this war sux [Archive] - ActionScript.org Forums

farafiro

03-24-2003, 08:14 AM

I wanted to start a thread like this, but didn't to see what others think.
We are here - as Egyptian - are a part from the rrgion here, and all of cource don't want the war. And I think all the world do but all for different reasons.
Some here for just a religion reasons, other - me with - for: Why the war, the Amerocan in the last Gulf-war said and showed the world that they can get the underware size of Saddam, and now they say we can't get him without a war.
They started it with "For these damned weapons" and now "For kicking Saddam out"
Other want it for getting some benifits, like land, oil,......

But anyway, war is Evil >> the world agrre, but does these politicans belong to the world we live in
The most of the Iraqi ppl don't want Saddam but they would kill anyone for entering there country, and it's a fact I know it.
But if they don't want him, so why killing them
Also, I see, here in TV's American, English, Spanish and some other who involved in this war, that the ppl there doesn't want the war
so, this is going to start getting bigger in the mind:
"The ppl want this" BUT "The politicans do that", hmmmmm so
how come these came to be the rulers of our countries

Sad what is the world going to.

Mortimer Jazz

03-24-2003, 09:43 AM

I don't agree with war but I also think about how Hitler abused the chances he was given and used them to advance and torture/kill many more people as a result, and he didn't have (alleged) access to advanced chemical and Nuclear weapons (most of which were supplied by the West in the first place - doh).

Certainly is a toughie. It's all too easy to go out there and wave the anti-war banner, and although I really want to be out there doing that too I don't think it's that cut-and-dried.

Does anyone else find it odd that Bush declares war, followed by the words 'God Bless America'? Forgive me if I'm wrong but isn't one of the 10 Commandments 'Thou shalt not kill'?

I'm sure I've said this before but it just strikes me as odd. Hypocrytical is the word. Then again, anyone who kills under the name of religion is a hypocrite. Didn't early Christians choose to die rather than hit back? I'm not religious and I wouldn't hurt a fly. Go figure.

black

03-25-2003, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by farafiro
I wanted to start a thread like this, but didn't to see what others think.
We are here - as Egyptian - are a part from the rrgion here, and all of cource don't want the war. And I think all the world do but all for different reasons.
Some here for just a religion reasons, other - me with - for: Why the war, the Amerocan in the last Gulf-war said and showed the world that they can get the underware size of Saddam, and now they say we can't get him without a war.
They started it with "For these damned weapons" and now "For kicking Saddam out"
Other want it for getting some benifits, like land, oil,......

But anyway, war is Evil >> the world agrre, but does these politicans belong to the world we live in
The most of the Iraqi ppl don't want Saddam but they would kill anyone for entering there country, and it's a fact I know it.
But if they don't want him, so why killing them
Also, I see, here in TV's American, English, Spanish and some other who involved in this war, that the ppl there doesn't want the war
so, this is going to start getting bigger in the mind:
"The ppl want this" BUT "The politicans do that", hmmmmm so
how come these came to be the rulers of our countries

Sad what is the world going to.

Let's open our eyes to see what will happen next~ :rolleyes: God bless those innocent people.

jubei

04-01-2003, 02:25 AM

I don't see how killing innocent people aids them in any way, to be honest. This war is full of hypocrisy and bullshit, and it's so -blatant-, it's like the world leaders are just ladling it out to people and they're munching it up.

I kinda lost hope after we had that initial huge lot of peace rallies right at the start, and Howard ignored them completely and did what he wanted. That's when i ralised nothing was gonna change his mind. I'll still go to marches, but i sure don't expect them to change anything.

Billy T

04-01-2003, 02:53 AM

Originally posted by snapple
if you researched the matter you would also realise that ALL oil reserves are being looked after by the U.N directly.

can you send me a link to an article or something that details this?

Thanks

djungle

04-01-2003, 05:37 AM

This war really is a tricky question!

But if we look closer it just becomes

1. Bush said it was part of the war on terror thing(We all know now that Saddam doesn't like religous extremists like Ben Laden, and Ben Laden doesn't like Saddam because the country isn't under muslim law).

2. Bush says Weapons of Mass Destruction, which the UN didn't find. No one, except the usa, builds WMD to use them, it is just a form of clout, it is my opinion that Iraq only ever started their Nuclear program to counter Israel in the region.

3. Bush says regime change. After the 1st gulf war the Iraqis had grown pretty tired of Saddam (The regular Jo Iraqi doesn't want to envade other countries) and started to revolt, they were on the verge of taking Saddam out, but then Uncle Sam turns around and saves Saddam!!?!?!?!? The regime change is up to Iraqis. Hell Many people around the world HATE Bush but they won't attack the USA to get him out!

So why is Bush so intent on invading Iraq?
It can't be just the oil, as Snapple said the UN is taking care of that...well kind of...the 'Food for Oil' program actually sells Oil for less than its market value, and guess who is the biggest buyer??? Halliburton, and guess who was its CEO before he went to work for the white house **** Cheney.
Anyways the USA is getting oil cheaper now, so it can't really be the main motive!

But one musn't forget the History.
The CIA has already assisted 2 coups in the short history of Iraq, they are the ones who put Saddams Ba'ath party into power.

I could go on, but I just think the war is wrong and I find it really sad that some people are not getting the full story, or if they are watching CNN they are getting strait-up LIES.

I think all americans should have a look at the Energy Policy that has been written by G.W.Bush administration, and think about their consumption habits, this war is directly related.

Energy Policy Article : http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=5533

Just my 2 cents, maybe nonsense!?!

farafiro

04-01-2003, 06:35 AM

wow djungle, u r a polotition or something?? from where u r ??
Just another little thing to add: Iraq has the most OIL reserves in the world.
Also, have u heared Bush saying two things (me laugh for that 'till crying):
> wow, those Iraqis brings those war-prisoners on the TV, it's againest Geneva rules, and guess what:
USA didn't signed it yet :rolleyes:
>another Bush wise words (and u can hear his echo --- Blair): we will free Iraq, but he didn't say from who?? most of the people in this area - middle east - started to remember what the UK has did before in the last centuries and now the US, so I feel like hell is yet to come.
we have some Iraqi ppl here in Egypt also, that they think will go back to fight with their ppl.

may GOD help us here in the world.

Xansi

04-01-2003, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by farafiro
may GOD help us here in the world.
And may God help those innocent people dying everyday under the "liberators" bombs.

natedawg007

04-01-2003, 07:37 PM

How that idiot (Bush) became president is beyond me! Nothing like a rigged election. Seriously though the leaders of this country (US) have created a shameful act and should be tried for War Crimes. I weep for the future.

The people of Iraq have said time and time again that they don't want a war. To them we are in Iraq to conquer not liberate and bombing these people into Democracy is going to help them, How arrogant are we to think: our way of government is the right way, when it has failed us time and time again.

Thousands of people will die and for what corporate gain for that 11.3% of the worlds oil. Our leaders call it freedom, if that is what they tell each other to sleep well at night. Then God, Allah, what ever higher being you place your faith in help us all.

