GameTavern

GameTavern (http://www.gametavern.net/forums/index.php)
-   Happy Hour (http://www.gametavern.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead (http://www.gametavern.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6143)

Bond 07-22-2003 05:17 PM

Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

MOSUL, Iraq — Saddam Hussein's sons Odai and Qusai were killed Tuesday when U.S. soldiers stormed a house in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, U.S. military officials said Tuesday.

Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez of U.S. Central Command announced late Tuesday night in Baghdad that Odai and Qusai were two of the four people who died in a firefight between U.S. troops and Iraqis at the house earlier in the day.

"This will prove to the Iraqi people that at least these two members of the regime will not be coming back to power," Sanchez said from Baghdad. "We remain totally committed to the same regime never coming back to power and tormenting the Iraqi people."

Sources at the Pentagon and within the Bush administration earlier told Fox News that at least four "high-level" targets were killed inside the large villa that belonged to one of Saddam's cousins. A senior administration official said the U.S. was "90 to 95 percent certain" that Saddam's sons were among the dead.

Source: FoxNews (What? You think I would use CNN? Ha!)
:banana:

GameMaster 07-22-2003 05:47 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
It isn't offcial yet, they're still investigating and identifying the bodies. They think its Saddam's sons.

Edit: Nope, you're right, I guess it is official now.

Vampyr 07-22-2003 05:50 PM

Thats good news, but it seems as though it was all in vain. We set the peoples of Iraq free, which is better than our primary goal, but the fact is, the reason Bush said we were going over there in the first place is a lie. Hes facing impeachment becuase he lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction.

But still, were accomplishing something better anyway.

Happydude 07-22-2003 06:04 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
HAH! those bastards deserve it!

that'll teach them to kill inocent people...

CrOnO_LiNk 07-22-2003 06:07 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr
Thats good news, but it seems as though it was all in vain. We set the peoples of Iraq free, which is better than our primary goal, but the fact is, the reason Bush said we were going over there in the first place is a lie. Hes facing impeachment becuase he lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction.

But still, were accomplishing something better anyway.

Saddam is probably going nuts right now. But yeah, I don't like the fact of people dying, but this is some good news...

Bond 07-22-2003 06:17 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr
Thats good news, but it seems as though it was all in vain. We set the peoples of Iraq free, which is better than our primary goal, but the fact is, the reason Bush said we were going over there in the first place is a lie. Hes facing impeachment becuase he lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction.

He is not facing impeachment, that is ludicrous.

I would argue with you about the reasons why we went to war, but it's not worth it.

DeathsHand 07-22-2003 06:43 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bond
He is not facing impeachment, that is ludicrous.

I would argue with you about the reasons why we went to war, but it's not worth it.

Arguing about political stuff is stupid (especially with teenagers) because there are basically 3 groups:

a. People who have their heads shoved way up the governments' ass
b. People who don't really care
c. People who try to take every government mistake and blow it out of proportion and bishidy bash it...

I, personally, enjoy bananas...

GameMaster 07-22-2003 07:16 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathsHand
I, personally, enjoy bananas...

Is your spoon too big also?

Dylflon 07-22-2003 07:32 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by happydude666
HAH! those bastards deserve it!

that'll teach them to kill inocent people...


American soldiers have also killed innocent people. Their hands aren't any cleaner. But America did a great thing by freeing the Iraqis.

DeathsHand 07-22-2003 07:56 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster
Is your spoon too big also?

MY SPOON IS TOO BIG!

I AM A BANANA!

ugh, gag me with a spoon

...

I mean umm... go US... kill those Iraqis...

Happydude 07-22-2003 08:43 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathsHand
MY SPOON IS TOO BIG!

I AM A BANANA!

ugh, gag me with a spoon

...

I mean umm... go US... kill those Iraqis...

damn rejects :p

gekko 07-22-2003 08:57 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bond
He is not facing impeachment, that is ludicrous.

I would argue with you about the reasons why we went to war, but it's not worth it.

I would also, but again, it's not worth it.

However, if you care to educate yourself, you can always ask.

