Attack by Iraq? Is Bush stupid?

[peter2002]

Bush said yesterday that an attack by Iraq would cripple the US economy. Iraq is no more a military threat to the USA than Mexico or Canada. Ooh, we're shakin' in our boots.

Well, for one, the US economy has already been crippled by Osama's Al Qaeda, which we have not killed nor captured none of its senior leaders.

Iraq has only shot down 1 US plane since the beginning of the Gulf War. We killed more of our own men from "friendly fire". Iraq is a threat to Israel, not the USA. Let Israel fight its own wars. Jesus ain't comin' back to stop this nonsense, so let them have at it.

The real threat is N. Korea. They have nukes and their leader is a freakin' insane Ghengis Khan wannabe, and their military has ballistic missles that can reach Japan, Alaska or Hawaii. If they don't use them, they are more than willing to sell them to terrorists that will ship them in a container ship to the port of Los Angeles. Bye, bye L.A. How do you think Pakistan got its missles and nukes anyway? It wasn't the nuke ferry.

I say nuke'em now, or we will get nuked later. Which is a better choice? I see you agree...

Pete

http://home.bellsouth.net/s/editorial.dll?fromspage=all/home.htm&categoryid=&bfromind=98&eeid=3774131&eetype=article&render=y&ck=&channel=news

[Kid Red]

I laughed when I heard that as well. Sorry but I seriously doubt Iraq can do anything to anyone outside it's own country, much less come to the US and attack us. Their planes wouldn't leave the no fly zone (they'd be shot down) and it's not like they have a real army much less any number of troops that could fight in the US. Not only that, but how would they get to the us? Iraq has no navy. I just had to laugh.

Iraq could sponsor a terrorist attack and that's about it. Bush is reaching for straws trying to get the public to back an Iraqi war.

Yet we are being peiceful with N Korea? Ok, now I'm confused.

A quote today
Showing no willingness to ease tensions over its nuclear weapons program, North Korea vowed Wednesday to build an army-based "powerful nation" and defy pressure from the United States.

North Korea said it fears a possible U.S. military attack, but President Bush said he was confident the North's nuclear issue can be resolved through diplomacy.

"This is not a military showdown. This is a diplomatic showdown," Bush said Tuesday.

North Korea, in its New Year's Day message, called on its people to unite under "the banner of the army-based policy" and build a "powerful nation" to counter a possible U.S. invasion. The reality is that North Korea is impoverished and dependent on outside food aid, much of it supplied by the United States via the U.N. World Food Program.

Someone is trying to step up and defy the US. Why? Not sure, but Bush would be better focused on N Korea then Iraq right now internationally.

[cc bcc]

I say nuke'em now

Are you nuts? You want to drop a bomb on innoccent people? Just as a precaution?
Jezus, what is this world coming to :/

This is the cold war starting over again. And noone will use their nukes, since it'll mean suicide.

When will Bush realize that countries may feel seriously threatened by trigger happy USA, forcing his will upon every nation, and that may drive dictators to develop nukes out of self defense.

The Netherlands by the way is a nice obidient little country, ready to serve uncle sam anytime. Profit is the driving force of dutch politics. We are to small to be a significant force on this planet.. Unless, of course... we build a nuke of our own!.. perhaps we even have them, I wouldn't know.. Just in case we get tired of being told what to do you know..

But seriously, I'm against all weapons period. But nukes in the wrong hands can be desastrous. But what are the "right" hands? USA, Russia, France, Israel, India? Who started this **** anyway? And who has proven to be crazy enough to use them?
I can't really blaim anyone to wanting to be able to defend themselves. And I hope it's really for defense, and not offense.

Anyway, I don't know what to do about north korea.

[MrMacMan]

Acually what bush is really saying is that we need to fake another attack against the U.S since nothing besides a war will stop our economy from bombing.
yay, fake attacks!

[MacRumorSkeptic]

When Bush says an attack by Iraq it should be known that hes speaking of them sponsoring a terrorist attack of a fairly large scale against the U.S. As for N.Korea we should surgically strike their nuclear facilities and destroy any chance for them to develope nuclear weapons. Diplomacy with the N.Korean leadership is a waste of time. They didnt obey the 1st agreement so why would they obey any others.

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by peter2002

I say nuke'em now
That's the kind of attitude that make people not like America, America is not the be all and end all of the world. Decissions that effect the world are not Bush's to make, they are everyones. Whilst N. Korea maybe braking the rules that is no reason to go in and nuke a nation (as temting as it mught be sometimes).

[MacAztec]

We kill every single person that believes in Allah and is Muslim. Think how much better the world would be.

Have you ever seen a terrorist thats name wasnt "Muhammed Allah Binladen" or some crap like that? How about a caucasian terrorist. What is the ratio of caucasian terrorists to Muslim terrorists? Like 1000/1?

There would be no more terrorism. We would have oil. There would be no real threat to the U.S. (but russia and n. korea). I believe if we went in to N. Korea and took a tough stand that they would back down and stop thinking that their rice eating population can be a world power.

I can see it now....rice powered nukes! :D :rolleyes:

[vniow]

Originally posted by MacAztec
We kill every single person that believes in Allah and is Muslim. Think how much better the world would be.



You can't be serious.


Nobody would be THAT stupid.

[OutThere]

Originally posted by MacAztec
We kill every single person that believes in Allah and is Muslim. Think how much better the world would be.

Have you ever seen a terrorist thats name wasnt "Muhammed Allah Binladen" or some crap like that? How about a caucasian terrorist. What is the ratio of caucasian terrorists to Muslim terrorists? Like 1000/1?

There would be no more terrorism. We would have oil. There would be no real threat to the U.S. (but russia and n. korea). I believe if we went in to N. Korea and took a tough stand that they would back down and stop thinking that their rice eating population can be a world power.

I can see it now....rice powered nukes! :D :rolleyes:


Either you are a very sick and twisted person or you just have a very sick and twisted sense of humor...

[medea]

Originally posted by MacAztec
We kill every single person that believes in Allah and is Muslim. Think how much better the world would be.

Have you ever seen a terrorist thats name wasnt "Muhammed Allah Binladen" or some crap like that? How about a caucasian terrorist. What is the ratio of caucasian terrorists to Muslim terrorists? Like 1000/1?

There would be no more terrorism. We would have oil. There would be no real threat to the U.S. (but russia and n. korea). I believe if we went in to N. Korea and took a tough stand that they would back down and stop thinking that their rice eating population can be a world power.

I can see it now....rice powered nukes! :D :rolleyes:

The ignorance you just showed is appaling to say the least, remember the Oklahoma City bombing? Couple of white guys wasn't it, what would you call the IRA, I'd call their deeds acts of terrorism myself. N.Korea could never be a world power because they eat rice????Does Japan not eat rice, nor China? Maybe N.Korea should beef up on Bigmacs.....:rolleyes:
All Muslims are not terrorists ahole. Comments like yours should ban you from the boards.

[OutThere]

Originally posted by medea

Comments like yours should ban you from the boards.

I agree...MacAztec-you really need to think before you post, no matter how freely you wish to speak. You never know who might read your post.

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by MacAztec
We kill every single person that believes in Allah and is Muslim. Think how much better the world would be.

Have you ever seen a terrorist thats name wasnt "Muhammed Allah Binladen" or some crap like that? How about a caucasian terrorist. What is the ratio of caucasian terrorists to Muslim terrorists? Like 1000/1?

There would be no more terrorism. We would have oil. There would be no real threat to the U.S. (but russia and n. korea). I believe if we went in to N. Korea and took a tough stand that they would back down and stop thinking that their rice eating population can be a world power.

I can see it now....rice powered nukes! :D :rolleyes:
You need to think about what you post before you post it. This is crap! :rolleyes:

[MacAztec]

Im sorry, most of what i said was a quote from someone else.

[MacAztec]

In the middle east, are they not taught IN SCHOOL to hate america? Or is that all a lie. Does the muslim religion not hate america?

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Im sorry, most of what i said was a quote from someone else.
Who? :confused: No one else said anything like that.

[vniow]

Originally posted by MacAztec
In the middle east, are they not taught IN SCHOOL to hate america? Or is that all a lie. Does the muslim religion not hate america?


You're thinking of the Muslim fanatics, which are no better than the so-called Christian KKK, that teach in those schools.

Anybody who thinks that that gruop of people represents the whole Muslim culture and religion should be taken out and shot.

And where the hell did you get that quote from??

[MacAztec]

A neighbor. We went golfing and were talking about the subject. He just said "Think what the world would be like if there were no muslums. I'm not trying to be racist, but are they ever going to do anything with their lives? They really don't do anything but live their lives 2000 years in the past."

I just thought about it. I thought if we did have a few countries in the middle east as ours, and how different things would be. How cheap would gas get? Would their be fights over oil and stuff?

Its only obvious that many people are taught to hate america. What does america do? Just wait and act like they have it under control because they catch a few terrorists, while there are 10s of thousands of people being bred that are taught to hate our country?

Edit: My neighbor didn't really SAY what I said in that one post, but he really implied it.

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by MacAztec
...while there are 10s of thousands of people being bred that are taught to hate our country?

I can't imagine why with comments like yours and your neighbous flying around :rolleyes:

(I am not BTW saying they are right to do so, just saying....)

[medea]

so to make gas cheaper we should kill off a whole race of people? are you serious? With your rational maybe we should kill all golfers so we can finally be at peace with one another.....
this is ridiculous, this is a public forum, racism should not be tolerated or joked about, you are not a newbie and should know you need to watch what you say.

[Mr. Anderson]

The Muslim extremists are using Islam and their religious beliefs to justify their acitons - and they aren't the majority of the population. And this sort of thing has been done around the world, continually in human history. It doesn't make it right and it only tends to color the situation the wrong way.

You should do some research on the subject and try not to 'quote' someone without realizing the implications of your words. I also know of a person who told me the US should conquer the world and put everyone who doesn't like it in the Sahara or some such crap. We were in a public place with colleagues, so I couldn't laugh in his face the way I really wanted to. Rise above the Us vs. Them mentality and see that things are much more complicated than what you're being told - and make your own conclusions, don't let someone do the thinking for you.