Do I hate the US, no because I live hear. Am I ashamed of my leaders, yes! very much! For those that believe we are not the instigators of this war. I have news flash get out of your Mc Donald's eating we are the good guys bubble. The United States is not the only country on this planet.

Gandhi once said "We must become the change we want to see."
When this happens then can we have peace in this world.

In conclusion read these articles they are brilliantly written.
http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030307/index.php

Nate-

djungle

04-01-2003, 08:24 PM

Hehe, no, Fafiro I'm not a politician, just a regular Joe interested in History and overwhelmed by this whole political/media circus.

Here is a little quote that I stole from somewhere.
This is something all Extremists, whatever kind, should remember.

"It is easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
- Alfred Adler

Is Bush really living by democracy? Last time i looked at the poles something like 75% of americans were against an intervention in Iraq without the UN.

I think the whole planet should vote at the American Elections, since the whole planet is subject to Americas Foreign Policy.

Xansi

04-01-2003, 08:31 PM

I think the whole planet should vote at the American Elections, since the whole planet is subject to Americas Foreign Policy.
Sad but true.

natedawg007

04-01-2003, 08:34 PM

djungle, I couldnt agree more!

Since we are tossing quotes around hear is one I found.

"the West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."
Samuel P. Huntington

Nate-

Billy T

04-02-2003, 11:17 PM

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2007/stories/20030411005701000.htm

jubei

04-02-2003, 11:23 PM

Noam Chomsky is a legend. Now there's someone who would make a good political leader... he's got all the facts, and can look at them objectively.

Billy T

04-02-2003, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by jubei
he's got all the facts, and can look at them objectively.

what use is that? What the world really needs is someone that can eat big bags of pretzels, pass out in front of the football and smack their head on the way down...that's what I call leadership material and if you aint with me then...ummm...you must be "evil".

DiDi

04-02-2003, 11:56 PM

More Chomsky readings:

Noam Chomsky Archives on ZMAG.ORG (http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/index.cfm)

jubei

04-03-2003, 12:15 AM

Originally posted by Billy T
what use is that?

You're right. What we actually need is someone with charisma, charm, and... a really big chin. I wonder what Bruce Campbell is up to.

Now there's a guy who looks good on television :)

"Gimme some sugar.. baby"

djungle

04-03-2003, 12:25 AM

C'mon guys, you sayin' Bush ain't got Charm,

Bush is sexy, peep this.
http://www.randomdudes.com/bush/bush.html

Billy T

04-03-2003, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by jubei
I wonder what Bruce Campbell is up to.

LOL...well I looked up his website...still have no idea who he is though...

Billy T

04-03-2003, 12:28 AM

Originally posted by djungle

Bush is sexy

LOL :D

some of those are VERY well done

jubei

04-03-2003, 12:52 AM

Bruce Campbell? Star of the Evil Dead series... co star in Hercules and Xena... The most well known B-actor out there...

Billy T

04-03-2003, 12:55 AM

well don't I feel dumb :rolleyes:

;)

DiDi

04-03-2003, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by djungle
Bush is sexyGross... :eek: :eek: :eek:

godonholiday

04-03-2003, 08:23 AM

If we (im from the uk) are liberating the iraqy people, then why are the americans the ones pulling down all the pictures of sadam????????
why are the americans putting up their flag!!!!!!!

shouldn't the iraqy people be doing this?

the coalition will not be welcome 1 day after sadam is dead!

this is not about sadam, this is not about oil!!!

wake up, this is about the export of democracy!!!!!!

you either conform or you get knocked down, america loves it!! and as we all know , it works so well in their own country!!!!
what a joke!

im not for the war, but we are at war and there are some things that need addressing.

moral is very important to soldiers, if all they see is pic of people calling them murders then their moral will drop, they will loose concentration and will be at greater risk!!!!!!!!

they are doing a JOB!

my peny and my pound!!

Billy T

04-03-2003, 08:34 AM

Originally posted by godonholiday
they are doing a JOB!

yeah..do what you're told no matter how wrong it is. I don't want to cause any offence (graphic_freak has already mentioned that he has a relative over there and I hope that he/she returns safely) but I can't subscribe to this "ok oppose the war but still support the troops" mentality...without these people that get paid to kill, the war wouldn't be possible...

godonholiday

04-03-2003, 08:43 AM

yeah and with out troops hiler would have walked all over us and our grandparents would be dead you wouldnt be here and niether would the computer your sat at, the army where the biggest investers in IT they pushed for the development of new tech.

i cant handle this " if we all loved each other we wouldnt have no war"

face the facts and live in prez!!!!

people out here feel they have been hard done by, most of them have,

the west messed everything up, by pushing our belifs on other people,

we need to face reality

it is so easy to watch the tv and see people shoot at each other!!! just like fireworks oooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh

you can be against war, most people are but the truth is, it solves prob in the short term and generates lots of money!!!! and keeps hicks in power!!!

the short term i hear you loaugh, well no one really cares about the next generation and the one after that, people are greedy and want it all now!!!

Billy T

04-03-2003, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by godonholiday

i cant handle this " if we all loved each other we wouldnt have no war"

are you putting words in my mouth or are you talking about people in general?

godonholiday

04-03-2003, 09:08 AM

im sorry i guess a little of both,

this is why we have problems in the world,

people in general dont agree on eevrything

no ones right or wrong it just depends on how you look at it or how your are being forced to look at it due to a cercumstance?

it doesnt mean kill each other but it put people in the poss where they want to be right and defend that ?

bluegel

04-03-2003, 09:18 AM

so what if the war sux or not! does it really matter.

I didn't agree to going to war in the first place, but we have now and we can't change that.

There are people out there that we care about, and we should be supporting them not protesting or arguing against this war. They need our support, and we should support them until we can bring them home.

godonholiday

04-03-2003, 09:26 AM

yeah thats another thing im not to sure on,

people say they did not agree and that there should be a vote for things like this and that the gov (in england anyway) is not acting on their behalf.....

i dont agree, our gov is voted in power in an election, we then intrust that person to do the job.

we ask them to make dess that we dont want to make, arn't as a nation well educated enough to make.

if you ask the general pub if we should hava a single currency and join the euro they will tell you they dont want to loose the history of the pound!!!

see all our history is in our money, are these people stupid??
no,
they just dont know the facts, i dont know how to work out all the interest i am paying on stuff how am i supposed to work out if it is gonnan be a goodthing for our econimy or not????

some time we just dont know everything, we dont need to half the time.

that why we have goverments they make the diss and we put them in power!

Billy T

04-03-2003, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by bluegel
but we have now and we can't change that.

...we should be supporting them not protesting or arguing against this war.

so if there is something going on that you feel is wrong, you should just shut up because its already happening and there is nothing you can do about it? you can't be serious...

bluegel

04-03-2003, 09:33 AM

we might have put the goverment in power as a people, but then saying that you are now saying we all lose freedom of speech.

