PDA

View Full Version : To Usa People: Bush Is A Terrorist



Pages : [1] 2

pOpe
12-03-2004, 04:21 PM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??

Do you know that Bush is a terrorist? Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons? do you know that they kill children? No, you don't know 'cause youre newspapers and youre tv censor the images, and they only tell lies to american people. Before november, I belive that the only bastard in USA was Bush, but now I see that I was wrong, 'cause Bush is the president now. Well, I belive that Bush will start the III WORLD WAR, and he will destroy the world with youre wars and youre contamination. In Spain people we throwed the president Aznar, the terrorist Aznar, cause the 11-M attaks was his fault because 99% spanish people didn't want to go to Iraq war... why didn't you do that? why did you vote a president who helps Sharon to kill all the palestinian? palestinian kids too? Why all the countries who Bush visit there are thousands of people who insult Bush? I know that, because Bush is a nazi, and if he are president now, is because all of you, american people, are nazi. It's too sad that in the most important country of the world live the most ignorant people. It isn't strange that terrorist attaks USA, 'casue you have won it.

Well, I hope that violence will finish someday, and I belive in a wolrd with peace, but with this country that is impossible. If you have more attaks, I won't cry, 'cause american soldiers kill much more people than terrorist.


Pd: sorry about my engllish... I'm spanish
________
LINCOLN-ZEPHYR V12 ENGINE (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Lincoln-Zephyr_V12_engine)

Not Ozymandias
12-03-2004, 04:28 PM
I know. All you have to do is look up "terrorism" in the dictionary and you'll get a great summary of U.S. policy, post-WWII.

wheelchairman
12-03-2004, 04:33 PM
ter·ror·ism

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
-Dictionary.com

Well....I'll be damned.

hugeones
12-03-2004, 04:43 PM
I must say that is very strongly spoken.
There is one small point.
Our Special relationship with the US is very tenuous, we give you access to increadibly good cars, you give us strangly cooked animals, usually in a bland bread thing. we say america is god and we should support the half wit president, you bomb the f@"££$ out of everything. truth. the UK generally does not support global americianisation, trouble is america now own most of europe.
the main point of the forum is offspring.
while america has gone hardline, offspring have gone gay.
SMASH was the high point.
all downhill since then. I've bought the records and listened to them, have an offspring ringtone, trouble is. SELL OUT. I'm not against it, but do it the way grteenday have and dont alienate your old, (33y old) ex fan base

Vera
12-03-2004, 04:48 PM
What the fuck, dude, this is an off-topic forum, meaning you don't NEED to talk about the Offspring here.

HornyPope
12-03-2004, 04:50 PM
Do you know that Bush is a terrorist?
Yes.


Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons?
Yes.


do you know that they kill children?
Yes.

But how is it bad? What's wrong with being a terrorist? What about their needs, huh? Why doesn't anyone support their right to kill people? Everyone screams "children here and children that", but no one cares about 25 year old soldiers who have spent years of training without a chance to properly shoot one's rifle. Why must you discriminate against them? They are people too you know.

pOpe
12-03-2004, 04:58 PM
Yes.


Yes.


Yes.

But how is it bad? What's wrong with being a terrorist? What about their needs, huh? Why doesn't anyone support their right to kill people? Everyone screams "children here and children that", but no one cares about 25 year old soldiers who have spent years of training without a chance to properly shoot one's rifle. Why must you discriminate against them? They are people too you know.


that's incredible! do you defend usa terrorist? well, why don't you defend islamist terrorist too? if a soldier shoot you, will you defend they??????


I hope that this was a ironic post, 'cause... arrrg, people like you make that people hope that america will be destroyed one day
________
Drug test (http://drugtestingkit.org)

Moose
12-03-2004, 05:45 PM
its sad how many times i see people take these kinds of posts seriously...honestly is your mind that much into hate drive that you cant point out what is supposed to be a joke or not...damn

Floyd the Barber
12-03-2004, 05:55 PM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??

Do you know that Bush is a terrorist? Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons? do you know that they kill children?