D

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by MacAztec
A neighbor. We went golfing and were talking about the subject. He just said "Think what the world would be like if there were no muslums. I'm not trying to be racist, but are they ever going to do anything with their lives? They really don't do anything but live their lives 2000 years in the past."

I just thought about it. I thought if we did have a few countries in the middle east as ours, and how different things would be. How cheap would gas get? Would their be fights over oil and stuff?

Wow... You have a really stupid neighbor. Please continue, though - you're a riot. Haha.

[mymemory]

Bush is not stupid, Bush THINK that you are stupid.

[MacAztec]

I think if there were any war, it would be a very horrible one. First off, I think Iraq has biological weapons. If war broke out, I think that a biological war is worse than a nuclear war. Say we had war with Korea, it would just be nukes going back and forth.

I think there needs to be something done about nukes. How many does the u.s. have? Over like 4,000? Oh so we alone COULD take on the world, but it would be the end of mankind.

[edesignuk]

Nuclear weapons are a curse on humanity. Those who have them threaten those who don't with them. Those who have them don't want others to have them and become aggressive when those other parties develop them.
All of this is totally pointless as no one in there right mind will ever use the damn things because it could be the trigger of the end of the world.
If any one nation takes the decission to start throwing nukes around and it could very easily spell the end of everything.:(

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by edesignuk

All of this is totally pointless as no one in there right mind will ever use the damn things because it could be the trigger of the end of the world..:(

Yes, but many people who have nukes are NOT in their right mind...

[pimentoLoaf]

We won't need nukes unless we get hit with chemical or biological weapons, and the tactical weapons are probably less capable than the pair we dropped on Japan -- BTW, they were air-bursters and caused the widespread damage they did as Japanese houses were predominately paper and wood. (Poof! Gone.)

We might use nuke penetrators, though. There are rumors of their existence; they would drill down deep then go off and leave radioactive caves with glow-in-the-dark chimneys.

For the rest of it? We'll have air superiority in less than six hours, with much of their air farce escapin' to Iran like the last time. And our tankers won't have any trouble, either. "Target. Fire in the hole... BLAAAAAMO!!!!!!... Iraqi BMP? What Iraqi BMP?"

China is rumored to have been the party-pooper last time, nixing the drive to Baghdad in '91. Hope that doesn't happen this time, though I doubt Bush will care much for UN opinion once the necessary momentum is reached for victory.

[Judo]

To the people who said that this should not be allowed in public forums, he should be banned or anything along those lines, you are being hypocritacal. While his was an extreme, rhetorical idea, yours were in a more direct, do it now kind of way of silencing people. If people like this can't say these kind of things on public forums how are you gonna know who's ideas you think you should be changing.

It is a stupid idea though and not the smartest post MacAztec.
I hope you know now that you are wrong. I don't know a hell of alot about the trouble's they are having over in the middle east but from what I've read the reason they are so screwed up is because of England, America and Russia.

It seems to me that America and England are trying to clean up there own mess but are really only making it worse at the cost of alot of human lives. THe only people I can think of that will benifit from this war are the dispicable companies that make weapons and George W Bush and his associates if he can fool the public into thinking he's won a war over Iraq.

I do agree with your post about most people who have nukes are not in there right minds. Quite concise i thought.

[skunk]

Who is this brain-dead 15 year old who is getting you all so wound up? Ignore him. He's not worth talking to.

[MrMacMan]

Ech, whatever.

Getting back to what bush said.
Bush basically said that they need to fake an attack on the U.S so we can go and get there oil. Plus Bush needs pay-back for his fathered mistake of not taking the country over.
Well it will happen soon enough.

Happy war people!

[Les Kern]

The "ignore" button is a powerful thing, but beyond that most sould ignore intolerant fundamentalists as a rule. (Sure, Rush has a huge audience, but I've always felt that the majority are seekers and not concrete-brained.)
Anyway, the topic is Bush.
He's not crazy, just astray... and a fundamentalist. Remember who his handlers are. Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney. C(old) warriors to be sure.
I honestly believe that there's a WHOLE lot going on that we'll never know, and that these folks honestly believe that pounding on Iraq with our UNBELIEVABLY powerful army, will make another nation-state think REAL HARD about supplying, aiding or abetting terrorists. I'd never use this as an excuse to pooh-pooh the whole thing, because in reality I am angry at the US (and most eveybody else), and every reason I've heard us give is ludicrous.
Frankly, I just don't get the Islamic fundamentalists anyway. They want us out and accuse us of taking oil? Hell, we BUY it. It's not our fault that the shieks over there use the money for themselves instead of building a great nation and taking care of their people. They should be the target, not us. I figure we should just leave. The oil will have to be sold anyway. (My isolationist tendency is rearing it's ugly head again)
As I have said many times, shame on the US for not making it a national priority to develop alternative energy sources. No vision, man, No vision. And for that we might be looking at a Bush-led armagghedon. It's all so stupid.

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by Judo
To the people who said that this should not be allowed in public forums, he should be banned or anything along those lines, you are being hypocritacal.

I disagree, with caveats. Personally I think purely inflamitory remarks without proof or merit have no place in adult discussions, so not every post by a nit-wit should be included. This forum is owned by MacRumours, and they can do as they please, and we can choose to ignore. As for the nit-wit; they should go plunk down some dough and start their own forum somewhere else.

[Judo]

Originally posted by Les Kern


I disagree, with caveats. Personally I think purely inflamitory remarks without proof or merit have no place in adult discussions, so not every post by a nit-wit should be included. This forum is owned by MacRumours, and they can do as they please, and we can choose to ignore. As for the nit-wit; they should go plunk down some dough and start their own forum somewhere else.

I wouldn't have called his post purely inflamitory, it's just not PC at all and it's completly stupid. I give merit to him for thinking but non to his logic. I don't understand these "think for yourself" comments, it sounded to me like he did. He heard someone say something and he thought about it, but just not very well.

And what if he did go off and start his own forum that people started to join, and started to believe and started to tell other people who are more versed in manipulating people.....
I would much prefer it if someone with those kind of ideas didn't start their own forum, here we can actually give them a wide view of ideas that can be taken in and learnt from.

You are right this forum is owned by Mac Rumors, but it is a public forum and so it should be run like one (and it is, Kudos to you Arn). Forums are a place for people to learn, (the best thing about the internet) young, old, dumb, not so dumb should all be allowed to partake.

[ddtlm]

The thing I don't get is why, when confronted by hand-liners like Bush, Sadam doesn't just cooperate. It's not like he'd loose his country or all the tiny little people that he owns or any of that.

[pimentoLoaf]

After the last time, we went around saying we won. Because he survived, Saddam said he won, believing that only with his death could Iraq have lost.

Saddam is typically arrogant for a small country. And, it's a question of honor.

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by Judo
And what if he did go off and start his own forum that people started to join, and started to believe and started to tell other people who are more versed in manipulating people.....

I can't not (double-negative !) agree with you on all of your points. I've seen the damage to the voting public that folks like Limbaugh have perpetrated, and I'm tired of fighting the fight I guess. I have also seen the unbendable minds, the sheer idiocy that way too many folks actually believe, and I am dumbfounded. Is it laziness? Stupidity? Is it just comfortable because we are the product of media manipulation, sound-bites and personalities? Or do those types of individuals REALLY believe that crap? Am I the one who is wrong? I really don't mind being wrong and a considerable portion of my life has been spent there. Somewhere deep in my heart I think most people are good and that good will indeed triumph, and then all of our governments decisions will be based on the desire to help the people of this country, and not the few. And I truly believe Bush believes he is helping all Americans, but sadly that is not so.
I'll keep searching for answers.
Thanks.

[skunk]

What this foolish child MacAztec (named appropriately enough after a people who had a penchant for human sacrifice) is advocating is the genocide of a billion innocent men, women and children, based on nothing more than hearsay. His ignorance of the history of religions is staggering: so-called "enlightened" "Christian" westerners have been responsible for genocide already in Africa, South America, North America, Europe and Australia. Isn't this enough? If it was not for those "Muslim terrorists" in the Ottoman Empire we would have lost most of the literary, scientific and philosophical basis for our Western civilization. MacAztec might benefit from doing a little homework before making such idiotic statements.

[touchsky]

Sitting here reading these posts is amazing. As far as the post by MacAztec, drop it already. I think it was a stupid comment and it seems most others agree but it was said. I think it was said out of frustration because lets face it the media has really been one sided with the coloring of the Muslim faith. The Media likes to show the Muslim Extremists and not the peaceful unless it will get ratings. So for the average person who does not have any association with normal Muslims, the extremists are what they see on TV. Does he have a right to say what he wants to in the forum, HELL YES! Just as all of you have a right. Just because you don't agree or it offends you doesn't mean he can't say what is on his mind. That would be called Censorship.
Regarding Nukes, they are a reality and maybe in everyone’s perfect utopian world we all live happily together skipping through freaking daisies but that isn’t reality. I wish that all the Nukes could go away but they aren’t. Who should have them? Who knows, but I do know that whenever anything happens in the world everyone likes to turn to the US to solve the problem. The US is like a cop, when your getting mugged or robbed he is your best friend, get a speeding ticket and he sucks. And if N. Korea tosses a nuke at S. Korea everyone in the world will be looking for that cop. When India and Pakistan were escalating, everyone looked to the US to stop it. Lets not even start to look at how much aid we have given other countries. Examples like that can go on for days. Has the US screwed up? Yes! What I think is scary is how pussified the rest of the world has become, the fact is that Iraq has broken every freaking resolution that was made and no one held them accountable. Can they be a threat now to the US or anyone else, probably not, Yet! But what do we do, we sit and wait till they become a real threat, which with their track record is pretty much a certainty. Lets look ahead, So now we have to do something but because we waited because all the *****'s cried. Now they have more power so the quick fix has now turned into a long dragged out conflict that spans months instead of days or weeks.
Lets look back on history, there was this guy...we'll call him Hitler. Let's suppose someone stepped in a few years earlier and did something, what might have happened?
Now just to piss everyone off, how about this, we outlaw religion! Let's look at it this way; basically most every major conflict in time boils down to religion. Its real easy to do things in the name of God or Allah, but take that away and try doing something in the name of Joe or Bob...doesn't have the same ring to it...:D
Happy New Year.