I mean, whoever put Tony Blair in power was stupid in the first place (I mean, I didn't vote for Labour), but if you are saying that we have to entrust the goverment with everything we do, then what do all those people do that don't agree with Labour and Tony Blair, if we are not allowed to have a freedom of speech.

And whats all this rubbish about freedom of speech, if we put a rubbish goverment in power that don't actually listen to their people.

bluegel

04-03-2003, 09:35 AM

Billy T,

there are different ways of going about it. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have our say.

But if you were out there fighting and you saw the protests against the war and things that say not im my name, how would you feel about that. you would think people didn't care about what you are doing for the citizens of Iraq.

There are different ways to have your say...

xxlm

04-03-2003, 10:11 AM

Ok, lots of things have been told.
Most of them are true (oil, and so on)...

But there is somethingn I want to add.

DON'T U THINK THAT THIS WAR COULD BE THE RESULT OF THE 11 SEPTEMBER!!!! *hard memory*

What I mean?
Hmmm. That at this date, America have been defeat. America have lose his powerful face.
So for me, you know this war is as everydody said not really for the reason bush said... Yeah oil and so on...

But I think there is REVENGE in it.. ok? Look... Since when Bush is sending ship and some other army stuff near iraq? Bush always know that he wil do war to iraq... Ok? He can't find Ladden? Anyway there is his friend Saddam... He knew that the army he sent will be useful...
Do you look the media? Ladden Ladden Ladden.. And then when Americe could not find Ladden and search was unuseful, then things coming up with iraq...Mean sending man to see if WMW exist or not and so on... All of this is FAKE. America find a way to make war for oil of course but for another reason too...
TOO SHOW THE WORLD THAT THEY ARE NOT WEAK!!!

Ok this is what I think...
Remember I'm not an english native man. So i tried to say what i feel. Perhaps i done t in the wrong way, but i tried...

CU

Mortimer Jazz

04-03-2003, 12:15 PM

They're all good points.

There was a documentary the other night on British tv about a plan to kill Hitler. If they had killed him one month earlier than the actual end of the second wolrd war they could have saved over a million lives. Imagine what a pre-emtive strike could have avoided. Being an idealist is lovely, but there will always be terrorists willing to exploit any given opportunity.

I have no doubt this war was needed. My whole problem is with the timing, the main instigator and his motives.

The Bush administration has to be the most openly corrupt developed world administration I've ever witnessed. All his main advisors have been accused of Fraud (Tom, D1ck & Larry - one of them was even involved in the Enron scandle for goodness sake!). Bush himself was accused of fraud but let off by a panel of judges appointed by his father, and he didn't even win the bungled election did he, but yet again he was voted in by a panel of judges I believe.

Didi said one if the most sensible things I've heard.... about why she went on a protest, in this thread
http://www.actionscript.org/forums/showthread.php3?postid=117880#post117880

People must be allowed to express exactly how they feel. The idea that people who are against war should shut up and support the troops is arse. If you join the army and are prepared to kill people then you must have a deep self belief that you are doing it for the right reasons, regardless of what other people think. If we all suddenly supported wars once they were underway we'd be sending out the wrong message to governments - "Hey George/Tony, we're anti war but don't worry, you go ahead and start one and then we'll all be 100% behind you" - no!

baby_annie

04-03-2003, 12:23 PM

I just want to say: "I have WAR !"
I think Bush and US governement are totally wrong. But they're have power and army, so they can do everything. Saddam is not a bad president. He was voted by Iraqi people. The US gover just want to control the oil, and they want show us they're very strong, they're No1 in the world.
I totally oppose this war.
And I don't want american soldiers die 4 this illegal war, too.
:mad: I'm vietnamese, so I know what is the war. But the bad is always lost, I think and hope so.

xxlm

04-03-2003, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by baby_annie
The US gover just want to control the oil, and they want show us they're very strong, they're No1 in the world.
yep as I told two post before.. ;)

Mortimer Jazz

04-03-2003, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by baby_annie
Saddam is not a bad president ???????

xxlm

04-03-2003, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by Mortimer Jazz
???????

yeah !!!!! :(

bluegel

04-03-2003, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by Mortimer Jazz
???????

thats exactly what I was thinking!

Billy T

04-03-2003, 12:45 PM

compared to Satan...

xxlm

04-03-2003, 12:53 PM

pls don't offend satan... lol

Billy T

04-03-2003, 12:55 PM

;)

Billy T

04-03-2003, 12:58 PM

Originally posted by Mortimer Jazz

People must be allowed to express exactly how they feel.

so why did you edit your post? hehe :p

xxlm

04-03-2003, 01:13 PM

Xansi

04-03-2003, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by bluegel
But if you were out there fighting and you saw the protests against the war and things that say not im my name, how would you feel about that. you would think people didn't care about what you are doing for the citizens of Iraq.
So you really think that US and UK are saving the Iraq people? :eek:
I can't belive it, maybe you only watch CNN and BBC, and that's the reason why you belive that this war it's really for "free Iraq", but here in my country there is no censure on tv and newspapers and we can have one vision of the conflict more impartial. And belive me, here no one supports this invasion, we think "nobody on Iraq asked mr. Bush or mr. Blair to go and rescue them, why they are attacking?", for us it's just a cynical invasion caused by various motives, none of them humanitarian.
Maybe XXLM it's right, America have lose his powerful face and needs to recover it.

bluegel

04-03-2003, 03:09 PM

Like I said, I'm not saying that the war is right, but the reason the Iraqi people haven't asked to be "saved" as such is cos they are scared of Saddam. The regime of their life is not one that I personally would like to live in.

I haven't actually been watching the news, I've heard what some Iraqi people think first hand as I know people who live out there.

Xansi

04-03-2003, 03:13 PM

OK, but even if Saddam are a monster (it is a monster, we all agreed on that) and the people in Iraq hates him, there si no reason to go there and "rescue" them.
Nobody have the right to do that.

bluegel

04-03-2003, 04:12 PM

so if you were there, wouldn't you like someone with power to come and "rescue" you then?

Xansi

04-03-2003, 04:25 PM

OK, let's recue them, some ugly bad guys will die, but who cares, some innocent people will die, but who cares, all the world will hate us & and fear us, but who cares, we have the power to do it and our mission in this world it's to be the liberators of the opressed, we'll free them all.
Only one question: if the people of Iraq wants to be liberated, why are they fighting the liberators?
Why some of them who live outside Iraq are returning to fight? You can say that only the Iraqy army are fighting, but Basora are still under Iraq power because the people are fighting too.
Have you heard about "self determination"?

Ricod

04-03-2003, 04:26 PM

*if you don't like long reads, skip this post. It matters not for anyone except myself.*

First, I doubt we'll come out of this discussion ... ever. Humans as a species are too self-centred to look at facts uninfluenced. Ofcourse, this is needed for survival and since we live in a survival of the fittest system, we want to be the fittest. I also think xxlm has a good point. After all, it's not like all of a sudden the Iraquese were in trouble. How many years since Saddham was elected ? Then, if the US government wants to save them, why didn't they do it in the last Gulf War ?