Do you know that you don't live in this country? So how about you stop preaching to us about how much you know. You think the REAL terrorists give a flying fuck about children? Hell no...they slaughtered over 100 children back in September when they took over that school in Russia. And here you are, griping about how "evil" American soldiers are while they're risking their asses trying to rid the world of scum. Since you seem to be so all-knowing, how about you go fight the war and do a better job?

Not Ozymandias
12-03-2004, 06:01 PM
You aren't the one to distinguish what is "really" terrorism. Look up the word "terrorism". 9/11, the Iraq invasion and the Russian massacre you mentioned all qualify.

Not Ozymandias
12-03-2004, 06:03 PM
why did you vote a president who helps Sharon to kill all the palestinian? palestinian kids too?
His only viable opponent was/is even less sympathetic to the Palestinean plight. Every President here has been on Israel's side.

greencows12
12-03-2004, 06:03 PM
I'm an anarchist, so I wouldn't vote anyways, and i'm too young, but I insisted people vote to get bush out of office. I'm surprised there wasn't a riot when he got re-elected. I'm just ignoring anything he says nows, because he's a joke. bush is a big douche.

Floyd the Barber
12-03-2004, 06:06 PM
You aren't the one to distinguish what is "really" terrorism.

And you are?


Look up the word "terrorism". 9/11, the Iraq invasion and the Russian massacre you mentioned all qualify.

So you're gonna consult a dictionary to tell you who the real terrorists are? Gee, how bright!

Revolver-2005?
12-03-2004, 06:07 PM
bush is a terrorist lol, friggen is oppressing iraqis who only want us to leave...but no we must form iraq like america...yes we will make thm all poor and thn whn we ask for somethin we get screwed in the end! ahhh america

Moose
12-03-2004, 06:07 PM
so why would you urge people to get bush out of office for another guy you hate? sometimes i wonder if people even know why they hate bush...

Not Ozymandias
12-03-2004, 06:09 PM
So you're gonna consult a dictionary to tell you who the real terrorists are? Gee, how bright!
There's nothing to consult. Anyone who practices terrorism as it is defined is a terrorist. There are no "real" terrorists. Fucking duh.

Stop posting here, you know nothing about everything.

lousyskater
12-03-2004, 06:10 PM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??

Do you know that Bush is a terrorist? Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons? do you know that they kill children? No, you don't know 'cause youre newspapers and youre tv censor the images, and they only tell lies to american people. Before november, I belive that the only bastard in USA was Bush, but now I see that I was wrong, 'cause Bush is the president now. Well, I belive that Bush will start the III WORLD WAR, and he will destroy the world with youre wars and youre contamination. In Spain people we throwed the president Aznar, the terrorist Aznar, cause the 11-M attaks was his fault because 99% spanish people didn't want to go to Iraq war... why didn't you do that? why did you vote a president who helps Sharon to kill all the palestinian? palestinian kids too? Why all the countries who Bush visit there are thousands of people who insult Bush? I know that, because Bush is a nazi, and if he are president now, is because all of you, american people, are nazi. It's too sad that in the most important country of the world live the most ignorant people. It isn't strange that terrorist attaks USA, 'casue you have won it.

Well, I hope that violence will finish someday, and I belive in a wolrd with peace, but with this country that is impossible. If you have more attaks, I won't cry, 'cause american soldiers kill much more people than terrorist.


Pd: sorry about my engllish... I'm spanish

so...what else is new?

Not Ozymandias
12-03-2004, 06:11 PM
so why would you urge people to get bush out of office for another guy you hate? sometimes i wonder if people even know why they hate bush...
It's all about baby-steps. That's the only way things improve in America. You get one imperialist bastard out for one slightly less wicked to buy some time for a chance at real liberal opposition.

Floyd the Barber
12-03-2004, 06:13 PM
Stop posting here, you know nothing about everything.

Yeah, I'm gonna take orders from a guy who says "nothing about everything".

Lighten up.

Revolver-2005?
12-03-2004, 06:16 PM
i hate bush because hes an uneducated monkey who only works to try and fill his wallet....i prefer kerry because he at least had an I.Q. above 2

Floyd the Barber
12-03-2004, 06:22 PM
ii prefer kerry because he at least had an I.Q. above 2

I wouldn't be so sure...he's from Massachusetts and he can't even get the names of the biggest Red Sox players right ("Manny Ortez"??)