BreakABone 07-22-2003 09:28 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathsHand
Arguing about political stuff is stupid (especially with teenagers) because there are basically 3 groups:

a. People who have their heads shoved way up the governments' ass
b. People who don't really care
c. People who try to take every government mistake and blow it out of proportion and bishidy bash it...

I, personally, enjoy bananas...


And we have a winner!

That pretty much sums up most political debates even beyond teens, but shush. :)

Stonecutter 07-22-2003 11:45 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
If you supported the war in the first place, but now don't because of the WMD thing, you're a moron. If it's only now that you realize that some of the stuff they were telling you just might not be completly true then you can't be helped. The government lies, deal with it.

This war was, and always has been about oil (Bush,) and displaying the might of the US military (Rumdsfeld.) Yeah, we really liberated the crap out of those poor bastards. I'm sure once Haliburton (oh yeah, that's Chaney) takes most of the government's money and pockets it the Iraqi people will be much better off.

But hey! At least gas is only $1.85 a gallon!

Vampyr 07-23-2003 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bond
He is not facing impeachment, that is ludicrous.

Last time I watched the news, which was like 2 nights ago, he was. Its not like they're going to impeach him tomorrow, but hes on grounds for impeachment. He said we were going over there to get rid of weapons of mass destruction. He ruined our aliance with France and most of the UN. And now the weapons are no where to be found. Tony Blair is in a bind right now because of the same thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonecutter
If you supported the war in the first place, but now don't because of the WMD thing, you're a moron. If it's only now that you realize that some of the stuff they were telling you just might not be completly true then you can't be helped. The government lies, deal with it.

This war was, and always has been about oil (Bush,) and displaying the might of the US military (Rumdsfeld.) Yeah, we really liberated the crap out of those poor bastards. I'm sure once Haliburton (oh yeah, that's Chaney) takes most of the government's money and pockets it the Iraqi people will be much better off.

I didnt support the war in the first place. I thought that the weapons of mass destruction thing was bull since the beginning. I mean, it was ridiculus! I was watching CNN, and the Bush administration said that if the UN weapons inspecters found weapons, they would attack and dissarm Saddam. Then they said that if they DIDNT find weapons of mass desruction, they would use that as proof that he was hiding them! So either way, we were going war, and that news report was enough to convince me that Bush had no idea if Saddam had weapons or not.

I think Bush would have gotten more support if he said the reason he was going over was to finish a job started years ago and to free the people of Iraq. His reasons could be that it was the humane thing to do and that it would prevent the spread of communism/dictatorships/tyranny.

But its the American's job in this world I guess, sticking our nose into places it doesnt belong. Look at Vietnam. We're trying to be the international police force, and its not working.

Oh well. :shakehead

gekko 07-23-2003 11:26 AM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr
Last time I watched the news, which was like 2 nights ago, he was. Its not like they're going to impeach him tomorrow, but hes on grounds for impeachment. He said we were going over there to get rid of weapons of mass destruction. He ruined our aliance with France and most of the UN. And now the weapons are no where to be found. Tony Blair is in a bind right now because of the same thing.

He never was facing impeachment, never will be. You need to listen clearer to what it being said. Besides, you can't impeach Bush, because you can't link him to a crime. Presidents are always scape goats, but the truth is they only give the OK. Along the way his advisors will look at the intelligence, make decisions on the best course of action, and then brief the President. The President says OK, and it's done. Plus, everything the President said was written by someone else, and evaluated numerous times before the President even sees it, so it there was anything questionable that was being said, it would've been taken out. Speeches are checked much more closely in matters of national security.

Now if you believe in all that, there are no WMD, you are a moron.

Quote:

I didnt support the war in the first place. I thought that the weapons of mass destruction thing was bull since the beginning.
Which is a clear sign that it is a partisan issue for you, and you wouldn't support Bush no matter what the reason.

Quote:

I think Bush would have gotten more support if he said the reason he was going over was to finish a job started years ago and to free the people of Iraq. His reasons could be that it was the humane thing to do and that it would prevent the spread of communism/dictatorships/tyranny.
Iraq is not communist. And Bush did say that, people didn't care. Many who support the war find it a good enough reason, then again, many who opposed the war had, and still have no idea what Saddam was actually doing. But we live in a selfish world, ending a oppressive regime is not a reason to go to war, because it doesn't affect Americans. For the same reason that until a bomb lands on your head, you could care less about WMD.