It's the 'big bully'-strategy, so to say. Fear is a strong weapon, and nothing is more fearfull than death. Even those thus religious they believe in life after death still fear death, wether out of that little spark of doubt or just because its in our genes. And the US is bringing a lot of death.

I think it's very one-sided to worry about the soldiers out there. Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware that we need soldiers. But the irony is, that we only need them, because they exist. We wouldn't need them if there weren't any other soldiers. Reality, unfortunately, is thus, that every country has a army (or a self defense force). Even the smallest of tribes have their warriors.

Oh, a lot of soldiers aren't fighting because they believe in freeing or helping others. Ask most soldiers for their motivation for joining the army : I just want to blow up stuff. Ofcourse, there are exceptions, but most hide behind those. Those who really want to help others, do so by actually helping them, not by killing them. Firemen for instance, they believe in helping others.

*Yes, I was already accused of writing novels before, but it's just cuz I talk a lot about matters that need talking about. (hey, you don't think I get a post count like that just from helping others right ? I'm not Jesse / Billy T / farafiro / Cyan Blue you know)*

We are raised with double morals and there are influences everywhere. On one side you keep hearing about the horrors of war and that nobody deserves that, except those that bring it upon others. On the other hand there's the entertainment industry. I, for example, play a lot of video games, watch movies, read comics / manga etc. I'd say about 45% is violence, 50% is sex and the rest is about 5% or so (just an estimate ofcourse, not a statistic. Anyone has them ?). War has become entertainment. Look at the news. Misery sells. Why ? Because it makes those without feel better about themselves. It's an annoying habit. We cannot evaluate our own lives without having some comparison. On one side there's what we want (for some people its money, fame or whatever) on the other what we don't (well, we all know what we don't want : and being in a war is one of em). Even those who are against war, are so for a part from this. There's a mixture of pity, and perhaps even guilt. After all, we have so much already. (we complain if our Flash project isn't working right away ... you think the Iraquese wouldn't love to have problems like that right now ?) Those who are for war, obviously never been on the receiving side of it.

And yes, for you all start, here's my guilt. I'm not doing anything about it, except by expressing my feelings. I'm well aware that if Bush isn't even listening to those he's supposed to represent, he's sure not going to listen to some guy he's never met, never heard of or has any proof of knowing what he's talking about.

With war, there are no rules and saying sorry doesn't bring back any of the people you killed. Saying that you're doing it to help them might clear your conscience, but that doesn't mean that it is okay for a fact. Never think you're being rightuous just because you think you are. We see the world the way we are taught to look at it.

natedawg007

04-03-2003, 05:49 PM

There is no doubt that Saddam is a murderous tyrant. But that characteristic does not distinguish him from several dozen other rulers around the world. If overthrowing a dictator is sufficient reason for the United States to go to war, one must ask how many other holy crusades are in our future. When does the United States attack North Korea's Kim Jong Il, Cuba's Fidel Castro, Sudan's genocidal slave-masters or Burma's murderous military junta - to name just a few of the world's most odious regimes?

The United States is supposed to be a constitutional republic. As such, the job of the U.S. military is to defend the vital security interests of the American people. U.S. troops are not armed crusaders with a mission to right all wrongs and liberate oppressed populations.

djungle

04-03-2003, 06:29 PM

so if you were there, wouldn't you like someone with power to come and "rescue" you then?

C'mon,
I hardly call bombing civilians rescuing.

What if France, Germany & Russia decided to Bomb america to rescue americans from their dictator?
It's the same thing!

ABSURD!!!

xxlm

04-03-2003, 06:39 PM

yep...

Billy T

04-03-2003, 08:48 PM

this guy kind of looks sad but I don't know what he's whinging about - he's just been liberated for crying out loud...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/02/1048962814432.html

maybe it's just the angle of the photo...

Xansi

04-03-2003, 08:53 PM

...yep, it's the angle.

djungle

04-03-2003, 09:07 PM

US officials had criticised Al-Jazeera for allegedly presenting a one-sided version of the US-British war on Iraq.
I don't know if I should laugh or cry at this!

CNN is showing a two-sided version!...British and American:rolleyes:

natedawg007

04-03-2003, 09:08 PM

That is very powerful seeing that man.

What gives us this right to give and take away life as we see fit. This is shameful. Unfortunatly that families death will be reduced to Collateral Damage in the media so us Americans can sleep and not have to think about it. Its disgusting!

When I see sh@# like this it just brings tears to my eyes.

Xansi

04-03-2003, 09:08 PM

that war is not against Irak, or not only against Irak. It's against any present or future intent to disobey. It's a war against rebelliousness, this is, against humanity. It is a world war beacuse its effects, and, over all, in the NO that they provoke
*Translated from the spanish*

jubei

04-03-2003, 10:05 PM

Did you see the article linked from that page? Bombing a hospital...

As i said a long long way back in this discussion (where'd you all come from? :)) it's all hypocrisy. I was actually pretty happy when i found out Aussies wouldn't be bombing civilian targets, hospitals and the like. It's sad that we're at a point now where something like that, something that should really be a given, becomes a point which the Aussies use to try to make themselves look more humanitarian.

And to whoever was saying they don't support the troops, i agree, i don't support them either. But I'll be protesting Howard, not them, because he's the guy who can make the decisions.. unfortunately.

Mortimer Jazz

04-03-2003, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by Billy T
so why did you edit your post? hehe :p
Well (smart arse, ) ahem, tere's actually a good reason (HA!).... when I originally typed D1ck (with an i) it got asterix'd out! :p
Funny, I can't type D1ck, but I can type Bush

*looks for a 'mooning-billy emoticon*

natedawg007

04-03-2003, 11:15 PM

That is funny. :D

-vixen

04-04-2003, 09:04 AM

I'm not against the war.. nor am I for it. Im neutral in the matter.

However i do think "SOME... not all.. but some" of these anti war protesters are hippocrits... simply because i see them protesting in the streets and grabbing people out of there cars and beating them up and hurting them.... if your going to protest the war.. YOU dont go around hurting people just because they feel differnt about the war then you... those people need to give there head a shake, and grow up.

As for the war... well I think we need to be supporting our soldiers more... there going out there risking there lives, and all people can think about is whos against the war and who isn't.... pathetic.....