Revolver-2005?
12-03-2004, 06:43 PM
and baseball and politics mix how? Well since ur going to go off like tht, wht kinda idiot chokes on pretzels? And wht kinda idiot hears about 9/11 while reading a childrens story and doesnt excuse himself ( just kept on readin for a while)? well tht wold be bush

jimmyjimjimz
12-03-2004, 06:47 PM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??

Do you know that Bush is a terrorist? Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons? do you know that they kill children? No, you don't know 'cause youre newspapers and youre tv censor the images, and they only tell lies to american people. Before november, I belive that the only bastard in USA was Bush, but now I see that I was wrong, 'cause Bush is the president now. Well, I belive that Bush will start the III WORLD WAR, and he will destroy the world with youre wars and youre contamination. In Spain people we throwed the president Aznar, the terrorist Aznar, cause the 11-M attaks was his fault because 99% spanish people didn't want to go to Iraq war... why didn't you do that? why did you vote a president who helps Sharon to kill all the palestinian? palestinian kids too? Why all the countries who Bush visit there are thousands of people who insult Bush? I know that, because Bush is a nazi, and if he are president now, is because all of you, american people, are nazi. It's too sad that in the most important country of the world live the most ignorant people. It isn't strange that terrorist attaks USA, 'casue you have won it.

Well, I hope that violence will finish someday, and I belive in a wolrd with peace, but with this country that is impossible. If you have more attaks, I won't cry, 'cause american soldiers kill much more people than terrorist.


Pd: sorry about my engllish... I'm spanish
Just to let you know, I voted for John Kerry. John Kerry won where I live (New York City) and john Kerry won my state (New York). Don't blame me. Blame the 51% who voted for Bush.

lousyskater
12-03-2004, 06:48 PM
I wouldn't be so sure...he's from Massachusetts and he can't even get the names of the biggest Red Sox players right ("Manny Ortez"??)

only a avid baseball fan would know the names of even the biggest players. i'm from LA and i don't know any of the names of the players on the dodgers and the angel.

Floyd the Barber
12-03-2004, 07:15 PM
and baseball and politics mix how?

I didn't say they mixed, I was just pointing out that Kerry isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

Revolver-2005?
12-03-2004, 07:58 PM
lol because he doesnt know the names of baseball players? Ok listen up, i was readin tht Kerry was speaking on a high level speaking standard...bush was on a 9th grade standard....towards the end of the elections....kerry lowered to 12th grade...and bush was at a 5th grade speaking level....so if u wanna say kerry isnt a sharp tool because he doesnt know his baseball players...go ahead...but bush is an idiot...cant even speak on his own lvl...well if he did tht it would be all "goo goo, gaa gaa"

Moose
12-03-2004, 08:07 PM
lol because he doesnt know the names of baseball players? Ok listen up, i was readin tht Kerry was speaking on a high level speaking standard...bush was on a 9th grade standard....towards the end of the elections....kerry lowered to 12th grade...and bush was at a 5th grade speaking level....so if u wanna say kerry isnt a sharp tool because he doesnt know his baseball players...go ahead...but bush is an idiot...cant even speak on his own lvl...well if he did tht it would be all "goo goo, gaa gaa"

do you even know what that means? that just means how he speaks, as in saying words properly...he has standard elevated speech...george bush obviously doesnt, i dont even think he speaks general american...lets say that some people from harvard speak in standard elevated...it doesnt make you smart, it just makes you sound smart, as well as general american does, but not as much...some people dont speak either, actually most people dont speak either, it doesnt mean anything significant so dont go to crazy over that.

Revolver-2005?
12-03-2004, 09:20 PM
kerry is quite intelligent actually, they ranked presidents I.Q. ( bush was dead last lol no surprise there) Kerry would be ranked 16...thts pretty dam good, but i suppose living in a country where ignorance is celebrated...whts the point of being smart....may as well just give up now we've reached the pinacle of stupidity

Moose
12-03-2004, 09:29 PM
im not saying he isnt, im just saying standard elevated speech doesnt necessarily mean intelligence...was bush really last? haha...well u also need to have the ability to you the intellect...and reason and all that...but it helps to have a good SAT score i suppose.

