Do Iraq War Supporters Really Love War?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by hungvu, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. Mr. Chips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    954
    "Welcome to the machine"

    Yup. Nice post tiassa.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
    Ah the warm blanket of a double standard.

    How many civilians would have died in the same country had we not acted? None?

    Sanctions? Yeah a lot of people died because Sadaam took the food money to the gold palace store.

    Were those US sanctions? I thought they were UN sanctions.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Mr. Chips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    954
    Well howdy Wes! How's it hanging? Did you just try to post something? Maybe if you could expand a bit to see if you can address something someone said rather than what you would put in my mouth we could have some intelligent discourse.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. slim Texican Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    410
    and opinions are like... um.... "IceHoles" so, nobody is right? one thing is obvious, it Ain't for the oil! at a buck seventy two a Gallon for gas nowdays..gezz..
     
  8. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
    So you presume everyone who was for the war accepted in on false pretenses eh? How utterly arrogant.

    Differently, because they were a paid ally of the United States.

    So, politics make for strange bedfellows. Shocking. Too advanced for you? Right.


    No, Sadaam needs to be punished for not performing his fucking contracted duty. We made him, he went his own way and it was long since time to reel in that loose fucking cannon, especially considering that... though he may not have liked Al-Queda, he had SO entertainment to gain from allowing them to play in his yard, in order that they recruit and train. I'd guess he'd probably even fund them such that they take us down. He had to have hated us for having fucked with him, so he was too much of a risk to leave in position considering the US's political perspective post 9-11.

    So you don't think it's possible that this is one of the reasons we reeled him in? We can't change the past, but we can effect forthcoming effents to some extent.

    So you fight propaganda with rhetoric! Well done. I see how many facts you've affirmed here. I know of at least one that you've put on display for all to see.

    As if you have the sense to recognize "truth"? Bad joke.

    LOL. Always looking down from your imaginary throne eh? Perhaps we're ALL decieved to some degree. No... that's silly eh? It's everyone but you, who can't even manage his life, who has been deceived.

    Thanks for looking out for all of us, douche.

    Cold up in the NW this time of year? Is your blanket statement to keep you warm? I don't think you know the first thing about tough.

    Would that make you a limp-dick? Yes I do think so.

    Do you think the masses are down with the nuances of international politics? Do you think that "weapons of mass destruction" might just be a psychologically advantageous term for "big threat"? If I hire you to fix my computer and I'm computer illiterate, should you tell me all about the variety of memory registers on the motherboard, their hex addresses, bits, etc.? Perhaps I should just tell you "your computer was broke, you hired me to fix it, so I did". Now, in a perfect world, the "spin" and political jockeyign would be significantly toned down, but as it has recently reached epidemic proportions due the whole 'information age' thing, the system now has to struggle to find a way to balance itself out. In essence, this conversation is a minute part of that effort, though it could possible serve toward pushing the system farther out of equilibrium.

    The beauty of a representative republic is vast IMO, but the main cause of it's merit IMO is that it accounts for specialization. It would be horribly innefficient for everyone to be completely informed, all the time regarding political crap.

    What about murder to stop murder? What about accidental deaths to stop murder? What about murder to save yoru child? What about murder to save the probability of a nuke going off in NYC if you know the likelihood is 90%? What if it's 60%. Okay what about 20%. You know there is a 1 in 5 chance that a bomb will kill 6 million in NYC, which can be averted if you drop a bomb on an apartment building in toronto, though it's right next to a school who has all the students on the playground at 10 random times during the day for 10 minutes at a time. Do you drop the bomb or take the chance that could result in 6 million dead?

    That you would think the President of the United States of America would casually undertake the likely destruction of any person, is a despicable accusation on your part. There are no easy choices at that level. It's easy for you to spew your hypocritical, thoughtless rhetoric on a message board though eh? I can do the same thing. How important of us. How fair.