Quote:

But its the American's job in this world I guess, sticking our nose into places it doesnt belong. Look at Vietnam. We're trying to be the international police force, and its not working.
Who says we don't belong? People will support and oppose anything we do, so we might as well do the right thing. And in so many ways, Vietnam was successful.

Vampyr 07-23-2003 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
He never was facing impeachment, never will be. You need to listen clearer to what it being said. Besides, you can't impeach Bush, because you can't link him to a crime. Presidents are always scape goats, but the truth is they only give the OK. Along the way his advisors will look at the intelligence, make decisions on the best course of action, and then brief the President. The President says OK, and it's done. Plus, everything the President said was written by someone else, and evaluated numerous times before the President even sees it, so it there was anything questionable that was being said, it would've been taken out. Speeches are checked much more closely in matters of national security.

I watched in on CNN, they said he was, Im not the original stater of the fact that he was on, once again, grounds of impeachment. I was just stating what I heard on the news. Tell them about the speeches and national security. And the way your putting it, the president is just the vessel of the words for the words of the people behind the scenes.

Quote:

Which is a clear sign that it is a partisan issue for you, and you wouldn't support Bush no matter what the reason.
Incorrect. The reason I thought it was bull was because of his reasons for thinking they had the weapons. I didnt disagree with him just because hes a republican or whatever, I just didnt think we should go attack some country when we havent seen a scrap of evidence that they have them. On the contrary, the UN weapon inspectors couldnt find anything, and they still cant.

Quote:

Who says we don't belong? People will support and oppose anything we do, so we might as well do the right thing. And in so many ways, Vietnam was successful.
Your right, anything anyone does will have mixed opinions.

Vietnam was successful!? Thats the first time Ive heard that. Go to Washington DC, and stand in front of that wall, you know, the one with the names on it. The LONG list of names. And say that again, real loud, so people can hear you.

gekko 07-23-2003 11:54 AM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr
I watched in on CNN, they said he was, Im not the original stater of the fact that he was on, once again, grounds of impeachment. I was just stating what I heard on the news. Tell them about the speeches and national security. And the way your putting it, the president is just the vessel of the words for the words of the people behind the scenes.

I've read the articles that were written. Bush is not facing impeachment, and no one is currently trying to get him impeached. ATD.

Quote:

Incorrect. The reason I thought it was bull was because of his reasons for thinking they had the weapons. I didnt disagree with him just because hes a republican or whatever, I just didnt think we should go attack some country when we havent seen a scrap of evidence that they have them. On the contrary, the UN weapon inspectors couldnt find anything, and they still cant.
You said you thought it was bull since the beginning, which means you didn't give him a chance. And next time pay more attention, the main arguments were over whether these weapons were a threat to America, not whether they had them. You would have to be blind to the obvious to believe that there are no WMD.

Quote:

Vietnam was successful!? Thats the first time Ive heard that. Go to Washington DC, and stand in front of that wall, you know, the one with the names on it. The LONG list of names. And say that again, real loud, so people can hear you.
If that's the case, why not go look at the list of WWII casualties, or Revolutionary War casualties. Oh, and I hate to kill your point, but people would generally be happier to hear someone say that the something was accomplished by the death of the soldiers than to say their death was worthless.

And yes, look at the reasons we went into Vietnam, and look at the end result. Wasn't pretty, but Vietnam did stop the spread of communism.

Vampyr 07-23-2003 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
You said you thought it was bull since the beginning, which means you didn't give him a chance. And next time pay more attention, the main arguments were over whether these weapons were a threat to America, not whether they had them. You would have to be blind to the obvious to believe that there are no WMD.

Well, since the beginning, he hasnt had evidence. Thus there in lies why I didnt trust it since the beginning.

Quote:

If that's the case, why not go look at the list of WWII casualties, or Revolutionary War casualties. Oh, and I hate to kill your point, but people would generally be happier to hear someone say that the something was accomplished by the death of the soldiers than to say their death was worthless.
Well, we won WWII and the Revolutionary War, so they didnt die in vain. Er, and hate to burst your bubble, but we lost Vietnam. We didnt stop communism from spreading. Hence the fact that the other side won, so they got what they wanted...