Mind you I'm canadian... not american, but I truely think Saddam is an evil man..... and what people dont like is innocent people dieing..... well thats war and it happins in every war.... it is a fact and protesting and perading around the streets won't do a thing about it.... if you want too do somthing about it... then help out the poor and needy in your own home town, and support the men and woman who are risking there lives in IRAQ right now. You need to put yourself in that persons shoes especially the poor people in iraq and also what it is like to live there as a citizen.... lets just hope the U.S actually helps out IRAQ instead of leaving it to the warlords like they did with Pakistan. The woman still don't have any rights there at all... i personally think they should have waited untill saddam built up his army and everything else... then 15 years later he would nuke your entire home town..... im shure if that happind then you all would be for the war......... akk i ashamed to be a human being.... :rolleyes:

cheers

-v

bluegel

04-04-2003, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by -vixen
As for the war... well I think we need to be supporting our soldiers more... there going out there risking there lives, and all people can think about is whos against the war and who isn't.... pathetic.....

I'm glad someone agrees with me on this one!

and what people dont like is innocent people dying..... well thats war and it happins in every war.... it is a fact and protesting and perading around the streets won't do a thing about it.... if you want too do somthing about it... then help out the poor and needy in your own home town, and support the men and woman who are risking there lives in IRAQ right now. You need to put yourself in that persons shoes especially the poor people in iraq and also what it is like to live there as a citizen.... lets just hope the U.S actually helps out IRAQ instead of leaving it to the warlords like they did with Pakistan. The woman still don't have any rights there at all

I totally agree, well said, perhaps someone here will listen to you, because all they are doing is argueing with each other, when they don't seem to have compassion for others at all.

-vixen

04-04-2003, 09:33 AM

cheers bluegel .. were both 22 and into programming and designing thats cool :p

as for the people arguing over each others opinions.... well that is just as pathetic..... we should respect all and everyones opinions on the war and be compassionate towards everyone in there views... it saddens me when i see adults bickering like 11 year olds.

Mortimer Jazz

04-04-2003, 10:01 AM

I totally agree, well said, perhaps someone here will listen to you, because all they are doing is argueing with each other, when they don't seem to have compassion for others at all.
They don't seem to have compassion for others?? So you're saying. for example, someone like Billy T who doesn't want a war in the first place, and doesn't want to see innocent civilians getting killed has no compassion? Please explain Bluegel? Sorry, but I think that comment is misguided, but I'm sure you didn't mean it in that way and I'm happy to listen to what you are trying to get at.

I also disagree that everyone is arguing. Many good points have been made and I have certainly considered the war from angles I wouldn't naturally have come from thanks to these threads.

What's important is that we look at things from as many different perspectives as possible, and then make an informed decision based on the knowledge we have gleaned, not just disagree with others, close our ears to their points of view and assume we're right - no matter how right we think we are.

Do the old debating trick of arguing FOR something that you're really AGAINST. This forces you to think about many aspects you may have otherwise overlooked or ignored.
We should be playing devil's advocate with ourselves and questioning our own beliefs as much as possible. Give your beliefs a good bashing and see if they still stand up at the end of it. There are serious political implications to everyone supporting a war they don't agree with just because, well, it's started now so we might as well.

To assume "no one listening" would suggest you think you 're right and everyone else is wrong. The person/people who disagree with you are probably thinking exactly the same thing about there point of view. Where will that get us?

You can't reduce this down to a simple formula. It's just not that easy. It isn't a right and wrong situation. It's phenominally complicated. There IS no totally right or wrong answer. That's the whole point.

bluegel

04-04-2003, 10:18 AM

hope you are not having a dig at me here mortimer jazz.

I see that there are two sides to the discussion but the comment about the compassion was correct to some extent.

War isn't right, I totally agree on that, but sometimes we have to go to war for other people's sakes. There are people who need help from other countries and sometimes the only way to go about helping is going to war. However, I totally understand that citizens are going to die, but this is inevitable.

(NB, this might get taken the wrong way, what I am about to say)
Personally, if I lived in the conditions and rules and regulations that some people live in both in Iraq and other countries, and couldn't leave because I was poor or other circumstances, then I would be glad that someone out there was trying to help us. if that meant dying in the process, then so be it.

Mortimer Jazz

04-04-2003, 10:59 AM

no :)
I totally understand where you're coming from, but okay, consider:

If this war was about liberating people then why are Bush/Blair happy to sit back and let Mugabe commit such attrocites in Zimbabwe? One thing is for certain, this war isn't about civil liberties for the Iraqis. It may be about protecting the world from terrorists (for Blair I think it is), but it's most likely about oil. From what I've read there seems to be mounting evidence that Bush already has plans for that oil - which happen to fit in very nicely with his plans to expand the US economy with blatent disregard for the environment - (he refused to sign the Kyoto protocol, he has flouted polution restrictions, yada yada....)

"There are people who need help from other countries"
It depends what you call help. During the Gulf war many Iraqis rose up aginst Saddam and then, when the war was over the West pulled out and left much of the country worse off than before. We didn't support the Iraqi's who helped us and we made conditions much worse for a large part of the population.

Many Iraqis also don't want to be "liberated". We can't decide what's best for them.
Bush declared this war without waiting for UN backing. No backing was offered because the majority of European countries felt it wasn't justified at this time. That should tell us something important. Also, if this war was about liberating people then why was Bush so eager to start war? What was the big hurry? Why couldn't he have complied and waited an extra couple of months?
No evidence has been produced to show Iraq was planning anything has it?

I understand that being realistic, some wars result in more good than harm in the long term, so I see your view about going to war to help people, but that assumes this war is really intended to help them, and given the evidence I'd say that's a pretty big assumption.

bluegel

04-04-2003, 11:28 AM

ok, so you made some good points there, but like I said, its just my opinion.

I don't think that we, in the UK have been given the total truth about why we are at war anyway and Blair has been misguided along the way in thinking that what Bush says is correct. At the end of the day tough, as much as I don't agree with the UK staying by US, Blair didn't really have a choice on the matter.

As for Bush, which stupid american people voted him in in the first place?? His father was just as bad. And yep, I agree, that Bush has alterior motives for this war.

djungle

04-04-2003, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by bluegel
As for Bush, which stupid american people voted him in in the first place??

No need to call americans stupid...

They didn't vote for him anyways;) at least not majoritarily:(

bluegel

04-04-2003, 12:43 PM

I didn't say they were all stupid now, did I!!

djungle

04-04-2003, 12:54 PM

No, you didn't...just the the republican half, I'll settle for that;)

djungle

04-04-2003, 01:15 PM

I think most of the debate on this thread is revolving around a very moral & ethical question...(That should be debated)

Is it right to make war for oil,*cough*sorry:rolleyes:, I mean for the liberating of a people?

If we look at how the American administration reacted(belated though) at the time to Nazi Germany, they were in fact liberating Western Europe from Nazi rule.

But is that the case right now, I mean Iraq hasn't invaded any countries(this time, true). But we musn't forget the (maybe most powerful)propaganda machine that is working for war right now.

It is indeed a very powerful machine, 1986 it made Americans feel that their security was in danger, they felt threatened by.....NICARAGUA...."The army is two days march from our borders". That was complete bullshit, so I am, lets say, skeptical about the real threat that Iraq poses to the world, and the USA for that matter.