    Technically POTHEAD, you are a criminal too... no? Oh that's right, it's about murder eh? Yeah the president is murdering people. It's his fucking job. He has to figure out the route that the least americans and secondly the least people are murdered over his term.

    What a comprehensive view you've supported. How exactly is the world more dangerous now? I'd say it's "as dangerous as it is", especially consideirng that it is quite obvious that we had previously underestimated exactly how dangerous it already is... eh? No?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    As if YOU are the authority of truth? LOL. Do you have all the facts? How DO you manage? It it your horrible attitude, lack of character, obnoxious personality or horrific emotional retardation that deludes you into your superior attitude?

    And you can delude yourself in a world of denial, misery and rhetoric. You're a brilliant example of it. Pathetic wretch.

    I would not trust that your idea of "nobility" wouldn't make the average person puke on you.

    Since you don't seem capable of comprehending the issues at hand, your opinion on the matter comes across as rather vacuous. Of course it appeals to the naive.
     
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    Wes,

    Stop running around squalling like an imbecile. Your response addresses me in the context of your long-standing attitude problem. Try it once addressing me in the context of the topic.

    Otherwise, keep your holy mission to yourself and stop mucking up discussions.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
    Gee, when I offer the same advice... you ignore it. OH SHIT! You're the BOSS! I FORGOT. I'm SO sorry Mr. Cunt. I'm so insensitive sometimes. I'm just too dumb and irrelevant!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    LOL.

    Why should I give a shit what you want me to do? I can tell you that what you want me to do might be negatively correlated to my actions... but for the most part I sincerely do not care what you want me to do.

    LOL. Something kettle-related? Pot and blackness. I dunno.

    Your failure to see the facets of the post that did address your vacuous nonsense only fuels my argument.

    You are not privy to my motivations, no matter how real your perception of them seems to you.
     
  11. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    in tiassa's world everybody is perfect, except the USA

    the tyrants and murderers get a free pass, while the USA are evil and sinister, no matter what

    with so much goodness and rhiteousness in you, tiassa, i'm surprised you're not elected President
     
  12. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
    Doing pretty good thanks. Need to get more excercise I suppose. Meh.

    Anyway, I thought my criticism was obvious enough that if you thought about it for a minute, you'd see it.

    Now that I've re-read it, I think I see what you mean. For some reason I put what you were saying in the context that you were saying "the US SUCKS!", in which case I think there's an obvious double standard in the words I quoted. On the re-read though, I see what you mean. You didn't necessarily create that context. Re-reading the broader context of your posts I can see where I think I got the idea, but I don't think that's a valid conclusion, so I apologize for having jumped to it.

    Thanks for pointing it out.
     
  13. Mr. Chips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    954
    Oh, well, I do believe that the US sucks but that is besides the point. Heck, I'm of the opinion that all nations suck, big time. In your comments to tiassa you did much the same thing with some added colorful insult but I always expect those weird twists of meanings and the crass low stooping in an online forum.

    An apology is a start though I would much rather you look to improve yourself and see if you can get out of being in such a sorry state. Ultimately we're all in this togethor whether anomie leads to blind allegiance to these failing institutions or not. Misperception is more an enemy than any human anywhere.
     
  14. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
     
  15. Silkie Registered Member

    Messages:
    16
    Let's see, you give Saddam two years notice that you are coming in and he's surrounded by countries sympathetic to him (at least so far in their mutual hate of us).

    You don't suppose any WMD's were moved to Syria or Iran?

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.................

    They wouldn't do that!!!!!!!!!! Would they????????????
     
  16. Hesomagari Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    135
    Really, Wes, the answer is quite simple.

    The USA could sort out Iraq real quick. Just flatten the lot of them....

    Like it says here..... in some of the responses to this

    http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1118837/posts

    These guys really know what they are talking about.

    Perhaps you'd like to join in with them.

    After all, they are the only ones who can possible save the world, right.

    sarcasm off.
     