The soldiers deaths weren't in complete vain, fighting for your country is one of the most noble ways to go out. But, in the end, we did lose.

Bond 07-23-2003 12:11 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
I'm not going to waste my time digging up all of the evidence for you. It's obvious you, yourself, have never researched the evidence and went through the reports. It's too bad you just listen to what CNN tells you rather than finding things out for yourself.

If you would like to read the British Dossier may learn something: www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/iraqdossier.pdf

gekko 07-23-2003 12:15 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr
Well, since the beginning, he hasnt had evidence. Thus there in lies why I didnt trust it since the beginning.

He always had evidence. Just because no one shows you, doesn't mean it's not there. Showing evidence doesn't help our cause. "Hey look guys, here they are at a chemical facility that we haven't inspected yet." Wait, I got an idea! Why not move them before inspectors return? :rolleyes:

Quote:

Well, we won WWII and the Revolutionary War, so they didnt die in vain. Er, and hate to burst your bubble, but we lost Vietnam. We didnt stop communism from spreading. Hence the fact that the other side won, so they got what they wanted...
We lost Vietnam? Please, explain to me how we lost Vietnam.

We kicked their ass, bad. We won all the battles, and I don't think there's been a war where we have ever done better. So from a military standpoint, we sure as hell didn't lose.

We went in to stop the spread of communism, you know, the old domino effect. That sure worked. Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand all stayed free of communism due to Vietnam. Indonesia kicked the Soviets out in 1966 because of Vietnam. Vietnam not only stopped the spread of communism, but started the fall of communism.

South Vietnam lost the war, they never got their independence. The US accomplished what they went in there to do.

Vampyr 07-23-2003 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bond
If you would like to read the British Dossier may learn something: http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cach...tart=1&ie=UTF-8

[/url]

Im assuming that was for me, but the link is broken. The only thing I learned from that was suggestions for looking stuff up on google.

By the way, Gekko, Im not trying to argue with you, Im just debating. I find debates quite fun. :)

Bond 07-23-2003 12:18 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Yes, I couldn't get it to link to the HTML version, so you can now view the PDF version and learn something.

gekko 07-23-2003 12:30 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampyr
Im assuming that was for me, but the link is broken. The only thing I learned from that was suggestions for looking stuff up on google.

By the way, Gekko, Im not trying to argue with you, Im just debating. I find debates quite fun. :)

Works for me. http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/iraqdossier.pdf

And finding debates fun is not necessarily a good thing. To debate means you have formed an opinion are are prepared to defend it. At 16, I see no reason why you need to form opinions on politics. In all honesty you would be better off absorbing information, and asking questions to help understand instead of arguing. Then over the next few years you'll learn something, but get really pissed off when you have to argue a 14 year old on a gaming forum about politics. Just my advice.

The Duggler 07-23-2003 03:18 PM

I feel like arguing today :)
 
Quote:

Posted by gekko :
Now if you believe in all that, there are no WMD, you are a moron.
So now we are morons if we don't think that there are WMDs? Well show them to me and I'll believe you, but until then, don't call me a moron.

Quote:

Iraq is not communist. And Bush did say that, people didn't care. Many who support the war find it a good enough reason, then again, many who opposed the war had, and still have no idea what Saddam was actually doing. But we live in a selfish world, ending a oppressive regime is not a reason to go to war, because it doesn't affect Americans. For the same reason that until a bomb lands on your head, you could care less about WMD.
Look, your 2 reasons why the US invaded Iraq was 1-the WMD and 2-To free the population. Well, we all know what happened with number 1 and I would have to say that #2 is pretty much stupid because of the fact that there is a lot of places worse than Iraq and if it was the case then Iraq should be part 1 of a world wide crusade to "free" all those who suffer. I say that you have one hell of a job to do. Also, don't you find it odd that it's still chaos out there, that the main services have not yet been restored, but there is already oil shippement coming from Iraq?

gekko 07-23-2003 03:42 PM

Re: I feel like arguing today :)
 
He's back! *hears no clapping*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranzid
Well show them to me and I'll believe you, but until then, don't call me a moron.