On another note check this sh¡t out :
http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_fullstory.asp?id=3828

bluegel

04-04-2003, 02:59 PM

that link is mad

natedawg007

04-04-2003, 03:31 PM

We are not here to change peoples views its your right to have them, just look at all the facts before jumping on the Bush / Blair lets all go to war Bandwagon.

By the way I voted for Gore. Since I didn't vote for the village idiot from Texas and obviously don't agree with the war, I shouldnt have to pay the taxes that will eventually be used for this act of aggression. I guess it's not that simple though.:rolleyes: However the Government should let you choose where your tax dollars go that would be nice.:)

Nate-

bluegel

04-04-2003, 03:35 PM

who hasn't looked at all the facts?

natedawg007

04-04-2003, 03:47 PM

That wasn't directed towards you bluegel I was just making a general statement. Whether you are for or against this war make sure you have done the research to back up why.

If I offended I didn't mean to.

bluegel

04-04-2003, 03:50 PM

ok, cool, I was kinda thinking it was at me, but then again, its been a long day

Xansi

04-04-2003, 03:51 PM

Well, maybe only the time will tell if this war was for free the Iraq people or only for the oil and other reasons.
In the meanwhile, people are dying. :(

Ricod

04-04-2003, 10:35 PM

hum. If arguing is childish, why do it yourself ? Having compassion for the soldiers risking their lives is a good thing. It's not their fault. Ignoring the lives of the Iraqui's is not a good thing. I know someone from Iraq and I can guarantee that he's no threat to anyone. He's worried sick about his parents of which he has no means of contacting to find out wether they're alive or not. But hey, they don't matter since they're not like 'us' or are of economical value, right ? That's so wrong.

The US is on a rampage if you ask me. Almost every nation agreed that soldiers who committed war crimes should be internationally trialed, except for the US. Didn't they took on some kind of motion in which it states that the US will rescue such US soldiers by any means nessecary ? With other words, if a US soldier commits a war crime and captured by the UN, the US army will declare war to rescue their soldier from the horrors of international trial, while as an american soldier, it doesn't need to justify his/her actions cuz by following US orders, (s)he is already just. It also thinks its allowed to attack anything that might be a thread or might become one. With other words, everything not directly under US control. How messed up is that ?

Billy T

04-05-2003, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by Ricod
its allowed to attack anything that might be a thread or might become one.

oh no...that looks like a thread right there...AND ITS COMING RIGHT FOR US!

quick...someone do a [ crosspost] or a [ search] or something to try and stop it!!

;)

just kidding Rico - you spoke some wise words...particularly regarding the value of all human lives being equal...

cheers

djungle

04-05-2003, 12:19 AM

The Death of the ICC (International Criminal Court).

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/icc/us.htm

DiDi

04-05-2003, 02:13 AM

Mentioning your friend from Iraq brought back the worst time of my life Rico...

I admit, I am afraid I can't be completely "dettached" here. Once you lived through three months of impotence while some "power" is bombing the place you were born and you don't know if you're ever to see your family again, trust me, you start looking at the world with another, more critical, eye (see note bellow *).

I am struggling inside with what to think about your arguing (sic) "compassion" and "supporting our guys on the front". Are they doing the job, doing justice, killing as ordered... I don't know. I can't help thinking that with all the reports (even stories and films) about the horrors of war soliders have to endure, about tremendous physical and psychological conditioning they are submitted to "properly do their job", compassion doesn't seem appropriate feeling. Is it possible that somebody today, in this world, enters high professional armies with the true conviction (s)he is going to (only) protect his homeland from (outer and inner) enemy??? Pardon me for saying, but it would seem to me somewhat naive attitude. Here is a quote from Veterans Against Iraq War (http://www.vaiw.org/vet/index.php) site:The present Administration is led by men and women who chose not to serve in the military and today have little understanding of war and no comprehension of its consequences. For all too many of them, war is little more than an abstract exercise in geopolitics.Than I remember reading somewhere that only one US congressman has a son serving in the Army (and he is, most probably, a West Point graduate hardly to be found on the fronline with an enemy), and I figure that those young men and woman are, most probably, from marginal zones with high unemployment rates who saw military career as the easiest way to earn their living. So... I still don't know... I may understand their situation, but I can't feel compassion. I only wish all young people who consider entering the Army could realize in time they may be used as flesh for some obscure geopolitical (thus ECONOMICAL) reasons, which in the end does not favour the people of their country, but stockholders of some multinational giant who don't give a **** about them or the people they'll have to kill. But then, how many would have entered the army service with this consiousness?

Forgive me for being so personal in this post.

Yours,

DD

* NOTE: If anybody has time (and will) to hear the other (less known) side of the NATO bombing Yugoslavia in 1999, check this archives on ZNet (http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/kosovo.htm) (I am not trying to start another futile arguing flame war, but since we are questioning Bush's reasons to bomb Iraq, this might be an introduction to too-late-learned history lesson).

Ricod

04-09-2003, 12:35 PM

There's nothing to forgive if you ask me DiDi. It's only natural that you are being personal when it comes down to personal matters. I haven't experienced war first hand, but from what I know of it, I wish it to noone. Those in favor of war not only have never experienced it either, but also lack empathy. And most are .. "oh well, its not my country, not my friends or anyone I care about." :(

vilehelm

04-09-2003, 02:36 PM

Crap, been reading this thread all morning, hadn't really looked at it till now. have to run to a meeting but wil be back in a bit for more. Just wanted to leave you with this thought.

"Why of course the people don't want war... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."

-Hermann Goering,
Hitler's designated successor, the second man in the Third Reich
April 18, 1946
Nuremberg Trials

In my honest opinion, I really do think this IS about 9-11. I'm not saying it's a good thing. I would also bet money this isn't the last.

:(

Xansi

04-09-2003, 03:31 PM

If you want to know what's going on inside Bagdad, you may check this (http://www.independent.co.uk/) site and read the Robert Fisk articles.

jubei

04-09-2003, 11:08 PM

Robert Fisk is a champion. Is that the one with both him and Noam Chomsky writing for them?

Actually, no, i'm thinking of zMag (http://www.zmag.org/ZMagSite/curTOC.htm)

farafiro

04-10-2003, 07:40 AM

not saying anything about Fisk but you should read from all over the world news, the covering of this war is very strange.
The arab's shows something, the US shows almost half of it, donno about the others (but I have bothe here so I can tell)
Even in the TV, it differs

bluegel

04-10-2003, 10:37 AM

other than this special hour program last night, I don't think the UK newsa tell us much at all.

vilehelm

04-10-2003, 05:46 PM

I was just watching Charlie Rose (http://www.charlierose.com/index.shtm). He's a great interviewer here in the States, does a real no frills interview show, asks great questions of very interesting people.

Today's guest was DR. KHIDHIR HAMZA
Former Director, Iraqi Nuclear Weaponization Program. This guy knew Saddam personally and fled the country several years ago. He brought up a point about the lack of European support for the war that I hadn't considered before.