Kitten
12-04-2004, 12:43 AM
that's incredible! do you defend usa terrorist? well, why don't you defend islamist terrorist too? if a soldier shoot you, will you defend they??????


I hope that this was a ironic post, 'cause... arrrg, people like you make that people hope that america will be destroyed one day

There is nothing wrong with Americans. I think the whole point behind voting Bush in was so he could finish what he started. Also, the other parties were not incrediably strong this election.
People like you make me wish stupid people would just self-combust. But that's not going to happen anytime soon, so stop critisizing the American people.

wheelchairman
12-04-2004, 04:37 AM
The only terrorists who could be less humane (and less justified) than Al-Qaida is Bush and the government itself.

And really you people got to stop grouping terrorists groups as all one large group. The terrorists of Chechnya are not the same as the terrorists of Al-Qaida. Talking as though they are, is just ignorance.

And why are you people even bothering to try and argue that Kerry is dumber than Bush? I don't care who you support, I don't like either of them personally, but Kerry is obviously smarter by a lot. Who gives a flying fuck about baseball players?

4moreyears
12-04-2004, 05:32 AM
"i hate bush because hes an uneducated monkey who only works to try and fill his wallet....i prefer kerry because he at least had an I.Q. above 2"

Hmm...tell me one thing. How come George W. Bush is a greedy jackass who just wants to make money, but Michael Moore is telling the truth? Hmm...Oh yeah, and I am pretty sure Bush got a higher GPA out of college then John Kerry did. Well...thank god idiots from Spain and France aren't running this country. You should be thankful for 4 more years.

Also...someone said he was an idiot for choking on a pretzel? You ever see Kerry catch a football? LOL.

How many people do you actually know in Iraq? I have 13 friends over there, and none of them tell me of such criminal behavior as to kill an innocent person for no reason. Maybe you should go over there like they have, and see for yourself...instead of making controversal statements thousands of miles away.

pOpe
12-04-2004, 05:51 AM
Well, someone tell here that soldiers only do their job.... torture is another part of an american soldier's job?? I remember that many soldiers torture people in Iraq, but what happened?? nothing, only one soldier has been punished. And what say Donanld Rumsfeld??? nothing.... nothing.

All the world belive that Sadam was a terrorist, a criminal, but with sadam people in iraq had houses, brothers, mothers, fathers.... now, many people have nothing. You say that I have to thanks american soldiers and bush because they do that????? NO




Pd: sorry about my english, I'm spansih :p
________
WEED (http://wwweed.com/)

4moreyears
12-04-2004, 06:03 AM
That is exactly what I am talking about. A few idiot soldiers decide to cross the line when it comes to interrogating prisoners, and now you think every last person over there is doing stuff like that. And yes, only one person has been condemned for their actions...but do your research! The others are currently on trial! And if you even think that Saddam was a good leader of his people, you have some serious thinking to do. Torturing olympic athletes in order to make them run faster. Murdering over 50 people after he got into power because they might have been a threat to his political future. Killing over 300,000 of his own people, 8 thousand of which in 10 minutes using cyanide and powder bombs. What kind of people do you have over in Spain? Maybe you would understand if you were an actual American. Thank God that isn't the case.

Wake Up...

pOpe
12-04-2004, 07:02 AM
NO no no, I don't think that saddam was a good leader, he was a criminal, and i didn't say that was a good person. But I think too that saddam was the same like bush. The difference is that saddam attaks his country, and bush attaks all the world. Bush, Blair, Sharon and Aznar are terrorist, and they have to go to prision.

Do you think that USA attaked Iraq because saddam was a terrorist??? NO. Oil was the reason... why USA don't attak Cuba? or China? or Spain when FRANCO (a spanish dictador 1975) was the leader? There are many countries in the world where the leaders are dictadors, but the reason that USA attak IRAQ was the oil.


I think that saddam was a bad leader, a criminal, a terrorist, but i think that bush too.


Pd: sorry aboyut my english
________
Fz1 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Yamaha_FZ1)

wheelchairman
12-04-2004, 07:49 AM
Wow 4moreyears is an idiot. Alright let's go through his posts piece by piece.



Hmm...tell me one thing. How come George W. Bush is a greedy jackass who just wants to make money, but Michael Moore is telling the truth?