There's a long list of reasons to call you a moron. But you're a special case. Where's your buddy these days? Wonder if he got hit by a bomb :D

Quote:

Look, your 2 reasons why the US invaded Iraq was 1-the WMD and 2-To free the population.
My two reasons? I got more than two reasons.

Quote:

Well, we all know what happened with number 1
We effectively stopped the production of WMD by the Iraqi regime, and prevented the death of many.

Quote:

I would have to say that #2 is pretty much stupid because of the fact that there is a lot of places worse than Iraq
Where did you hear that, the news? I mean, by all means try to pretend you actually care, but you don't. You are against helping out Iraqis, and you make no effort to help the people of these "worse places." You could care less about all of them, so why make the effort to pretend like you care? Iraq is of strategic importance, I can't believe you still haven't figured that out.

Quote:

Also, don't you find it odd that it's still chaos out there,
No. Afghanistan was the same way, or did you not pay attention?

Quote:

that the main services have not yet been restored,
Not a surprise, except to people who think you can rebuild a country in a day.

Quote:

but there is already oil shippement coming from Iraq?
And no. It's the largest source of income the country has, and the country needs money to be rebuilt.

The Duggler 07-23-2003 04:32 PM

Re: I feel like arguing today :)
 
Quote:

Posted by gekko:He's back! *hears no clapping*

There's a long list of reasons to call you a moron. But you're a special case. Where's your buddy these days? Wonder if he got hit by a bomb :D
:wtf: huu.. Ok?

Quote:

My two reasons? I got more than two reasons.
And what are those?

Quote:

We effectively stopped the production of WMD by the Iraqi regime, and prevented the death of many.
Oh ok, so now it's the "production" of WMD that needed to be stopped :rolleyes:

Quote:

Where did you hear that, the news?
Why? You didn't lnow that?
Quote:

I mean, by all means try to pretend you actually care, but you don't.
You're right! I don't give a ****. But are you telling me that you actually care for those people? Come on tell me the truth.
Quote:

You are against helping out Iraqis, and you make no effort to help the people of these "worse places." You could care less about all of them, so why make the effort to pretend like you care?
WTF? I'm not superman, so let them die. Let them sort out their **** by themselves. It's not like we are doing much of a difference anyways. And what's that **** about me pretending to care. I'm not saying that you're doing nothing to help other miserable countries because I care for them, I'm saying that to show you that your argument about saving Iraqis is ****.
Quote:

Iraq is of strategic importance, I can't believe you still haven't figured that out.
Strategic importance for what? Showing to other "non-behaving" countries to calm down? The only strategic importance I know about Iraq, is in the oil market.

Quote:

No. Afghanistan was the same way, or did you not pay attention?
Then why do it? Oh yhea, they're a threat :rolleyes:

Quote:

Not a surprise, except to people who think you can rebuild a country in a day.
But the oil is sure flowing easily

Quote:

And no. It's the largest source of income the country has, and the country needs money to be rebuilt.
Yhea, the country get IT'S part of the oil (being extracted by US companies) money and that part is given to some other US companies to rebuilt what you guys destroy. Amazing.

gekko 07-23-2003 05:14 PM

Re: I feel like arguing today :)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranzid
:wtf: huu.. Ok?

Almasurah, duh!

Quote:

And what are those?
I'm not going to make a list.

Quote:

Oh ok, so now it's the "production" of WMD that needed to be stopped :rolleyes:
It's actually the destruction that needs to be started, but stopping production is a good place to start.

Quote:

Why? You didn't lnow that?
Because you don't seem to comprehend anything on your own, only regurgitate what someone else said. You can't say "We shouldn't have attacked Iraq because there are worse places" unless you actually know about those places. Unless you've actually done the research, don't bother trying to state a point. I don't want to hear what you heard some guy on CNN say.

Quote:

You're right! I don't give a ****. But are you telling me that you actually care for those people? Come on tell me the truth.
Personally? No. But do I were in their shoes, I would hope someone would do the same for me. I don't know these people, but I do think the US is doing the right thing by fighting for people who can't fight for themselves. We have two choices, sit back and watch thousands of people getting killed, or do something about it. I say we should do something.