Essentially he said that "There are many forms of Colonialism" and that the European indifference to the suffering of Arabs was more anti-arab and anti-muslim than any invasion. After all it's not like 12 years of sanctions, diplomacy and occasional bomb strikes have done anything to stop this man from spending the wealth of his nation erecting statues of himself and torturing and sucking the population dry. Things were not gonna change. Leaving Iraq in the dark ages under a madman was more to the advantage of European nations like Germany and France who are too self-absorbed to act for the better of the world and the people of Iraq... (his words, don't flame me)

hmmmmmmmm

Well, I'm certainly not ready to give my American administration any peace prizes but I heard it and thought I would add yet another viewpoint of a really really messed up world. I still hold to my own personal viewpoint that world conflict is the result of various personal pissing matches between a hundred or so egomaniacs (world leaders) and we're all just swept along in the aftermath.

Billy T

04-10-2003, 10:00 PM

Originally posted by vilehelm
world conflict is the result of various personal pissing matches between a hundred or so egomaniacs (world leaders) and we're all just swept along in the aftermath.

yep I remember the last time you said that and I couldn't agree more...

jubei

04-11-2003, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by farafiro
you should read from all over the world news, the covering of this war is very strange

I must say i've always thought of the world media as tools for their respective governments, but it's been so blatant this time around i found it hard to believe. Now i pretty much don't believe anything i see on the news, or read in the papers. There are some sources i trust more than others, like Noam Chomsky, but yeah, forget CNN or Fox. Now i don't even trust our generally leftist ABC...

DiDi

04-11-2003, 07:27 AM

All world leaders are equal, but some are more equal than the others:

The Project for the New American Century (http://www.newamericancentury.org/index.html)The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle; and that too few political leaders today are making the case for global leadership. "What else is new?" you will say... Nothing, except the fact that the Statement of Principles (http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm) of the above ("non-profit educational" :rolleyes: ) organization is dated June 3rd 1997, and is signed by (among others): Jeb Bush, D¡ck Cheney, Dan Quayle, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz: Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power... America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire.

The most "educational" resource is a document called "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century". For those who don't want to fight through 90 pages of it, here are some more quotes:Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.

****************************

The region (Europe) is stable, but a continued American presence helps to assure the major European powers, especially Germany, that the United States retains its longstanding security interest in the continent. This is especially important in light of the nascent European moves toward an independent defense “identity” and policy; it is important that NATO not be replaced by the European Union, leaving the United States without a voice in European security affairs.

***************************

Although Saudi domestic sensibilities demand that the forces based in the Kingdom nominally remain rotational forces, it has become apparent that this is now a semi-permanent mission. From an American perspective, the value of such bases would endure even should Saddam pass from the scene. Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region.

***************************

American landpower is the essential link in the chain that translates U.S. military supremacy into American geopolitical preeminence.

***************************

Since today’s peace is the unique product of American preeminence, a failure to preserve that preeminence allows others an opportunity to shape the world in ways antithetical to American interests and principles.

**************************

Keeping the American peace requires the U.S. military to undertake a broad array of missions today and rise to very different challenges tomorrow, but there can be no retreat from these missions without compromising American leadership and the benevolent order it secures. This is the choice we face. It is not a choice between preeminence today and preeminence tomorrow. Global leadership is not something exercised at our leisure, when the mood strikes us or when our core national security interests are directly threatened; then it is already too late. Rather, it is a choice whether or not to maintain American military preeminence, to secure American geopolitical leadership, and to preserve the American peace.

After the bombing of Yugoslavia postcards like this appeared in Belgrade (authors weren't so precise as of future objectives - must have been the influence of all those "inteligent bombs" :D ):

http://usuarios.lycos.es/didinomade/imagenes/natosoft.jpg

vilehelm

04-11-2003, 02:02 PM

Anyone ever heard of Joe Sacco?

He wrote/drew a little book called SAFE AREA GORAZDE and another called PALESTINE.

You can see a teeny bit of GORAZDE here (http://www.fantagraphics.com/artist/sacco/gorazde_gal/gor1.html). Highly reccomend it.

also...

What I was gonna say before, and was clearly illustrated by the WTC, pro-USA, rally that occured the other day was, I think 9-11 is at the heart of this conflict. I don't think it's oil at all. It's just my opinion but I think the US is still deeply wounded over the attacks and is lashing out. I also think it's led to some surprisingly pro-administration journalism too. I know that the currency for 9-11 sympathy is spent internationally, but I'm tellin' ya, people here still think about it nearly every day. It's a deep psychic wound.*

Most likely this isn't the end. While they have the public whipped into blood-lust the current administration will probably move against other small radical nations that it has a grudge with.

Such as, North Korea, yet another nation we had a conflict with in the past ... even more disturbing to think that we may be in the trend of refighting all of our wars.

* we get upset about something killing 3000 but have nothing to say about tobacco companies and chemical companies that kill 100's of thousands every year. CRACKERS I SAY!!!

Billy T

04-11-2003, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by snapple
ALL oil reserves are being looked after by the U.N directly.

Hey snapple

did you post a link to any info on this?

Thanks

djungle

04-11-2003, 09:28 PM

The UN were managing the oil through the "Food for Oil" program, But that is very likely to be swept aside by the "temporary" american government in Iraq. I wouldn't be suprised if the US government started talking about rebuilding the oil infrastructures before civil infrastructures.

vilehelm

04-11-2003, 10:07 PM

Most likely it will and should be swept aside as right now Iraq is getting hardly anything at all for the real value of their exports. If Iraq is to repay nearly 400 billion dollars in debt it will have to get fair market price for those eports. And yeah the oil infrastructure should be first because something has to pay for it.

btw - that's debt amassed before the war.

An interesting new problem arises now, Iraq had massive debts to Arab nations and other countries. Before the war noone thought they would ever see it as Saddam kept refusing to pay and just erected more statues of himself. Now that he's gone, EVERYBODY wants to get paid.

Essentially Iraq is in world bankruptcy court on monday when the IMF meets, which it would've been anyway but now everyone has a teeny glimmer that they'll actually get paid.

The USA guy at the IMF (forget his name) is actually saying all Iraq debt should be swept away, at least any debt that was involved in the purchase of arms. And all intrest accrued on debts removed (nearly 60 billion). The only way the country will be able to stand is if it has a clean start. Apparentlly it can generate about 25 billion (and right now they're probably only getting about half that maybe less) in oil revenues yearly so they need some help or the burden of debt would crush them.

Sanctions work if the person at the top is affected and gives a rats ass, but in this case more sanctions and "diplomacy" just made horrible conditions worse.

Ricod

04-12-2003, 12:18 PM

I doubt people will start to give reasonable prices for oil to Iraq 'just' cuz it has huge depts and Saddam is finally gone. I mean, noone is giving fair prices to other export products of third world nations (or fair wages for that matter ... why else are those huge factories located in third world countries ... not to help the local community).

vilehelm

04-12-2003, 01:38 PM

What I'm saying is that now Iraq can demand a fair price for their exports. I'm sure OPEC would love to see that.