[skunk]

Originally posted by touchsky
Its real easy to do things in the name of God or Allah, but take that away and try doing something in the name of Joe or Bob...doesn't have the same ring to it...:D
Happy New Year.
Letting pass the other highly questionable points in your post, isn't US nationalism (what is euphemistically referred to as "patriotism") every bit as dangerous as these religions?

[touchsky]

Originally posted by skunk

Letting pass the other highly questionable points in your post, isn't US nationalism (what is euphemistically referred to as "patriotism") every bit as dangerous as these religions?

Ah....No!

Patriotism or as you would like to put it US nationalism is one of the reasons the US has come so far so quickly. In 200 years the US has grown to be the last remaining world super power. (Quite honestly I don't much care for that title because someone always wants to try to take down the fastest gun or whatever euphemisim you choose). There is nothing wrong with pride in where you from and if you want to call it nationalism so be it.
Hey I will admit it, I am proud to be an American and I am sick and tired of people knocking the US. Hell if it weren't for the US in WWII most of Europe including England would be eating Knockwurst now and goose stepping down the sidewalk. I know I will hear a rebutle to that but it is a fact.

[skunk]

Originally posted by touchsky

Patriotism or as you would like to put it US nationalism is one of the reasons the US has come so far so quickly.
It's taken a hundred years, which is roughly average for the rise of an empire in historical times, and it could be gone again in the twinkling of an eye. The cost to others has been horrendous, again as with all empires. And the resentment which has built up around the world against US imperialism should not be taken lightly. A little homework on the early years of WWII would be instructive too, cf. Ford, Alcoa, DuPont, Dulles, Hearst, Prescott Bush. You could have had jackboots on your sidewalks too – American ones!

[edesignuk]

Just spotted this over at the Spymac gallery, thought it was quite funny and *loosely* related to this thread :)

[skunk]

I expect you've seen this one :D :D

[touchsky]

Originally posted by skunk

It's taken a hundred years, which is roughly average for the rise of an empire in historical times, and it could be gone again in the twinkling of an eye. The cost to others has been horrendous, again as with all empires. And the resentment which has built up around the world against US imperialism should not be taken lightly. A little homework on the early years of WWII would be instructive too, cf. Ford, Alcoa, DuPont, Dulles, Hearst, Prescott Bush. You could have had jackboots on your sidewalks too – American ones!

Say what you want but the fact is we saved your ass...plain and simple. And my homework on WWII is fine I have heard, read and seen all the pros and cons and the industrialist arguments regarding the afformentioned individuals but that doesn't negate that when the S@$# hit the fan if it weren't for the US England would have been overrun. This is nothing against England, I love England my family is from there. What this is against is the high and mighty self importent individuals with the cocky attitudes that think their S doesn't stink and that America is the great evil.
Quite frankly I think the US should back out of everywhere we are and let everyone deal with there own crap. I would much rather our goverment take the P*** Off attitude but that ain't gonna happen because you all will B@#$% about that.

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by skunk
I expect you've seen this one :D :D
Yup, I think it was posted in one of the other political threads that's floating about around here somewhere, but it's always funny to see again. Someone put a lot of hard work into that! :D

[skunk]

Originally posted by touchsky
Quite frankly I think the US should back out of everywhere we are and let everyone deal with there own crap.
Many would agree.....:rolleyes:
Bear in mind that a lot of the "crap" was dumped there by the US (and in earlier times by the UK, France, the Ottomans, the Spanish, the Romans etc.)
I wonder how many in those areas supposedly "helped" by the US in recent years realise their good fortune? The Palestinians? The Somalis? The Vietnamese? The Koreans? The Chileans? The Venezuelans? The Iraqis? The Afghanis? The Filipinos? The Nicaraguans? Shall I go on?

[wdlove]

According to a Brad News Service report today, using a secret Defense Department document on a Iraqi invasion. The cost of the attack on Iraq estimate ~3,000 soldiers dead & 10,000 soldiers injured.

One way to prevent this is to nuke Iraq, use tactical nuclear weapons.

This is not a political positive for George Bush, unless it goes flawlessly.

Murphy's Law applies, many things will go wrong. It may cost him votes. He and his advisors think its not somthing they should do, but its something they must do.

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by wdlove
One way to prevent this is to nuke Iraq, use tactical nuclear weapons.

I really hope they don't decide that, NO NUKES, PLEEEEEEASE!

[Roger1]

Many would agree.....

Bear in mind that a lot of the "crap" was dumped there by the US (and in earlier times by the UK, France, the Ottomans, the Spanish, the Romans etc.)
I wonder how many in those areas supposedly "helped" by the US in recent years realise their good fortune? The Palestinians? The Somalis? The Vietnamese? The Koreans? The Chileans? The Venezuelans? The Iraqis? The Afghanis? The Filipinos? The Nicaraguans? Shall I go on?


Here's a few for you: Western Europe, after WWI and WWII, Japan after WWII, the Phllipines, Grenada, Panama.
True, we have had many policy blunder, but we have had a few successes too.

[touchsky]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by skunk
[B]
Many would agree.....:rolleyes:

Oh yes....and these countries have excellent civil rights for there women and children and they love there people and don't ever use them or hide behind them or murder them for things like..hum...having a child out of wedlock...or any other numerous attrocities...shall I go on.....We could do this all week..this is fun..debate is great..!
But alas I work and pay taxes so gotta go pay for those bombs....!

[macfan]

I also wonder if some of those who have been "helped" by the US recognize their good fortune. The Afghans who aren't being executed in soccer staduims probably appreciate the actions of the US militray. The South Koreans, who have a thriving country both economically and politically need only look across the border to see what terror would have awaited them without the US and UN defending them against the North. The countries of eastern Europe who are no longer under Soviet domination are probably appreciative as well. The endless rows of marble crosses strewn across Western Europe, each with a dead American soldier underneath, bear silent testimony to the gratitude that France, Germany, Italy, the UK and the rest of Europe should feel having been recentlly "helped" by the United States. "Helped" to the tune of 50 years of peace and prosperity.

Many in Iraq will be grateful if and when they are liberated from Saddam's rule, particularly those who have been tortured and seen their children die and be devoured by dogs. The difference between Saddam and Hitler is that there was no one powerful enough or willing to put Hitler in his place when he began wholesale violation of the Treaty of Versailles which ended WWI. There was no one to tell him that, no, he couldn't have whole countries just because he wanted them. With luck, Saddam might go quitely into exile or be deposed by his army. If not, then force may be the only way to remove him. Saddam is a madman. If history has taught us anything, it has taught us that appeasment of tyrants leads to worse bloodshed later, not "peace for our time."

[skunk]

Originally posted by Roger1
...the Phllipines, Grenada, Panama.
True, we have had many policy blunder, but we have had a few successes too.
300,000 dead Filipinos might disagree.

Many in Iraq will be grateful if and when they are liberated from Saddam's rule, particularly those who have been tortured and seen their children die and be devoured by dogs.

Those who survive being nuked, maybe.

[macfan]

C'mon skunk, let's hear a "Thank you, America!" for saving your British butt twice! :)

[skunk]

Thanks for your rather belated help. Twice. Glad you finally made your minds up.

[Roger1]

300,000 dead Filipinos might disagree.

How were we involved in their deaths? Seriously, this is a gap in my knowledge.

[skunk]

I believe this was the approximate number of Filipinos killed in the only US experiment in real colonialism in 1899.

[cc bcc]

Originally posted by touchsky

Hey I will admit it, I am proud to be an American and I am sick and tired of people knocking the US. Hell if it weren't for the US in WWII most of Europe including England would be eating Knockwurst now and goose stepping down the sidewalk. I know I will hear a rebutle to that but it is a fact.

That's true. I've seen the monuments and bunkers in France where American and Canadian soldiers died to free Europe. And the cliffs that scared young men had to climb while being shot at from above. It's incredibly impressive and still makes me feel sick when people (politicians) decide to go to war.
But if pure humanitarism was the only driving force, would Saddam and lots of other dictator still be where they are? How powerful would the 3rd Reich have been? Europe is big, and that was he biggest thread to the USA.

I think things like this (north korea, irak) should be handled by the UN.

[touchsky]

Originally posted by skunk

300,000 dead Filipinos might disagree.

Many in Iraq will be grateful if and when they are liberated from Saddam's rule, particularly those who have been tortured and seen their children die and be devoured by dogs.

Those who survive being nuked, maybe.

At what point have you heard that Bush will Nuke Iraq....? I pay close attention to the news and this must have slipped by me...if your so good with your facts maybe you might want to back that one up.

And yes America has killed everyone in the world always..hell we took out the damn Dinosaurs just because we could..we figured they would turn to oil sooner or later...:D

[skunk]

At what point have you heard that Bush will Nuke Iraq....?

Why, I heard it in this very thread :rolleyes:
And by the way, the bit about being "devoured by dogs" was not from me.

[macfan]

Originally posted by skunk
Thanks for your rather belated help. Twice. Glad you finally made your minds up.

You are welcome! I would say we won't take so long to help the Iraqis, but we already have. They have suffered enough under Saddam, and it's partly our (the world community's) fault. It's time to help them secure the blessings of freedom. By diplomacy if at all possible, but force if need be.

..and let's not hear from a Brit about colonialism! ;)

Nuclear weapons are not very likely to be used. They are not appropriate. Too much bang for the highly specific targeting of today. A tactical nuke with low yield might be used for a deep bunker, but I doubt it unless Iraq launches chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons first.

[Cappy]

I wasn't going to get drawn into this but I guess I couldn't keep my big mouth shut. Here are a few points that I think need to be made that could offend some.

1. There's a reason that the President does what he does and we do what we do. In other words there's a reason why those posting here are not the President of the United States.

2. People tend to think that with the vast resources of the internet, newspapers, tv, radio, and their barber or hair stylist, oh, and the loud men and women that show up to school board meetings that they really know what's going on. Those who understand this point can get themselves a scooby snack. Those who don't, well, go get a clue first.