  17. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    Hesomagari -

    Thank you for that link. Compelling story, hilarious quotes. Quote of the week:
    ° (for formality's sake, a link)

    I just found that ironic because an associate was telling me, just the other day, how American violence has nothing to do with religion.
     
  18. DeeCee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,793
    No. They just lack imagination.
    Dee Cee
     
  19. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
    Why would we do that? This is about government. There is no direct problem with the Iraqi people excepting those who try to kill us.

    Those guys are soldiers, trying to keep the peace. They are not required to 'know what they're talking about'. Their job is "keeping the peace" and secondarily "acting as bait" I guess. It's ultimately better (from the perspective of the US government) that they shoot guys with RPGs in Iraq than in Chicago.

    Why?

    Did someone mention something about people putting words in other's mouths? Yeah.

    Ulitmately, the problem is competing views of what exactly comprises "saving the world", don't you think?
     
  20. Hesomagari Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    135
    O come now wes... if the boot was on the other foot, and the USA was invaded some time in the future, by, say, China, (sorry, saved from a fate worse then Bush) do you think all the american citizens would stand by and allow it to happen, thinking that China could give them a better form of government than their own?

    What did you expect the Iraqi people to do?

    Lie down and say "yes please"?

    Or did you believe the Bush line that the ordinary Iraqi citizen would welcome being "invaded", for their own good?

    All Bush has done is created a situation where, yes, he captured Saddam who they all hated, but now, they hate Americans even more than they hated Saddam.

    I think that everyone who thinks that the USA is doing the right thing, should go along and help them out.

    I mean, they are so short of "volunteer" soldiers, that some of them have had their year long stint extended by three months. I'd just like to see if those people who think that everything that's happening in Iraq is so "right" and "proper".... whether if you joined them to continue the "good work", your views might change.

    But then, I know that, as even a volunteer addition to the armed forced in USA it is a crime to either criticise Bush, or to disagree with orders, so even if you changed your mind, and didn't like it, you'd be forced to keep your mouth shut, or go to jail. What a wonderful concept of democracy that is...

    No, I don't. Bush's version of a safe world, is to eliminate terrorists in Afghanistan, and wherever else they are, and despots by such means as enforcing "democracy" on Iraq.

    Then, according to him, the world will be safe.

    Who will he take on next? Kim Il Jong? After all, he has killed far more of his own people than Saddam ever had. And has North Korea in far more of a desperate position than Saddam ever did. And further, actually HAS WMD.

    In fact, if you compare the two, surely KIJ would have been a better choice in the interests of a countrys people. But no. Some imagined connection between OBL and Saddam was the magic dust that decided who to go after.

    All for 2,795 dead in NY city. And in reply, the USA has killed how many in Afghanistan and Iraq? And how many more will die, just so that Bush thinks "justice" has been done? Already the "equation" makes the motives of the USA look pretty sick.

    Not to mention all the DU being left behind.... Oh, but I forgot. DU isn't an issue to pro-war people is it. It's perfectly safe

    My version of saving the world, is to get rid of the factors that started the terrorism in the first place.

    One of the things that would involved would be to remove the attitude of the american administration, that its okay for them to continually interfere in the politics/business sector of any country that they feel should do it their way.

    And they do that all the time. Everywhere. Here, Australia, China, wherever they think that trading doesn't go in their favour.

    The key, is to remove the US attitude that the whole world should revolve solely around the military, political, business and pharmaceutical future "needs" of the USA.

    To those of us from afar, who have "suffered" at the hands of these attitudes, its simply a blinding revelation of the obvious. But for those in the world who consider that "the most powerful nation in the world" can do no wrong, I guess they will never see it....
     
  21. You give up a lot of your rights when you volunteer to serve in the U.S. military. Some people cannot handle the sacrifice. Those who can feel that in surrendering their freedom they are insuring the safety of their country and protecting their future rights. I apologize to those who feel that they have suffered from the American forces. We thought that most people did not enjoy being ruled by someone who was so ruthless that they would use WMDs on their own populations. I personally do not care if we were looking for WMDs or ice cubes in the desert. America had to send a message that if you attack us on our home soil you will pay a price. Terrorist are spread throughout the world and feel that they are untouchable. America said that the way to stop terrorist attacks is to attack unfriendly governments that support terrorism. Saudi Arabia may have more terrorist in their country but at least their government is reasonable. When America participated in a regime change in two countries that supported terrorism it convinced several other countries that they might want to rethink their terror partners.
     