Quote:

WTF? I'm not superman, so let them die. Let them sort out their **** by themselves. It's not like we are doing much of a difference anyways. And what's that **** about me pretending to care. I'm not saying that you're doing nothing to help other miserable countries because I care for them, I'm saying that to show you that your argument about saving Iraqis is ****.
You made an argument that the US shouldn't go into Iraq because there are worse places. But in all reality, you don't care. In other words, you just hate America. But don't worry, America hates you.

Quote:

Strategic importance for what? Showing to other "non-behaving" countries to calm down? The only strategic importance I know about Iraq, is in the oil market.
Strategic importance to everything. By taking away the biggest threat to Middle Eastern countries, you allow room for change. Iraq is also the best place to setup a democracy, since they are the most educated out of the Middle East. They also have tons of oil, which in turn means money to allow them to develop as a country. Then you set an example, and it begins to rub off onto other Middle Eastern countries. There will likely be a revolt in Iran, the Israel/Palestine conflict is moving forward better than anyone could've imagined, and North Korea has all but shut up. If there is one place in the Middle East that has the best chance of being a successful democracy, it's Iraq.


Quote:

Then why do it? Oh yhea, they're a threat :rolleyes:
Wow, you got lost. My reply had nothing to do with doing anything.

Quote:

But the oil is sure flowing easily
Because it wasn't destroyed in the process. It also provides a lot of jobs.

Quote:

Yhea, the country get IT'S part of the oil (being extracted by US companies) money and that part is given to some other US companies to rebuilt what you guys destroy. Amazing.
You're catching on. It does come full circle, it's supposed to. American tax payers do not want to pay for the rebuilding of Iraq, therefore, Iraq will pay to rebuild itself. US companies have always been getting oil from the Middle East, they do not have the technology to do it themselves. US construction companies are also some of the best in the world, and ones that our government have contracts with, and know what they are capable of. Any surprise they would choose them? No. The US isn't getting rich off of Iraqi oil, the only money from Iraq is going to the reconstruction of their own country, something they need, and for the oil companies to develop the oil fieds, something that oil companies have always done.

Rndm_Perfection 07-23-2003 05:23 PM

:rofl: It's Ranzid and Gekko at it again.

Ooooh the humility.... Ooooh the futility!

gekko 07-23-2003 05:26 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
It's not completely futile. One day he might catch on.

I'm educating the less fortunate, helping out society.

Stonecutter 07-23-2003 05:28 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
And yes, look at the reasons we went into Vietnam, and look at the end result. Wasn't pretty, but Vietnam did stop the spread of communism.

*CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP* And the world is a much better place because we got rid of that "evil" communism. I'm not going to try and suggest that communism or socialism is a better option because they're not. They don't work, but none of those countries are any better off because of capitalism, and life in the united states would not be any different if communism were still around... well maybe we'd have McCarthyites running around arresting people for thinking differently.... oh wait, we do have guys like that, they work for Johnny Ashcroft.

And communism fell because Russia ran out of money. Had we not spent so much money building up a useless military force (useless unless you consider Armageddon a legitimate function) to fight the evil "reds" communism would still be around. There was no reason to fight it in the first place. Because the wealthy felt so threatened by the thought of a revolution in the united states they made sure that everyone saw the russians as evil, godless people. We built the largest military force in the world and russia had to try and match it, but because communism doesn't work, they couldn't, and collapsed.

Yes, other countries, for fear of constant B52 flyovers raining fire on their humble villages, desided not to attempt communist revolution. I'm not sure why that's something to be proud of but, ok, I guess.

Vampyr 07-23-2003 05:33 PM

ROFL

At least its Ranzid and not me. Im just going to set by and watch.

:handball:

Oh, and by the way, I agree with Stonecutter.

Rndm_Perfection 07-23-2003 05:44 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
It's not completely futile. One day he might catch on.

I'm educating the less fortunate, helping out society.

Hah... helping society by "educating" a foreign teen about American correct-ness?

"And then society bowed to Gekko's feet as he changed the mind of a Canadian at a Gaming Forum."

gekko 07-23-2003 05:53 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Stonecutter,

Heh. I almost find that funny coming from you. For someone who grew up long after Vietnam and the Cold War, you speak like you actually know what threat this "evil communism" posed. 30 years later communism is all but dead, but it wasn't back then. Communism and capitalism are two completely different societies, and we don't know what the result would be if communism continued to spread. When societies differ, there can be conflict. I don't see communism as a threat, but I wasn't alive back then, so I have no idea what it was like. In 30 years, our kids may not see some guy sitting in a cave reading the Quran as a threat either.