3. The world and even America is made up of many different cultures and religions. I wonder how many who hang out here really get out much from their dark basement dwelling where the glow of the monitor reflects off their faces as they socialize endlessly or not so endlessly online in contrast to their personal physical life. In other words I doubt many really understand that other cultures do exist and they are what has made the US strong.

4. The world is getting smaller relatively speaking due to the growing population. America itself continues to grow. Simple research will show that humanity typically reacts in strange ways when crowded. Culture clashes are going to happen even more because they want to stand out among others.

5. Many consider older people to be more mature. In some cases that can be viewed as true but the truth of the matter is that maturity is truly a reflection of actions. Now apply this to cultures and countries and you might begin to see that someone has to act mature about how the world interacts and runs. Sometimes that requires standing back and other times it takes getting in ones face. Acting out of hate, anger, and especially misinformation is never a sign of maturity.

6. Based on the information we have had available to the public one can easily second guess what the President is doing. Simply put we don't know everything, probably never will, and frankly it's probably best we don't. We will learn more eventually but no one is really going to know what's right or wrong except for those directly involved.

7. The President is human like everyone else and can make mistakes but don't kid yourselves. He has a number of advisors and experts in the field. Sure, they're easy to criticize in many situations but remember they're the ones doing it, not you. No one person is going to destroy America overnight or even over a 4 yr period. Things can get rough but the US government is only as strong as its people. Many doubt this but you're wrong. Try thinking big picture for a change.

8. Being a terrorist is a matter of perception. Other countries would argue that the US is as much of a terrorist as others. How many times has the US even funded terrorist groups?

9. While it is sad that some countries and cultures teach their young to hate America, should we allow it? Yes. Should we prepare against it? Yes. Should we attack them for their beliefs? No. Should we attack them for already committed fatal actions that may be directly against us? Yes.

10. For whatever faults Bush and company might have would you want someone else in there now? I wouldn't. It would be badly viewed and a country might consider taking advantage of the change of leadership. Or are those complaining still upset that the wrong person is in there in the first place? For those people...get over it already. This is the hand you're dealt so play it. Whining doesn't solve anything. Running a government like the US isn't streetball or even Unreal Tournament where you can talk trash and then most of the time walk away from it. If you think you can do better, get involved more with the government and other such organizations and make your way to a position like the President or advisor.

11. I hope people can learn to remind themselves that the Mac community while not as large as other platform's communities is still composed of a number of people from various cultures and countries. Your comments may stem from anger to just wanting attention. See the end of #10 in that case. Running your mouth off does nothing constructive.

12. I often wonder how easy it could be with the power of the internet for certain countries and cultures to now instigate dissension in the ranks of the US through forums and what not. So many people are suscpeptable to specific conversations while never knowing or seeing the face of the person spreading doubts about the government.

That pretty much wraps it up for now. Those are some simple thoughts on this subject that I decided to share. I'm sure there are those who will react with comments similar to "It is my way or culture to state or feel what I do or even to disagree with you." For those I'll remind you that mine is to believe in what I believe as well. :)

[Gyroscope]

The biggest threat to world stability and peace is USA right now.
Fck it. USA has tons of biological,nuclear,chemical weapons. USA supplies Israel with weapons to keep Palestinians opressed. USA is the biggest polluter of our environment. Money(greed) driven corporations danger for all human values and cultures inculding their own. Nuclear bomb invented by US military. Dropped 2 A-bombs on civilian population in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Shall I go on. Huh

[ddtlm]

Gyroscope:

USA has tons of biological,nuclear,chemical weapons.
So?

USA supplies Israel with weapons to keep Palestinians opressed.
I have somewhere between very little and zero sympathy left for the Palestinians and their subhuman extremists.

USA is the biggest polluter of our environment.
Also the largest economy in the world.

Money(greed) driven corporations danger for all human values and cultures inculding their own.
It's called capitalism.

Nuclear bomb invented by US military.
The Nazis were working on it too, and since that time many other nations have seen fit to design their own.

Dropped 2 A-bombs on civilian population in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Which combined generated an insignificant number of casualties when compared to death by other means during WW2.

Shall I go on. Huh
No, I'd rather you did not.

[Les Kern]

The biggest threat to world stability and peace is USA right now.
How do you figure? While no fan of the current administration, they don't try to obtain/sell/give away WMD to use against anyone.

USA has tons of biological,nuclear,chemical weapons.
Yes, as a direct result of M.A.D... which is no longer in favor. Hence the destruction of stockpiles. And M.A.D. might not work anyway with nut-cases like Saddam.
USA supplies Israel with weapons to keep Palestinians opressed.
So? WE aren't doing the oppressing, if that's what you want to call it. And what is your solution to suicide bombers? Give them Jerusalem and Bethlehem? Half the country? I'm interested in your answer.
USA is the biggest polluter of our environment.
One has to agree, but remember that we have WAY more industry than the rest of the world, and we lead the world in pollution technology. We can do better of course, but don't knock us becasue we are successful. We're trying to be environmentally responsable, we really are. Don't be decieved by the party banter, and look at the big picture.
Money(greed) driven corporations danger for all human values and cultures inculding their own.
Almost agree with you, but me being rich doesn't make you poor. Quit whining and get a career... preferably a righteous one, like education or in the medical field. I do believe our culture is ill right now... but it's unrelated to capitalism...probably.
Nuclear bomb invented by US military.
Wrong, it was invented by scientists, mostly German ones. Good thing too, because if they didn't HITLER would have won the freakin war.
Dropped 2 A-bombs on civilian population in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In a time where the implications were not realized, during a war that was WAY more terrifying than the planned invasion of Japan. We HAVE learned that nukes are evil. Why the hell do you think the US is trying to rid the world of them? And do you really think the US is out for world domination? You must not be from around here.
Just look around the world and see that the GOOD we do far exceeds the bad... and we are certainly not an evil people. We DIED for Europeans protecting there culture, we DIED trying to get food to starving Somalians, we DIED deposing mass-murderers like Milosivic... the list is long and your memory is short. But you're welcome.

[G4scott]

Originally posted by peter2002
Bush said yesterday that an attack by Iraq would cripple the US economy. Iraq is no more a military threat to the USA than Mexico or Canada. Ooh, we're shakin' in our boots.

Well, for one, the US economy has already been crippled by Osama's Al Qaeda, which we have not killed nor captured none of its senior leaders.

Iraq has only shot down 1 US plane since the beginning of the Gulf War. We killed more of our own men from "friendly fire". Iraq is a threat to Israel, not the USA. Let Israel fight its own wars. Jesus ain't comin' back to stop this nonsense, so let them have at it.

The real threat is N. Korea. They have nukes and their leader is a freakin' insane Ghengis Khan wannabe, and their military has ballistic missles that can reach Japan, Alaska or Hawaii. If they don't use them, they are more than willing to sell them to terrorists that will ship them in a container ship to the port of Los Angeles. Bye, bye L.A. How do you think Pakistan got its missles and nukes anyway? It wasn't the nuke ferry.

I say nuke'em now, or we will get nuked later. Which is a better choice? I see you agree...

Pete

http://home.bellsouth.net/s/editorial.dll?fromspage=all/home.htm&categoryid=&bfromind=98&eeid=3774131&eetype=article&render=y&ck=&channel=news

What you forget is all the oil we get from that region. If Iraq attacked their neighbors, oil production in the area could come to a halt, and since we get tons of oil from there, the US economy, along with the economies of other countries would go into turmoil. Can you imagine waiting 3 hours in line to get gas at over 3-4 dollars per gallon? Besides, you don't know that Saddam doesn't have nukes yet...

As for North Korea, I agree with you there, somewhat. But just because a country doesn't have nukes doesn't mean that they aren't a threat. You also have to remember that it was Clinton who helped put North Korea where they are right now...

You have to realize that although Iraq can't attack the US, they can hurt the US indirectly by attacking its interests.

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by G4scott
What you forget is all the oil we get from that region.
Want to know how much oil we get from there? 10%
Can you imagine waiting 3 hours in line to get gas?
Yes. I was THERE in 1973. No big deal. (See earlier post on alt. energy development)
You also have to remember that it was Clinton who helped put North Korea where they are right now...
You'll have to remind everyone why. Please be VERY specific, or else it's just bashing. Imagine: Seeking peace. What a horrible concept.
You have to realize that although Iraq can't attack the US, they can hurt the US indirectly by attacking its interests.
I AGREE! Woo-hoo!

[G4scott]

Originally posted by skunk
What this foolish child MacAztec (named appropriately enough after a people who had a penchant for human sacrifice) is advocating is the genocide of a billion innocent men, women and children, based on nothing more than hearsay. His ignorance of the history of religions is staggering: so-called "enlightened" "Christian" westerners have been responsible for genocide already in Africa, South America, North America, Europe and Australia. Isn't this enough? If it was not for those "Muslim terrorists" in the Ottoman Empire we would have lost most of the literary, scientific and philosophical basis for our Western civilization. MacAztec might benefit from doing a little homework before making such idiotic statements.

And of course, repeatedly making fun of him and putting him down makes you a better person. All that you have to say is that 'that post was uncalled for' and left it at that. The majority of your posts about him were uncalled for, no matter how wrong he may be, and I'm going to leave it like that...

[G4scott]

Hey, about that pollution thing, isn't it true that a volcano spews more toxic gasses and crap like that into the atmosphere than the total amount of man made pollution to date? It may have just been propaganda, I don't really know for sure where I heard it...

[G4scott]

Originally posted by Les Kern
You'll have to remind everyone why. Please be VERY specific, or else it's just bashing. Imagine: Seeking peace. What a horrible concept.

Clinton made some outrageous deal with North Korea, supplying them with food, and TWO NUCLEAR REACTORS!!!. Clinton was buddy-buddy with N. Korea.

This aid was meant to help the starving people without electricity, but everybody knew that it was a joke, and that the government would use it to their advantage. Clinton was operating on the idea that "everybody is perfect, and we all keep our promises." Unfortunately, he didn't learn in third grade that people don't keep promises. He also didn't learn in history that people are corrupt by nature.