Because Bush is padding his pockets and going to war for business interests and Michael Moore backs up his films with evidence.


How many people do you actually know in Iraq? I have 13 friends over there, and none of them tell me of such criminal behavior as to kill an innocent person for no reason. Maybe you should go over there like they have, and see for yourself...instead of making controversal statements thousands of miles away.

Right yeah, so US soldiers are saying they aren't doing anything illegal, how fuckin' shocking. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Red Cross all disagree. And you know what...I'm gonna take their word for it.



That is exactly what I am talking about. A few idiot soldiers decide to cross the line when it comes to interrogating prisoners, and now you think every last person over there is doing stuff like that. And yes, only one person has been condemned for their actions...but do your research!
A few idiots. I would say it's more than likely just a few. You should do your own research. What behavior patterns to scared, outnumbered, and poorly trained soldiers follow? You should familiarize yourself with the Zimbardo experiment. I think you would find the results to be very interesting.

And no one has said anything about supporting Saddam don't be an idiot.
I would say the American Occupational Government is worse than Saddam was. Killing innocents, torturing prisoners, bombing cities before we invade because we don't have enough ground troops (Fallujah) etc etc.

Betty
12-04-2004, 10:54 AM
Wow 4moreyears is an idiot.

I really hate how you guys always do that... I'm not sure if he's an idiot or not (seems like he just made a new screen name to debate in this tread) cause I haven't read enough yet. But he hasn't said anything that idiotic. Certainly no more idiotic than a lot of the people that are anti-Bush and still have no idea what they're talking about. I could see myself using half of those arguments, possibly in a more eloquent way. They're a little iffy, so I probably wouldn't, but still.

It's just annoying that everybody that doesn't agree with you is an idiot, especially if they're new.

RXP
12-04-2004, 11:03 AM
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Your terrorist (USA) is my freedom fighter.

Eat a dick.

Vera
12-04-2004, 11:43 AM
I really hate how you guys always do that... I'm not sure if he's an idiot or not (seems like he just made a new screen name to debate in this tread) cause I haven't read enough yet. But he hasn't said anything that idiotic. Certainly no more idiotic than a lot of the people that are anti-Bush and still have no idea what they're talking about. I could see myself using half of those arguments, possibly in a more eloquent way. They're a little iffy, so I probably wouldn't, but still.

It's just annoying that everybody that doesn't agree with you is an idiot, especially if they're new.
Well, it's really a case of not wanting to jump on everyone's back who represents your side in a way you don't like it represented. The anti-Bush idiots may have stupid reasons for not supporting him, but at least I agree with them on the general level of "hey, don't like Bush running the US".

If someone who represents the pro-Bush side makes a stupid statement or a bad argument, of course we're more compelled to reply to it.

And on the idiot-calling thing, well, hey, it's the internet. Whatever idea one post or one thread gives me about a certain person, of course I will judge them by it. I will change my opinion if it turns out that the person is different, but judgements are done pretty fast online. Unfortunate facts in life.

And the "idiotic things" is of course subjective. In my opinion he did make some idiotic statements in that post.

4moreyears
12-04-2004, 11:50 AM
Okay, I had my post broken down, so I will break down these new posts.

You should like this coming from a Political Science Major...

Michael Moore backs his film with evidence? Let me tell you about this evidence. One of his major points is a pipeline built through afghanistan. When I first saw that, I was extremely angered. I didn't know what to say. BUT...I did my research. Do you know who actually wanted to build that sucker anyway? Yours truly...Bill Clinton. But, it couldn't be his fault...right? Also, you should see a movie titled FahrenHYPE 9/11. It is actually experts from their field speaking the truth about national security, Fahrenheit 9/11 (like how there were NO flights to leave the U.S. the next day), Michael Moore, etc.

Also...oil. If we are so eager to harvest someone elses oil, that we would actually invade another country, then why are we the only country that boycotts Iranian oil? And that of United Arab Emirates. This would be some of the cheapest oil in the world, but we still boycott it.

You're so busy telling me that I am an idiot, when all you are basing your opinions off of is conspiracy propaganda BS. How can you point out the speck in my eye if you have a beam in yours?