But at least you're not clueless, like some little Canadian in here.

PureEvil 07-23-2003 05:53 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
It's not completely futile. One day he might catch on.

It is completely futile. He's from New Brunswick.

People from Eastern Canada = :shakehead

gekko 07-23-2003 05:58 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rndm_Perfection
Hah... helping society by "educating" a foreign teen about American correct-ness?

"And then society bowed to Gekko's feet as he changed the mind of a Canadian at a Gaming Forum."

I don't know how foreign you want to consider Canada. Granted he is from a different country, the culture is almost identical.

And I'm sorry PureEvil, I'm not caught up on my eastern Canadian society. Next time I'll try to find someone from Vancouver.

Rndm_Perfection 07-23-2003 06:06 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
I don't know how foreign you want to consider Canada. Granted he is from a different country, the culture is almost identical.

I'm not caught up on my eastern Canadian society.

You probably know little of Canadian history, and most definately don't care. Yet, you assume that Canadians are not "foreign" enough to know so little of American history and politics?

It's like looking out from a two-way mirror...

"d00d, stop picking your nose."

gekko 07-23-2003 06:22 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Umm... not quite. First of all, I don't know why you make the jump from what PureEvil said to Canadian history.

Second, Canadian history is not something we learn in school, and not something I have taken the time to study on my own. Canada isn't exactly one of those countries that have had a major influence on the world.

Third, you referred to him as a foreigner, and by doing that implied that he was in some way different. My point was the two countries as similar, so it's in no way different than educating someone from America. It's not like I'm talking to someone from Saudi Arabia here, trying to explain things to them would be futile. There is a chance to educate a Canadian.

And lastly, if a Canadian gets into a debate regarding American politics, they should be educated in it.

Vampyr 07-23-2003 07:28 PM

Im not Canadian, but Im going to say something here.

Canadians are educated in American politics, every day. They watch CNN too, they are using the same internet you are. When was the last time you went to a news site on the net and it wasnt about America? It happens, but not very often. And at my school, we did learn about Canada and its history. Not as in depth as our own, but you know, enough.

So if you consider Canadians stupid when it comes to American politics, then your wrong. Thats what happens when you live in a country thats not involved in almost anything and you live above a country involved in everything.

And on what Stonecutter said, hes right. The principles of communism isnt bad at all. In theory, its a utopia, a perfect society. Carl Marx wasnt a bad guy, it just doesnt work. Now back to watching...

:handball:

Stonecutter 07-23-2003 07:31 PM

Re: Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gekko
Stonecutter,

Heh. I almost find that funny coming from you. For someone who grew up long after Vietnam and the Cold War, you speak like you actually know what threat this "evil communism" posed. 30 years later communism is all but dead, but it wasn't back then. Communism and capitalism are two completely different societies, and we don't know what the result would be if communism continued to spread. When societies differ, there can be conflict. I don't see communism as a threat, but I wasn't alive back then, so I have no idea what it was like. In 30 years, our kids may not see some guy sitting in a cave reading the Quran as a threat either.

But at least you're not clueless, like some little Canadian in here.

Well, if you weren't alive back then either, then don't use "the end of communism" as an excuse for that war. You don't want me to argue it because I wasn't alive but you insist on arguing even though you weren't alive, but oh well, it's not my fault you've got no argument to stand on.

FYI, There was no excuse for that war and yes, we did lose. If for no other reason than the political and, more importanly, social unrest in the united states.

What threats does communism pose then?

Actually, what threats does socialism pose? (communism - violence = socialism) Unless you've got a lot of money that you're afraid of losing, it's actually not much.

The wealthy don't want to lose money. That's the big threat. Spend a little, create some enemies for the poor and middle class to hate, have tons of tax dollars go your wealthy friends to build a nuclear arsenal that you need to fight the "evil reds" and you're all set. The rich get richer, and the lower classes don't mind, because they're "fighting evil."


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GameTavern