EdIT: Part of this agreement made by Clinton in 1994 was that N. Korea would halt weapons development. What a laugh...

[Gyroscope]

Ok here’s more oil to the fire J

-Kyoto protocol USA not signing.
-International War Tribunal USA wants exemption.
-USA intervenes only there where has its interests. Not for a sake of other nations.
For money, resources, strategic interests.
-U.S governments used (and still do) sponsor brutal dictators around the world.
Sadam Husein was once sponsored by US gov during the war with Iran.
Some of your states still have death sentence and segregate (not openly cuz it ain’t South Africa) against minorities.
- you cheated Indians (put them into reserves) L
- you cheated Mexicans (stole California & Texas) J
-You invented fast food and now I m fat because of it J

and I must give you a credit for rock n roll and ice cold coke

[skunk]

Oh Boy! I'm away for one night and I find there's been a war on the forum while I was asleep!
Thank you Cappy for a sensible and balanced post, it's like someone opened a window.
Gyroscope has points which deserve a better answer than ddtlm's "I have somewhere between very little and zero sympathy left for the Palestinians and their subhuman extremists."
G4Scott, I believe that thoughtless and hateful bigotry as expressed in MacAztec's post NEEDS to be very clearly rejected. Nobody is "subhuman". "All men are created equal" has NO exceptions. Any other path leads to slavery and genocide.

To expect ANY country to act out of anything other than self-interest is unrealistic. However, the stakes here are so high, and the human cost is likely to be so appalling (yes, Palestinians, North Koreans, Afghanis and Iraqis ARE human, even when you only see them on telly) that it would be comforting if it was at least ENLIGHTENED self-interest that was prompting the decisions. Unfortunately the US record of interventions since Korea, under either party, has led many in the world to have serious doubts. This does not make them America's enemies, but it certainly makes American claims to be acting on behalf of the world rather more suspect in the eyes of many who are supposed to feel grateful.

[trebblekicked]

If we want to win the war against Sadam Hussein , sure. Go ahead. Send in the troops, we'll clean it up in a couple months and we'll have a shiny new nation-state to build and trade with. But if we want to win the war against Muslim extremism, which is the REAL enemy of the United States, we need to reapir the damage years of contempt and neglect to the region and it's people have caused. This includes securing peace in Palestine and extending financial assistance to nations besides those with oil, among other things. Starting a war will only make the problem exponentialy worse. Since i hear nothing of fighting the causes of Mulsim extremism, i can only assume this war is not out of concern for our safety, but for other, possibly greedy, sinister or personal reasons.

If Bush persues this war, at best, he is an ignorant, greedy warmonger. At worst, he is... [URL=http://www.geocities.com/trebor_92627/Bush.htm];)

[skunk]

Well said, that man! Now we're getting somewhere!

[touchsky]

Originally posted by trebblekicked
If we want to win the war against Sadam Hussein , sure. Go ahead. Send in the troops, we'll clean it up in a couple months and we'll have a shiny new nation-state to build and trade with. But if we want to win the war against Muslim extremism, which is the REAL enemy of the United States, we need to reapir the damage years of contempt and neglect to the region and it's people have caused. This includes securing peace in Palestine and extending financial assistance to nations besides those with oil, among other things. Starting a war will only make the problem exponentialy worse. Since i hear nothing of fighting the causes of Mulsim extremism, i can only assume this war is not out of concern for our safety, but for other, possibly greedy, sinister or personal reasons.

If Bush persues this war, at best, he is an ignorant, greedy warmonger. At worst, he is... www.geocities.com/trebor_92627/Bush.htm (http://)

First off your not going to win a war against Muslim Extremisim by being warm and fuzzy and your are completly warped if you think that is the case. Has anyone actually read the transcripts of Bin Ladin's so called Manefesto or whatever he calls it. He spends a breif period saying how the US is in Arab land and Isreal and so on....but then goes into depth for a long period explaning how they hate our way of life.....and that goes for EVERYONE! in this message board regardles of where your from. IF you beleive women should speak, they hate you. If you beleive homosexuals should be aloud to live...they hate you. It goes on and on...you will never ever change the way they feel.

As far as subhumans comment, I am from NYC area, I watched with my own eyes (not on TV like most of you) the planes hit the towers, the people jump, the building fall. I lost friends in the buildings. So actually calling them Subhuman is probably to good, they are a boil on societys ass that needs to be removed however posible.

[trebblekicked]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by touchsky

First off your not going to win a war against Muslim Extremisim by being warm and fuzzy and your are completly warped if you think that is the case.

-how about being fair and compassionate?

As for Osama Bin Laden, he is a cankerous sore on the world and the ideas he represents are maniacle (sp?) and evil. But that doesn't mean that his ideas are not a direct or indirect result of our nation's actions.

He did not wake up one day and decide to hate America. His contention is that America is an imperialist nation that forces it's will on the Muslim nations of the world by economic or military force. When we attack a Muslim nation as a 'pre-emptive strike', we are validating what he is saying to the Muslim population. And when we validate what he is saying, we are making his army stronger.

(added) The 'way of life' argument has weight. Yes, Mulslim extremists think that according to the Koran, our society is Sodom and Gamora. But our society matches descriptions of Sodom and Gamora by Jewish and Christian standards as well. So why aren't there radical Chrisitan and Jewish organizations flying planes into buildings? Because Christians and Jews have benefitted from America's wealth, while Muslims in the Middle East have largely suffered from it. This suffering led to the same kind of blind hate that feuls the KKK in America and Neo-Nazism in Europe.

I'm not suggesting turning Al-Qaida into allies of America. Whenever we can, we should stand up to them. But if we continue to act as if their feelings are without base, and fall victim to the Bush-spawned "evil doers" cone of silence, we risk turning more and more moderate Muslims into extremeists. please. think beyond reaction. it's the only way to fix this mess.

[skunk]

Originally posted by touchsky
As far as subhumans comment, I am from NYC area, I watched with my own eyes (not on TV like most of you) the planes hit the towers, the people jump, the building fall. I lost friends in the buildings. So actually calling them Subhuman is probably to good, they are a boil on societys ass that needs to be removed however posible.

And I'm sure that the US bomber crew who mistakenly killed 48 Afghanis at a wedding were not too kindly regarded either. This viewpoint is not balanced or constructive.

[touchsky]

Originally posted by skunk


And I'm sure that the US bomber crew who mistakenly killed 48 Afghanis at a wedding were not too kindly regarded either. This viewpoint is not balanced or constructive.

You hit it with "MISTAKENLY" don't think the guy's on 9/11 accidentally flew 3 planes into buildings and one into the ground...

[skunk]

When you're dead, "mistakenly" doesn't make much difference.

[Les Kern]

"I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn't here." — George W. Bush

[OutThere]

Originally posted by edesignuk

I really hope they don't decide that, NO NUKES, PLEEEEEEASE!

I cant tell you how much I agree with that.

Has anyone seen The Sum of All Fears? It kinda makes you think twice about nuclear weapons and war between countries that have these kinds of weapons, or could buy them from corrupt countries that do. To anyone who said using nukes is a good idea, watch the film.

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by OutThere761
Has anyone seen The Sum of All Fears? It kinda makes you think twice about nuclear weapons and war between countries that have these kinds of weapons, or could buy them from corrupt countries that do. To anyone who said using nukes is a good idea, watch the film.

Good flick.
Not "if"... more like "when". That's why part of me (but a small part) WANT'S the US to be to world's cop.

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Think what the world would be like if there were no muslums. I'm not trying to be racist, but are they ever going to do anything with their lives? They really don't do anything but live their lives 2000 years in the past.

Of course, Spanish Muslims were living in palaces with fountains and plumbing while Europeans were in thatch huts with dirt floors. Where do you think the inspiration for Euro cathedrals (and the arch) came from?

While Arabs may not have invented them, Europe's knowledge of arithmatic, algebra and astronomy all came from the Muslim world.

That said, since even before Constantinople was sacked during the Crusades 800 yrs ago, Arab culture had stagnated and for the average Arab, life has not changed much since then.

Many cultures have been "Kings of the World" for a time. The U.S.'s hold on this position is in no way permanent.

In spite of Bush's lock-step into an invasion, has he actually released any "proof" of Iraq's WOMD? It seems like the teams over there aren't finding anything. So, an attack will be based on a hunch? There's no high-horse in that approach and it's highly unethical- not that such a route is suprising in today's climate..... - j

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Think what the world would be like if there were no muslums. I'm not trying to be racist, but are they ever going to do anything with their lives? They really don't do anything but live their lives 2000 years in the past.

That would be assuming that they have to be like us. There was long discussions on whether the tribes of the Amazon should be assimilated into the west. It was decided that they shouldn't be.
There are some very happy people in the world who are very unlike us. We should leave them alone. The Muslims? Live and let live, man. Tolerance of others is the key.

[Roger1]

In spite of Bush's lock-step into an invasion, has he actually released any "proof" of Iraq's WOMD? It seems like the teams over there aren't finding anything. So, an attack will be based on a hunch? There's no high-horse in that approach and it's highly unethical- not that such a route is suprising in today's climate..... - j


Interesting observation. I was listening to NPR yesterday, and a guy asked a question very similar to yours. The guests response (as well as I can remember it), was that Iraq is required to be in full compliance of all UN mandates, not just the one about WMD, in order to not be attacked. The mandates involve human rights, war reparations, etc.

[wink]

There are some interesting websites that give an alternative view to the mainstream media, that I've come across. Some are conservative leaning and some are pro-Israel, but the articles and commentary are very interesting to read.


http://www.frontpagemag.com
http://www.debka.com
http://www.mediaresearch.org
http://www.worldnetdaily.com
http://www.intellectualconservatism.com
http://www.honestreporting.com
http://www.jewishworldreview.com

[wink]

Originally posted by Les Kern


Good flick.
Not "if"... more like "when". That's why part of me (but a small part) WANT'S the US to be to world's cop.

