ?

[Professor S]

What makes you say that I will see the US soon enough once we annex Canada for the trees.
Worry is not an emotion I experience.Also? There is no need to apologize. Your purpose is being an a**hole but he or she tend not to take well to ignorant doofus's who spout off on topics they no idea about and just repeat what someone else tells them without bothering to think for themselves.I assume you mean our current problem.Where do you want me to take it?Your purpose is the record this was specifically targeted at Typhoid and he or she actually like Canada even if Montreal is filled with most rude people who have ever existed but Toronto and St.What do you have that is ?

What? In english please.

[Shadow_Link]

By the way, did Neo turn up the frequency with which he posts? It seems he's posting a lot more frequently lately.

Hehe...

[TheGame]

No, in their eyes, and most of the rest of the world, you are viewed as pushy a**holes

If we were "pushy a**holes" we would own the whole western hemisphere by now, and there wouild be no middle east. What we are doing is eliminating a threat. We have much more power than we use, and we are holding back ourselves by using the the world wide "rules of war"

Yes, instead of blowing the middle east off of the face of the earth we are walking in letting our soldiers be killed and taking them out (and acctually trying to help them) in an honerable way just so the main powers of the world don't get mad at us.

[Dylflon]

Yeah, Typhoid. You are generalizing and what you're saying is extremely prejudiced. There are many great americans. Sure there are some jerk and people from Alabama but for the most part Americans are okay. You can't pin the actions of the country on the people who live in it.

Although I have encountered a lot of rude americans. But most of them seem to be in my parent's generation. This generation seems to be much more well mannered.

[Typhoid]

You guys dont like to read do you? I never said i thought you ( Americans) were pushy a**holes, i said the rest of the world views you that way. I dont believe its true, i think that their are a few people in The US who are true A**holes, just like in Canada. I never said that everyone was an ass, read it this time. Ill save you the time.
not saying all americans are.

befor you start the hate train rolling, try reading, its that thing they try to teach us in school

(And dylflon, its not generalization, because i said only a few are,if i sadi every single American is, then yes, it is. But in this case its personal experience. You even said you met some annoying Americans from your parents generation, i said something along those lines, except i didnt say the generation)

[Crono]

and I actually like Canada (even if Montreal is filled with most rude people who have ever existed, but Toronto and St. Catherines rule).

Montreal is the most English city in Quebec (except for maybe Gatineau, where I was born). But if you think that's bad try going deeper in Quebec, like Québec City and Trois Rivières.

When I go to Québec most people there are nice, I don't know why people get this idea that most people are rude there. I guess it's mostly the older generation (or the fact that you're American, sad but may be true), but people my age are different that what you might expect. I have cousins in Quebec that are very into American pop culture just like the rest of Canada is..

[Typhoid]

Maybe people think that PDQ is rude because they get the impression that the whole province is French. So they try to put 1 and 1 together, because they also think that all French people are rude. ( And it is sad but true, that French Canadians and French people dont really like The US)...

[Crono]

Maybe people think that PDQ is rude because they get the impression that the whole province is French. So they try to put 1 and 1 together, because they also think that all French people are rude. ( And it is sad but true, that French Canadians and French people dont really like The US)...

Well you are generalizing again. Have you ever been to Quebec? Do you have family there? Like I just said, it may be mostly the older generations because all my cousins are who are young (10-21) all like America and it's cultures. I was born in Gatineau and my whole family is French (well one half of my Mom's side is actually Scottish, her Dad is anyway) and they do not fit any general description. And most of them live in Val-d'Or and places where you would never see Americans, but they do not hate the US.

But anyway... on to more important things...

[Typhoid]

After this i will stop talking about Quebec. But wow, i said maybe people think that....Maybe....and people and i never said Americans, and i didnt say everyone....I never said i think that, my friend went to Quebec and said the people their are very nice, and i do have family that lives there thank you very much. and for the record, i have no problem with PDQ, in fact when i get eough money i plan to move to Montreal. So dont rag on me for you misunderstanding what i meant..please and thank you...

[Bond]

Actually, there is something I have been meaning to tell you but I just
couldn't... I think you should know, though. On Saturday morning last week I
saw a guy leaving Rosemary's room... How should I put it, it was like they
were ... "intimate." I'm sorry. Sorry to bring this up during the mission,
but...

[GameMaster]

Alright people, clear out. The topic has left the building.