Those aren't just regular soldiers that I know buddy, those are my friends over there. Now, obviously I would know more about Iraq about you, seeing that I have friends over there, and that I have been there myself. Also, about Fallujah. 95-99% of the civilians were evacuated from the city before the assault. The civilian casualty rate in this battle was less than any battle before it.

The last thing I will say right now, is a response to your quote that you are NOT supporting Saddam. You have never been there. I have. I have seen what this guy has done to his people, and he will roast in hell. No, you are not DIRECTLY defending Saddam, but you do it without even knowing it. I can't stand you guys. You have no idea what you are talking about, but you can not live without a controversy.

Oh, BTW, thanks for backing me up Betty...

Vera
12-04-2004, 11:56 AM
I'm not taking a part of this debate as I'm sure a hundred people in here will kick your ass anyway, but I'd just like to point out how lovely you playing the Major card is.

Even an English major can make spelling mistakes.

Betty
12-04-2004, 12:25 PM
Vera, obviously you're not going to call somebody on "your side" an idiot, because that's just dumb. I just find it hypocritical that people call the people on the other side idiots. And I know it's the Internet, and flaming abounds, I just don't like that sort of thing. It's just my opinion, I think it's dumb to name call. I never call the people I'm arguing with idiots or stupid, or whatever. So, well, I understand it, but I don't agree with it, personally. I'm probably way too nice on the Internet...

Which is why if I argue a right-wing point of view on the Offspring BBS, I am very tentative and polite in doing so or I know my head would get bitten off.

And I'm not going to add to this argument, becuase I've tried it before, and it was not very productive.

nieh
12-04-2004, 12:31 PM
Vera, obviously you're not going to call somebody on "your side" an idiot, because that's just dumb. I just find it hypocritical that people call the people on the other side idiots. And I know it's the Internet, and flaming abounds, I just don't like that sort of thing. It's just my opinion, I think it's dumb to name call. I never call the people I'm arguing with idiots or stupid, or whatever. So, well, I understand it, but I don't agree with it, personally. I'm probably way too nice on the Internet...

Which is why if I argue a right-wing point of view on the Offspring BBS, I am very tentative and polite in doing so or I know my head would get bitten off.

And I'm not going to add to this argument, becuase I've tried it before, and it was not very productive.

Actually I'm more likely to call people on 'my side' idiots. If I want the same outcome as someone else, and they're making completely stupid, invalid, un-informed arguements, I will call them an idiot because I don't want my credibility ruined based on the fact that I'm on the 'same side' as them. If someone on the other side makes stupid, invalid, un-informed arguments, then I tend to pick them apart more than call them stupid.

pOpe
12-04-2004, 12:42 PM
I have friends over there, and that I have been there myself. Also, about Fallujah.


Yes, I haven't been there... have you ever been there in the last year? in the war?? I don't know, I only know that thousands of iraks (iraks? iraiqies? sorry, I don't know the word :confused: ) are killed by american soldiers... do you defend that? kill inocent people? thausands?? And if you think that these people are not innocent, I will say you that in this case they don't want american soldiers!

On the other hand, what was the reason of the war?? the weapons?? :D
________
Granada (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Granada)

Betty
12-04-2004, 12:50 PM
Nieh, good correction, I was sorta thinking that.

Panzerfaust92
12-04-2004, 02:12 PM
No, you are not DIRECTLY defending Saddam, but you do it without even knowing it

These are the kind of accusations that I can not stand. The very idea of defending Saddam is completely idiotic for me, and you're telling me that just because I don't support the war in Iraq, that means I'm supporting the enemy. Thats complete drivel. I'm not going to spin what you said into something it isn't, but I have to tell you that I would never support the opposition of the U.S. in any battle, directly or indirectly. If it were absolutely necessary, I would die for the rights of my children and nephews and nieces. In this case, I do not believe it was at all reasonable to bomb this small nation with only a minimally effective military. Bush said that one of his goals was to continue the spread of peace. I don't understand how we can achieve that by bombing the crap out of sovereign nations. I don't want this to be a repeat of Vietnam, primarily because my uncle died in Vietnam. I'll admit, I don't have any distinct ideas on how we can get our Soldiers out of Iraq without fermenting difficulties, I just don't think we should have been pushed into this situation in the first place.