That's why a BIG part of me wants the US to be world cop. Everyone is out to get the States already. It started years ago, and it's only now that other rogue states and militia armies (al queda) are able to use technologies and weapons (and certain glaring holes in the US's immigration policies that only recently have begun to be corrected) to be able to attack from within your borders (I am a Canadian, but somehow wish was an American... trust me, you don't want the "leader" in Chretien that we have).

Stuff like what happened in that movie, WILL happen. It will be devastating. That's why Bush is doing everything he possibly can to prevent that result. What did Clinton do when the Trade Center was first bombed in '93? Not much. After his own military got smoked in Mogadishu? Turned tail and ran! That made the rest of the world take notice. The US was weak. Thanks, Bill.

And by the way, the OKC bombing had Saddam's firgerprints all over it. Check out okcbombing.org (http://www.okcbombing.org) and you'll see how there was a massive coverup going on so that the American people would be conned into thinking that it was 2 right-wing radicals, aallllll by their lonesome, who did the deed. IRAQ and Saddam were involved. They sponsor terrorism, they harbour terrorists, they kill their own, their neighbours... and the first domino of the axis of evil needs to fall. If we let them just go and build their weapons and let them pass it along to suicide bombers and terrorists with no homeland (i.e. no country to officially blame) to penetrate your borders, it will be our fault for letting it happen. A stitch in time saves nine, no? Let's stitch this b@#*h up, then! Otherwise, we will see how the Trade Towers will pale in comparison to the next wave of terrorism that will hit. They say, you teach people how to treat you. Well, this is where and when we start teaching.

Funny how the US never goes to war with democracies, isn't it? It's always dictators or communists who seek to expand their domain over their neighboring countries (Russia into Afghanistan in the 80's and every other example from the past 50 years of Communist conquests). How many people did Pol Pot kill? Stalin?

Wheh.... sorry for the venting.

G-d bless the US of A. And if it wasn't for you guys, I would shudder to think what this planet would be like today

[skunk]

Originally posted by wink
Everyone is out to get the States already. It started years ago, and it's only now that other rogue states and militia armies (al queda) are able to use technologies and weapons (and certain glaring holes in the US's immigration policies that only recently have begun to be corrected) to be able to attack from within your borders
Oh come on, this is rubbish! US "foreign policy" and economic domination bears a heavy responsibility for how the US is viewed around the world, and Al Quaeda did not use any weapons other than box-cutters.

What did Clinton do....After his own military got smoked in Mogadishu? Turned tail and ran!
What would you prefer, after an ill-advised military PR adventure resulting in the deaths of many more innocent civilians? Nuke them, too?

IRAQ and Saddam were involved. They sponsor terrorism, they harbour terrorists, they kill their own, their neighbours... and the first domino of the axis of evil needs to fall.
Any real evidence that Iraq sponsors or harbours terrorists? Which ones?

If we let them just go and build their weapons and let them pass it along to suicide bombers and terrorists with no homeland (i.e. no country to officially blame) to penetrate your borders, it will be our fault for letting it happen.
Most of the 9/11 guys had a homeland, and it was Saudi Arabia. But it would be too awkward to treat that country like Iraq, wouldn't it?

They say, you teach people how to treat you. Well, this is where and when we start teaching.
The US has been busy "teaching" for years, and 9/11 is what they got. Anyway, you're Canadian, aren't you? What's with the "we"?

Funny how the US never goes to war with democracies, isn't it? It's always dictators or communists who seek to expand their domain over their neighboring countries (Russia into Afghanistan in the 80's and every other example from the past 50 years of Communist conquests).
This is getting absurd! The US has a long history of supporting dictators. They tend to keep the markets orderly for the corporations to milk. Russia's time in Afghanistan was a lot more civilized than the US-sponsored successor regime supported by You-Know-Who.

Wheh.... sorry for the venting.
I should hope so. :eek:

[wink]

Originally posted by skunk

Oh come on, this is rubbish! US "foreign policy" and economic domination bears a heavy responsibility for how the US is viewed around the world, and Al Quaeda did not use any weapons other than box-cutters.

I'd be curious to hear what your explanation of US "foreign policy" is. As for the US's economic domination... why should the success of the US be responsible for the way they are viewed around the world? If they are a dominant nation economically, and the rest of the world doesn't like it, should the US just say, "Ahhhh, you guys are right. We're too wealthy. We're too stable a nation. We should relinquish our position as an economic power so we can appease the rest of the world and be viewed as One Of The Gang." p.s. The US is THE most generous nation in the world when it comes to aid.

And... box cutters are what al queda was able to sneak aboard the flights in the terrorist attacks here, but what I was refering to was the broader terrorist structure. Rocket launchers firing on civilian planes just recently on your side of the ocean. Internet and other mobile communications they are able to use to communicate and facilitate attacks. That kind of thing.

Originally posted by skunk

What would you prefer, after an ill-advised military PR adventure resulting in the deaths of many more innocent civilians? Nuke them, too?

It very well may have been an ill-advised, Clinton PR adventure, (something not too foreign to Arab terror leaders, who get dressed up in fancy suits, come on CNN and spew lies left right and center, but we believe them whole heartedly!) but don't you know that it is the way terrorists fight? Shielded by civilians. Bomb making factories amongst civiian dwellings. They know that it will be very difficult to be attacked that way. They choose to have their human shields become "collateral damage" in any kind of attack. Then the whole world cries a river when there are a few (or maybe even more) civilian deaths yet it is the terrorist leaders who will get away. But the world will be happy, because they just don't want any more blood shed. Even it means the perpetrators get away.

Would i suggest "Nuking" them too? Of course not. But I sure as heck like the idea of "us" having it as a deterrent instead of terrorists. Could you imagine if they had a Nuke? They'd just use it. Iraq has already threatened to use everything they've got against Israel if the US attacks Iraq. Hmmm. I find that a little odd. If the US strikes, Saddam will use that as the precursor to destroy the Jews and Israel. How convenient for him. US strikes, they strike Israel.

Originally posted by skunk

Any real evidence that Iraq sponsors or harbours terrorists? Which ones?

Try this one... An interview with Saddam's bomb maker. .Interview with Saddam's bombmaker (http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder.html)

Also... go to ]debka.com (http://www.debka.com) for starters. They have a number of good articles to get people up to speed. Also, if you think you're going to get anything of value or truth from the mainstream media, especially the BBC (It's bad over here too, trust me...) you won't. It's too bad, really. Check out examples at honestreporting.com (http://www.honestreporting.com) for horrible bias in the media. Debka goes into good detail about the link between Saddam and Arafat. Including the sponsorship of suicide bomber families who send their kids to death to wipe out Israelies. A stipend of $25 000 per family. And as I pointed out earlier, the OKC connection is out there but is being supressed. Check out okcbombing.org (http://www.okcbombing.org) . This isn't just conspiracy talk either. Do a simple search on google if that website doesn't satisfy your curiousity.


Originally posted by skunk

Most of the 9/11 guys had a homeland, and it was Saudi Arabia. But it would be too awkward to treat that country like Iraq, wouldn't it?

War makes strange bed fellows. The ruling family in Saudi Arabia, the House of Saud, are not terroirsts themselves. They have been buying off (or at least trying to buy off) Islamic fudamentalists for a long time so that they can hold on to power and just have the radicals leave them alone if they are left to operate their terror structures within their borders. Islamic radicals are causing huge problems all over Europe, but especially in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, where support for Osama is massive. The difference between Iraq and Saudi Arabia is obvious. They are ALL (Yemen, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, China) part of the problem though. Iraq is trying to build WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) not S.A. Also, you would never get this from your local paper or news station, but Debka.com is all over it as is Drudgereport.com and many other sources, that the rest of the Arab world wants to get rid of Saddam. They would never go public with it for fear of upheaval from within their own countries by radicals. Some websites out there are just phenomenal for getting an alternative view of the what's going on. I posted some of them a few messages back in this thread. Check them out.


Originally posted by skunk
The US has been busy "teaching" for years, and 9/11 is what they got. Anyway, you're Canadian, aren't you? What's with the "we"?

I'd also be interested to see what you think, or how you think the US has been "teaching"the world? If you think 9/11 is the result of what "the world" would have you believe... that it's because of how the US treats and have treated the world in the past... That it's is because of all of the US's actions that people are starving in Iraq... It's the US's sanctions against Cuba that causes their country to be so poor... basically all the rheteric that comes out of the mouths of Osama, Arafat, Saddam, Castro and company... we may not be able to agree on anything, I'm afraid.

It is THEIR leaders' responsibilty to be accountable to their people. To make sure they have jobs. To have food in their mouths.

But it's much easier to spew propopganda via state-run television and radio and newspapers that it's the West's and The Jews's fault. Deflect deflect deflect.

And if the people in their respective countries don't like what their rulers are doing, then just vote them ou... Oh, right. They can't vote them out. They have a dictatorship. If they oppose, they will be killed. There is no opposition to a dictator.

I guess the poor of Iraq will just have to blame the US and Israel for all their ills, while Saddam hides in one of his many palacial mansions. I guess Cuba will have to blame the US for the fact their Country is in the pits, because of the US sanctions, even though Cuba is able to trade with every other country in the world and nothing is stopping them to do that, yet their people suffer.



Originally posted by skunk
This is getting absurd! The US has a long history of supporting dictators. They tend to keep the markets orderly for the corporations to milk. Russia's time in Afghanistan was a lot more civilized than the US-sponsored successor regime supported by You-Know-Who.

They have supported certain regimes when it has beneiftted them, yes. I will agree with that. It is unfortunate that governments have to get into bed with certain people to get a favorable result in another area... ie. Osama to resist communist occupation of Afghanistan, I believe. (I may be wrong on that example.) Or backing Saddam and Iraq when Iran was out of control. I don't have all the answers for that. But when YOU are attacked by these people, and they threaten your allies, and then threaten to destabilize the world (North Korea)... you have to pick your battles, and choose when and how to fight them accordingly, whether militarily or diplomatically. War and Peace in the world are brought about through a series of manoeuvres and game playing and leaked statements (and all that kind of crap) that nations do. It's a difficult world and we don't know HALF of the stuff going on behind closed doors amongst our governments, with the intelligence they have gathered against these nations (and in this case IRAQ and the like).