  22. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,846
    I don't think that's a comparable scenario.

    If I am utterly militarily defeated, I see no point in killing soldiers excepting attempts to sway the bleeding hearts. That can be effective as you demonstrate. The US is giving them their country. There was a dictator in power that took "100% of the vote". It's basically our fault that he was there. I think it's the least we could do to take him down for them.

    "Lie down"? LOL. They "layed down" a long damned time ago and found themself under the boot of a dictator that we set up for them. I don't blame some of them for taking pot-shots at us, but I don't think the idea of them "laying down" is even pertinent. If a determined leader is in place on the part of the US, there is no chance for them to win militarily. It's stupid to try, but again, I understand that people's emotions get them and other people killed, all the time. That's just kind of part of the deal. I think it's prudent to try to minimize that kind of thing, such that people have some sort of faith in the stability of society, but it can be very reasonable to take your medicine now in order to avoid major surgery later. There's never a gaurentee it will work and this way, I'd guess that less people have died that would have in the same amount of time if we'd done nothing, so I think it's a good first step. Hopefully something good can come from all this sacrifice now.

    If Sadaam were in charge of the United States, I'd welcome an invasion. The US is not attacking Iraqi civilians unless those civilians attack them. In the same case I wouldn't be too worried about the occupying force harming me, especially if I knew they were in the process of trying to build a better government for me, one that didn't include a masochistic leader.

    I don't think you can support that statement. Certainly pockets of people hate the US, and they have changed somewhat since the war began, but most of the Iraqis think it's better that we invaded than not. It's interesting to me that I'm not sure that their opinion as of today is necessarily pertinent to the big picture. The question is, will the world be better off in the future for this? I still think yes, though I do not insist that is correct. It could go either way. I would say however, that failure to act would end in the same action as a failure of the current plan, though perhaps sooner. That is actually better IMO, as a confrontation of that sort I believe is better now, than when tech. increases the military power of the average combatant (or terrorist, depending on your perspective) 10 or 30 years from now.

    I've done my time, thanks. Oh, and I think that's ridiculous. I think Bush should be our president again, that doesn't mean I'm going to the white house with him.

    Been there. Being a soldier can suck. I'm familiar with it. Fact is that when you sign up, you sign up for whatever. While a tour extension does such from the perspective of the individual soldier, they can handle it. It's their job.

    What is happening in Iraq right now is a clash of a lot of ideals. It's not "right" or "proper" but the best of a bad situation as far as I can see. My guess is if I were there, it would only bolster my opinion that this is a noble effort. I'm no longer in the military though, and have no plans to rejoin.

    That's no crime. If you don't want to be criticized in doing so however, it'd help if you tried to construct a fair, thoughtful argument. Pandering to ridiculous ideals only begs criticism.

    As long as orders are lawful, and you agreed to follow them, you would have to be a piece of shit not to follow them. That's what soldiers do. No one in the US military has been forced to be a soldier as you noted.

    Assuming that you're talking about soldiers, they shouldn't criticize bush while they're on duty. They can hold whatever opinion they like so long as that opinion doesn't comprimise their function as a soldier. If they don't like that, they are welcome to stop beign soldiers. It's quite easy to get yourself discharged from the military without getting put in prison.

    I think that's an intentionally distorted and simplistic perspective on the scenario. I think you create it to support your presumptions, as you don't seem do be considering anything, but condemning all aspects of it like a typical partisan.

    Ack. I simply don't have the energy to go through the rest of it at the moment. I might try to get back to it later.
     
  23. Repo Man Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,955

Share This Page