It's an interesting question, I'm assuming that sanctions will be lifted now that the regime is gone.? I would hope so.

Also they owe the most money to the US, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates (did I say that right?). The largest chunk is from law suits and those will most likely be whiped away*. If they wanted Saddam gone so bad they should except that as payment.

*Excepting about 2billion in personal suits like the american oil worker who was held hostage at the begining of the 1st war and was not given access to Diabetes medicine, went blind and suffered all sorts of nerve damage. Also the families of over 600 Kuwaitis who were taken prisoner and their whereabouts are still unknown.

Ricod

04-12-2003, 01:53 PM

Well, I also hope for that, but let's not forget we're still living in THIS world ...

I heard rumours about Saddam being dead ? Wonder how much truth's in that (this time, didn't they also claim it during the Gulf War ?)

btw, where have you been ? Hardly see you around here lately ... been chatting with the mrs in 20 ton's dungeon ?

vilehelm

04-12-2003, 07:14 PM

I had a 5 week on-site contract job.

For some reason the forums were running like crap the few times that I took a break and looked around.

The chat room seems to be disabled so Kay and I use Yahoo. ;)

Yeah, Clinton tried to zap Saddam in 1998 with Tomahawks. Tyrannical dictators seem to be extremely resilient. I was just reading an article about how Castro is in his 45th year of power in Cuba? Cripes, smokes tons of cigars too.

Ricod

04-12-2003, 07:20 PM

Yeah, makes you wonder. Millions of people die from lung cancer, except for 'ol Fidel ... And Adolf Hitler also survived several direct assasination atempts.

What about our plan here ? Moving already ? (refers to Visa trubbles)

vilehelm

04-12-2003, 07:28 PM

The visa situation is horrible.

In fact...

Any Americans reading this, please call or write your congressional reps and ask them to funnel some of that homeland security to the visa processing centers.

They are swamped and the back log is getting out of control. Kay and I are one of thousands in the same boat. It looks like it's gonna come down to picketing in front of the building to get anything done, and i can only do that after 90 days and have anything happen.

It's been very tough. I have mixed emotions about my country lately. I don't think anyone should be ashamed of where they're from no matter what the leaders of the country do but I swear in the last couple of years the USA has turned into a mean, mean place. I don't get it. CRACKERS I SAY!

Ricod

04-12-2003, 07:35 PM

Must be frustrating :( ... already considered moving to the UK :D ?!
*wouldn't solve the 'evil leaders' problem, but maybe the whole Visa thing is less awkward there ?*

DiDi

04-13-2003, 02:57 AM

Originally posted by vilehelm
I have mixed emotions about my country lately. I don't think anyone should be ashamed of where they're from no matter what the leaders of the country do but...Oh boy... I know exactly how you feel vile... :(
There was a time when I prefered saying I was Italian, just to avoid comments and questions about "evil Serbs"...

About "9-11 or oil" being a heart of war on Iraq, my guess is that it's a question of perspective: (common) American people may belive (or are made to belive - that Goering's quote you wrote before is the clue) that national security problems are addressed by attacking Iraq, but for the current American "leaders" it is the question of "American geopolitical preeminence" (which includes control of oil-rich regions) and new huge bussines opportunities (rummors about Halliburton having the contract for riconstructing Iraq's oil plants even before the war started) while "terrorist-hunt" and "saving poor Iraquis of Saddams dictatorship" are just used as pretext and excuse.

This kind of scenario repeats itself way too often all over the planet in various scales. Question is: can we detect it in time and do we have a way of avoiding it?

I'm still keeping all my fingers crossed for you and pink, wheather it is US or UK... :)

DD

PS: I picked these comments on some other forum and there was no link for the source :mad: . They made me laught (the first and last are my favourites) and I am curious, can anybody give me more insight about the authors?
You know the world is going crazy. When the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a blackguy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named 'Bush', 'D¡ck', and 'Colon'.
-- Chris Rock

President Bush has said that he does not need approval from the UN to wage war, and I'm thinking, well, hell, he didn't need the approval of the American voters to become president, either.
-- David Letterman

In a speech earlier today President Bush said if Iraq gets rid of Saddam Hussein, he will help the Iraqi people with food, medicine, supplies, housing, education - anything that's needed. Isn't that amazing? He finally comes up with a domestic agenda - and it's for Iraq. Maybe we could bring that here if it works out.
-- Jay Leno

President Bush announced tonight that he believes in democracy and that democracy can exist in Iraq. They can have a strong economy, a good health care plan, and they can have a free and fair voting. Iraq? We can't even get this in Florida.
-- Jay Leno

Democrats were quick to point out that President Bush's budget creates a 1 trillion dollar deficit. The White House quickly responded with "Hey, look over there, it's Saddam Hussein."
-- Craig Kilborn

We have it. The smoking gun. The evidence. The potential weapon of mass destruction we have been looking for as our pretext of invading Iraq. There's just one problem -- it's in North Korea.
-- Jon Stewart

War continues in Iraq. They're calling it Operation Iraqi Freedom. They were going to call it Operation Iraqi Liberation until they realized that spells OIL.
-- Jay Leno

Iraq began destroying those missiles they don't have over the weekend. See, President Bush may be the smartest military president in history. First, he gets Iraq to destroy all of their weapons. Then he declares war.
-- Jay Leno

The president boasted at the top of his press conference that we have the support now of Britain and Spain for our attack on Iraq. You know, when you want to make it perfectly clear to the world that you're not an imperialist, the people you want in your corner are Britain and Spain.
-- Bill Maher

vilehelm

04-13-2003, 05:04 AM

Almost all of them are late night talk show hosts.

Chris Rock is on HBO so he gets to be ruder.

John Stewart hosts The Daily Show, a parody news program that is just great. Puts me in stitches everytime I watch it.

Bill Maher is this smarmy guy who hosts Politcally Incorrect where he has a lot of dumb celebrities and maybe one person who knows what they're talking about come on and discuss issues. Rarely funny.

Leno, Letterman and Kilborn are all Standard talk show hosts.

Ricod

04-13-2003, 11:34 AM

*wonders* is Chris Rock doing a show like Arsenio Hall in the 90's ? (or is Arsenio still at it ?) Most of those shows are all pretty similar though ... I still don't get that big fuzz over the Tonight Show between Leno and Letterman. Just cuz it's prime time ?

the Daily Show ... (it's one of the only ones I can see nowadays, since it's on CNN, right ?) I was a Late Night with David Letterman fan when they aired it here in the Netherlands ... it doesn't air anymore. Now we get those lovely Tell Sell commercials for products to get rid of what really troubles most people - exercise and diet miracles to get rid of overweight due to anabundance of food and cosmetic products to flatten your hair in minutes, because "To get your hair this straight and shiny, you have to brush it a 100 times each day. Who has time to brush her hair a 100 times each day ? ". Must be nice if those are your biggest troubles ...