But appeasement isn't the answer.

And why do I say "we" when I am Canadian? Because I believe we are all threatened by terror. You, me, brother in California, my friend in Paris, France, and another friend who is a diplomat in Kenya. I believe it is only a matter of time before some bomb-belted lunatic walks into a cafe in Los Angeles, or New York or London and continues what we saw happen on 9/11. And THEN, when it happens in YOUR backyard, we'll see what kind of support the people of England will have for the fight against Terror. We are all infidels to Radical Islam. If you are not Muslim you should die - that is what they preach. So Radical Islam gets into bed with Saddam, who joins forces with Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad and everyone else who has their sights set on the destruction of Democracy, The West, The threat to a dictator's power... War does make for strange bedfellows indeed.

But appeasement is not the answer.

[skunk]

You appear to have swallowed the "authorized version" hook, line and sinker. I have visited Debka and Co., and found them seriously wanting in accuracy and objectivity. You should be more critical of your sources: we need more considered reaction in this world than knee-jerks. Perhaps you should try talking to a few Muslims – or better still, listening to them, before you pull the trigger. And since it appears to have escaped your notice, may I point out that we have considerable experience of "terror" over here in our "backyard". There are no simple answers.

[wdlove]

A little comic relief! Bush has surrounded himself with the best and brightest for council, Powell, Rice, & Rumsfeld. He's not afraid to have them on his team, r/t ego. He's learned alot in 2 years, presidential!

It is under control, totally. Can sleep safe at night, men will to do battle on our behalf! :)

[trebblekicked]

;)

[wink]

Originally posted by skunk
You appear to have swallowed the "authorized version" hook, line and sinker. I have visited Debka and Co., and found them seriously wanting in accuracy and objectivity. You should be more critical of your sources: we need more considered reaction in this world than knee-jerks. Perhaps you should try talking to a few Muslims – or better still, listening to them, before you pull the trigger. And since it appears to have escaped your notice, may I point out that we have considerable experience of "terror" over here in our "backyard". There are no simple answers.

Whose "authorized version"? Bush's? Yes, I'm sure my view is in line with his for the most part when it comes to fighting terror, but just because I am in agreement with that line of thinking and rationale doesn't mean that have swallowed anything. (no jokes here please ;-)
And how have you found debka and company wanting in accuracy and objectivity! The detail from Debka's site is astounding which no paper I have read to date, ranging from the New York Times to the Guardian have even come close to. And who's to say what is accurate, as well. Some reporter's version of a story he got from a Palestinian insider from the outskirts of the Gaza Strip of a reported Israeli offence on a Palestinian? The editor of Debka.com? Your friend, the Israeli or Muslim, whose biases might sway "facts" to support their viewpoint?
At some point we have to believe something though, and can't just sit on the fence because there's no believable source out there. I guess, I've chosen to believe the websites and papers out there that are not the sound bite-repeating, headline grabbing, mainstream media type of organizations.
It is true, you have had your share of terror. I'm assuming you are reffering to the IRA... is that right? Here in Toronto, we have a very multicultural society where people live in a very safe city. Muslims next to Catholics and Jews and Protestants. I am an artist here, and am very open to listening and acting upon suggestions from anyone. In fact it has been a few incredibly well thought out articles and commentary by some arabs which have led me to my belief system. One Arab-American, Joseph Farah, can be found with all of his editorials at www.worldnetdaily.com.
I do agree with you... there are no simple answers. But diplomacy is not ALWYAS the answer. You can't "talk" your way to peace each and every single time there is conflict. There are some instances where the exercise of might or power is required. And I believe that this is one of those times if Iraq does not relinquish every piece of information regarding it's WMD. Which I do believe they have, but not being privy to sensitive US and British Intelligence (save for what information I get from those alternative websites I visit), I guess we will only know when we are told from our leaders.

[wink]

More interesting info concerning Al queda and it's mention of Iraq's harbouring of terrorists.

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=233


...and a book...

http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=360

[macfan]

Originally posted by skunk
Any real evidence that Iraq sponsors or harbours terrorists? Which ones?


Yes. There is plently of evidence, as some have already pointed out.

Remember Abu Nidal?

Sadly, there are always many who do not want to face reality. For some reason, they believe that if just talk and negotiate, offer concessions and cajole, you can come to an understanding with anyone. Tragically, history has taught us that this is not so.

Military force is always a bad option, but sometimes it is the best option of many bad options.

The Iraqi people deserve to enjoy the blessings of freedom. They have suffered enough.

[skunk]

Originally posted by wink
[QUOTE]I guess we will only know when we are told from our leaders.
Is this good enough for you? It's not my idea of the rule of law.

[wink]

Originally posted by skunk

Is this good enough for you? It's not my idea of the rule of law.

No, it's not good enough for me. That's why I try to seek out the truth wherever I may find it. I do about 2-3 hours a day research on the subject (yeah, being an actor gives you a little too much time on your hands sometimes), and I try to gather as much info as I possibly can.

But as we all know, the truth is, we don't get (and will not get)certain very sensitive information that governments possess. And we will only get them when they are leaked or released by those governments for everyone to see.

I don't believe that every last shred of information and intelligence should be common knowledge to all. That would seriously hinder the rule and defense of any country. But at least here in North America and where you live in England (and as in every other democracy, and freedom-loving nation) if you haven't liked what your government has done during its term, you can vote them out. The Iraqis unfortunately don't have that luxury.

[skunk]

Originally posted by wink
But at least here in North America and where you live in England (and as in every other democracy, and freedom-loving nation) if you haven't liked what your government has done during its term, you can vote them out. The Iraqis unfortunately don't have that luxury.
Ho bloody ho! Tell it to the voters of Florida!

Anyway, a government can kill an awful lot of people within a four or five year term.

[macfan]

skunk,

Ho bloody ho! Tell it to the voters of Florida!

Funny thing, practically every media recount of the "undercounted" ballots showed Bush still won in Florida. Maybe that particular piece of news didn't make it over to Jolly Old England.

Yes, we Americans have a system that lets a person lose, even with more popular votes nationally, but it doesn't happen very often (about once every 100 years), and it's designed that way for very solid reasons. You have a system that is still technically run by a monarch. I'll stick with ours.

Trying to compare Florida to Iraq is really quite assinine.

Anyway, a government can kill an awful lot of people within a four or five year term.

While it is true that fewer people died during the term of Neville Chamerlain than under Winston Churchill, I don't think I'd prefer the leadership of the former over that of the latter.

Anyway, when is there going to be some news of new Macs and such things? That's why I signed up for this board!

[wink]

Originally posted by skunk

Ho bloody ho! Tell it to the voters of Florida!

Anyway, a government can kill an awful lot of people within a four or five year term.


Yeah, it's funny how the world thinks that Bush "stole" the election during that whole Florida debacle, when it was Gore who was trying to steal Florida. Read this book and get back to me. Katherine Harris ran the entire show during that time and you'd be surprised at what really went down.

http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=956


And yes it's true that a government can kill a fair number of people in a short term, especially when those targeted people shield themselves behind civilian, human shields... But nothing tops a Totalitarian!!

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by macfan
skunk,
Funny thing, practically every media recount of the "undercounted" ballots showed Bush still won in Florida. Maybe that particular piece of news didn't make it over to Jolly Old England.

But you know, they never factored in things like Harris hiring a Texas company to purge the rolls of so-called convicted felons who weren't that at all. That alone could have meant many thousands of gore votes. But the theft of the election by so-called patriots is for another forum.

[macfan]

But you know, they never factored in things like Harris hiring a Texas company to purge the rolls of so-called convicted felons who weren't that at all. That alone could have meant many thousands of gore votes. But the theft of the election by so-called patriots is for another forum.

The illegal votes that were cast could have meant fewer for Gore had they not been counted, and if Gore had been able to win his home state, it would have all been a moot point.

Anyway, Harris wasn't even the Florida Secretary of State when the law requiring the hiring of of a private firm went into effect or when the contract was signed.

From Salon.com.
In the Salon Politics article "Florida's flawed 'voter-cleansing' program," it was incorrectly stated that Florida's Secretary of State Katherine Harris hired a company, ChoicePoint, to create a voter "purge" list. The company was hired in 1998 before Harris was elected to her post. Also, Rick Rozar was incorrectly identified as a founder of ChoicePoint. Rozar was the president of a company, CDB Infotek, of which Choicepoint owned 70 percent, and which ChoicePoint eventually bought. Salon regrets the errors.

The "Harris hired Texas firm to underhandedly deny blacks the right to vote" story has a nice ring to it, but, like so many other stories that circulate, is patently false.

[skunk]

Originally posted by macfan
Trying to compare Florida to Iraq is really quite assinine.
At no point did I try to compare Florida to Iraq.

While it is true that fewer people died during the term of Neville Chamerlain than under Winston Churchill, I don't think I'd prefer the leadership of the former over that of the latter.
Are you saying that launching an unjustified war is Churchillian? I think you're missing the point.

Anyway, when is there going to be some news of new Macs and such things? That's why I signed up for this board!
You're on the wrong thread, then, aren't you? Why don't you read the title?

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by macfan


The illegal votes that were cast could have meant fewer for Gore had they not been counted, and if Gore had been able to win his home state, it would have all been a moot point.


We're not talking about Gore's home state. So let's say Harris DIDN'T have a hand in it (which is something I wholeheartily disagree with); the fact is there is inequality in this country, and the GOP in Florida did nothing to help, and in fact I believe they took advantage of their power. And I'm sure we can find a thousand articles on either side, but facts are facts:

• African American voters were nearly ten times more likely than white voters to have their ballots rejected in Florida.

• While African Americans comprised about 11 percent of all voters in Florida in the November presidential election, they cast about 54 percent of the ballots that were rejected.

• Of the 100 precincts in the state with the highest number of disqualified ballots, 83 are majority black.

• African American voting districts were "disproportionately hindered" by antiquated and error-prone equipment like the punch card ballot system. Voting districts that were predominantly white were more likely to have high technology for verification of voter eligibility.

• African Americans were "disproportionately purged" from the voter roles due to spoiled ballots rendered by undercounts and overcounts. For instance, in Miami-Dade, the state's largest county, over 65 percent of the names on the purge list consisted of African Americans who represent only one fifth of the population. By comparison, Hispanics were 57.4 percent of the population, but only 16.6 percent of the purge list while whites composed more than three quarters of the population but just 17.6 percent of those purged.

• Although the report said fraud did not appear to be a "major factor" in the Florida election, it maintains that "overzealous efforts conducted under the guise of an anti-fraud campaign" resulted in the "inexcusable and patently unjust" removal of disproportionate numbers of African American voters from the state's voter registration rolls.

• Purging discharged felons from the voting rolls raises important questions of "fundamental fairness" since the data on the computerized felon list had at least a 14.1 percent error rate. "It is also clear that African Americans, disproportionately charged, convicted and sentenced in the criminal justice system, are disproportionately impacted by the state's purging policies and practices," said the report. "The governor should exercise his moral authority over elections to reform this area of state law." Case in point: White boys are 70% more likely to use drugs than blacks, but blacks are 49 TIMES more likely to serve jail time. Mike Moore is right. Until we deal with racism we will NEVER become a great society.

[Les Kern]

error

[macfan]

wink wrote:
...if you haven't liked what your government has done during its term, you can vote them out. The Iraqis unfortunately don't have that luxury.

skunk wrote:
Ho bloody ho! Tell it to the voters of Florida!

skunk then wrote:
At no point did I try to compare Florida to Iraq.

And we are supposed to take skunk seriously?

Les,

One might also note that the country election officials, under Florida law, were supposed to use those lists as a starting point and then verify them. Many of them did not. Incidently, the country election offices in the countries you reference--where there were higher numbers of invalid ballots with hanging chad and the like--were run by Democrats, so it is unlikely that they were trying to disenfranchise a group who tends to vote heavily Democratic.

Another point worthy of consideration is that while the racial makeup of the lists did not proportionally match the population generally in those counties, it did proportionally match the population of felons in that county by race.

It is also noteworthy that that law involved was passed in the wake of a very fradulent mayoral election in Miami to correct terrible voter fraud. It was not passed as a back door way to disenfranchise black voters, nor was it used in that manner. Historically, blacks were denied the right to vote in the United States, most recently in Southern states in the Jim Crow era. It is likely that this historical fact make the stories of disenfranchisement more believable, although no less false.

It is quite telling that you "wholeheartedly disagree" with the idea that Harris wasn't involved in letting the contract to purge felons off the voter rolls. Unless she has discovered time travel, your disagreement on that point is simply obtuse, and makes a rational person question your objectivity.

As someone who knows something about measurement and statistics, I can assure you that the voting system in Florida (and almost every other stae) was simply incapable of measuring an election that was that close. The margin of Bush's win was withing the margin of error for the system. No amount of recounting ballots would have changed that fact. This was apparent to me from the very first day.

We aren't talking about Gore's home state? The fact remains that Gore lost the election in Tennessee. Had he won his home state, he would have been president today.

[skunk]

Originally posted by macfan
As someone who knows something about measurement and statistics, I can assure you that the voting system in Florida (and almost every other stae) was simply incapable of measuring an election that was that close. The margin of Bush's win was withing the margin of error for the system. No amount of recounting ballots would have changed that fact. This was apparent to me from the very first day.
Your hindsight is remarkably accurate.

[Judo]

Originally posted by wink



Yeah, it's funny how the world thinks that Bush "stole" the election during that whole Florida debacle, when it was Gore who was trying to steal Florida. Read this book and get back to me. Katherine Harris ran the entire show during that time and you'd be surprised at what really went down.

http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=956



Don't you think that there is a bit of conflict of interest if your looking for an unbaised opinion on what happened???

If you are gonna recomend that book then I will recommend Stupid White Men from Micheal Moore.

[macfan]

If you are gonna recomend that book then I will recommend Stupid White Men from Micheal Moore.

Is that his autobiography?

[allah akbar]

n

[allah akbar]

Originally posted by Judo


Don't you think that there is a bit of conflict of interest if your looking for an unbaised opinion on what happened???

If you are gonna recomend that book then I will recommend Stupid White Men from Micheal Moore.


I love it when you leftists openly flaunt an intollerant racist like Michael Moore as a representative of you transparenlty bigotted views.

As a liberal-leftist, you normally lie about your racism. Well... actually...come to think of it... liberal-leftists normally lie about everything.

But for some reason, when the name Michael Moore pops up, you trumpet him around as an avant-garde chic personality.

How pathetic. Racism is racism is racism. Deploring us whiteys, just because of the color of our skin, then writing a book about it, then taking your show on the road, then making more and more money by hating us whiteys, then desecrating the memory of 9-11 victims by slandering them because of their "whiteness" is so typically normal for you degenerate lefties.

Racism is bad. Period. Against blacks, against whites, against anybody.

And the sooner you liberals stop propogating your hateful intolerance, and stop worshipping your racist Michael Moore gods, the sooner the wackos of the world will stop using your intolerance as a justification for their terrorism.

[Les Kern]

Originally posted by allah akbar



I love it when you leftists openly flaunt an intollerant racist like Michael Moore as a representative of you transparenlty bigotted views.
And the sooner you liberals stop propogating your hateful intolerance, and stop worshipping your racist Michael Moore gods, the sooner the wackos of the world will stop using your intolerance as a justification for their terrorism.

Wow, you are angry...but evidently you either didn't ead the book or are blinded by your own intolerance. Intolerance? The GOP wrote the freakin' BOOK on it. As for Moore, he just points out the quite obvious problem we have with race in this country. For instance it a quite telling and sad fact that whites are 70% more likely to USE drugs, but blacks are 49 TIMES more likely to spend jail because they do the same. Moore points this out, and the fundamentalist GOP idiots feel that this in itself is an attack on the chosen ones. The GOP, and I mean the fundamentalist GOP like Bush and his gang of idiots, think nothing about helping the regular folks, but perpetuate the mantra of a buck and any price, embrace a Christian dogma that has no place in our government (Like Falwell and his power in Washington), court despots when it's convenient (Like Cheney and Iraq), and lie like they invented it (Too many to list). I was a member of the GOP until a few years back. I had the epiphany, and I hope you open your eyes soon and see that helping people because we are all truly equal is above the survival of the fittest GOP mentality. Oh of course there are some pretty terrible DEMS. Lying, cheating evil DEMS. And there are some incredibly lazy and useless citizens. But it's the core beliefs that I believe set us apart from the GOP. And speaking of extremism, you might think I was some ultra-liberal nut-case. Not even close, and it might even surprise you on where I might stand on any given issue. No, my biggest realization was that fundamentalism (which always carries that "intolerance" baggage) in ANY form is evil itself... hence my signature. This was hastily written, but no apologies and I hope you get the point. Oh, and by the way, your second sentence above makes absolutely no sense, but it sure smells of intolerance, eh? Know what? I just had another epiphany. No more responding to assinine posts for me. Enjoy your sad, hate-filled world.

[allah akbar]

Originally posted by Les Kern


... The GOP, and I mean the fundamentalist GOP like Bush and his gang of idiots, think nothing about helping the regular folks, but perpetuate the mantra of a buck and any price, embrace a Christian dogma that has no place in our government (Like Falwell and his power in Washington), court despots when it's convenient (Like Cheney and Iraq), and lie like they invented it (Too many to list).....

YAWN...

you leftists are as predictable as your offensive and racist.

As for reading the book...of course I wouldn't read the book. No more than I would read any other piece of stalinist trash, lining the pockets of racists like Moore with my hard earned money.

GOP intollerance? The phrase is as stale as you are a moron. Intollerance is a defacto liberal attribute. Whether its your hatred of religions like Christianity and your attempts to banish it everywhere from the nation, your support of terrorists who blow up innocent Jewish citizens in Israel, your senators who express support for Osama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussein and Castro and travel to their dictatorships to play footsy, your governments in Europe who don't bat an eyelash as synagogues are burned down, your so-called civil rights leaders who use phrases like "Hymie-town" and who describe members of some religions as sons of pigs and dogs , your presidents and senators who use the N-word...the beat goes on and on and on like an energizer bunny. Liberal leftists invent and perpetrate racism and intollerance.


The stats? I can't really get too excited. Leftists like you enjoy horrendously distorting stats and outright lying. I have read numerous reports purporting to show systemic racism in the American judicial system, and they always inevitably show that the root cause is not systemic racism, but instead higher levels of more violent crimes caused by the supposed victim of racism.

I know you leftists believe that anything less than 100% taxation and government control means to you that the regular folk aren't being helped. I know you leftists believe that giving black communities the freedom and support to move their children out of drug and crime infested schools to improve the opportunity for black children and their families, is untennable because it goes against your marxist union support. I know you leftists choose to ignore the very Christian beginnings and underpinnings of this nation, its importance, and through your hatred and intollerance attempt to banish it. I know you leftists believe in governmental regimes which reward and punish based on class, race, and political affiliation through quotas and set asides.

You see...my dear pathetic lefty...the only group of people who really care about people, and I mean ALL people, are Conservatives. We believe in the power of people to solve problems, not beurocratic governmental regimes. We believe believe in a color blind state: one which does not discriminate , reward and punish based on color. And we believe in the God-given right of human freedom: for Americans to choose to live their lives as they see fit. If you want to call this dog eat dog...that's your perogative, and you are right its part of the core differences which sets apart those who love the American ideal of freedom from you marxists.

If by fundamentalism , which you have ever so sloppily left undefined and with no context, you mean a radical for freedom, equality under the law, a color blind nation, the faith in men and women to solve their problems and create a bold and compelling future, and tollerance of all religions (including your hated Christianity and Judaism), ...then call me a FUNDAMENTALIST!

I'll leave you with this.
Given that you and your leftists cronies despise Christianity and are intollerant in its practice, support terrorist states and regimes, hate freedom, support anti-semitic crimes globally, and hate Bush and Cheney for no stated reason...I think its clear to anybody reading this board who is living in the sad , hate filled world.


Peace, Freedom, Justice