Moose
12-04-2004, 06:22 PM
I really hate how you guys always do that... I'm not sure if he's an idiot or not (seems like he just made a new screen name to debate in this tread) cause I haven't read enough yet. But he hasn't said anything that idiotic. Certainly no more idiotic than a lot of the people that are anti-Bush and still have no idea what they're talking about. I could see myself using half of those arguments, possibly in a more eloquent way. They're a little iffy, so I probably wouldn't, but still.

It's just annoying that everybody that doesn't agree with you is an idiot, especially if they're new.

you rock, i wish more people on this board would actually think and stop talking bullshit. basically when you choose one side to follow you are blinded, but i think its even worse that that, i think people hate bush just because its the popular thing to do, and thats just sad...im not saying im for bush, but ive noticed a lot of people just going with the flow.

BLACK SABBATH
12-04-2004, 06:36 PM
so...what else is new?
GOT A PROBLEM WITH NAZI'S? AND NO THATS NOT TRUE NOT ALL AMERICAN PEOPLE R NAZI. BUT I YET DO AGREE WITH SOME OF THE STUFF U SAID ABOUT BUSH SO ROCK ON MAN \\m//(>.<)\\m//

Betty
12-04-2004, 06:39 PM
I think a lot of people just do it because it's a trend. Especially if you're a movie star, punkrocker, university student... Which is why when people say I'm the ignorant one who is just following the media, it bothers me. I may not like everything Bush does, but I think overall there are a lot more flaws from the democratic side.

However, I know there are a bunch of people on the board (and in life) that have true convictions one way or another, and I can respect that. And even though some of them may respect what I have to say, it bothers me that they call people who would say similar things as me idiots. But like Vera said, it's the Internet. People are mean. I'm too sensitive. That's how it goes.

BLACK SABBATH
12-04-2004, 06:39 PM
GOT A PROBLEM WITH NAZI'S? AND NO THATS NOT TRUE NOT ALL AMERICAN PEOPLE R NAZI. BUT I YET DO AGREE WITH SOME OF THE STUFF U SAID ABOUT BUSH SO ROCK ON MAN \\m//(>.<)\\m//
IM QUOTEING MYSELF CUZ I QUOTED THE WRONG PERSON LAST TIME IT WAS MENT TO THE FIRST PERSON POPE

4moreyears
12-04-2004, 07:15 PM
To answer your question, I just got back from Iraq. I was wounded before the attack on Fallujah, and would do anything to be with my Marines again. Well guys, we have very different opinions, and there is no changing of anyones minds. It was a pleasure to speak with you all, and I am sorry if I offended anyone in any way.

pOpe
12-05-2004, 10:31 AM
I only think that Bush is so arrogances, but thats only my opinion.... and the world, unfortunately, depends on USA
________
2007 LEXUS CUP SPECIFICATIONS (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/2007_Lexus_Cup)

wheelchairman
12-05-2004, 10:47 AM
and the world, unfortunately, depends on USA
in what way?

Jakebert
12-05-2004, 12:14 PM
Well, someone tell here that soldiers only do their job.... torture is another part of an american soldier's job?? I remember that many soldiers torture people in Iraq, but what happened?? nothing, only one soldier has been punished. And what say Donanld Rumsfeld??? nothing.... nothing.

All the world belive that Sadam was a terrorist, a criminal, but with sadam people in iraq had houses, brothers, mothers, fathers.... now, many people have nothing. You say that I have to thanks american soldiers and bush because they do that????? NO


How the fuck is putting panties on someone's head torture? There are people who pay for that kind of thing.

As for the Saddam thing, they only fathers, mothers, ect if those people agreed with Saddam. If they didn't, they were gone.

wheelchairman
12-05-2004, 01:20 PM
1. How the fuck is putting panties on someone's head torture? There are people who pay for that kind of thing.

As for the Saddam thing, they only fathers, mothers, ect if those people agreed with Saddam. If they didn't, they were gone.
1. That is a form of torture. It isn't a pleasant thing for someone who doesn't want it. What about the people who were forced to stand on a box blindfolded? Or forced to squat in positions for hours? Or heaven forbid we forget about the ones who were beaten or forced to sodomize each other. Perhaps you should watch the news far more carefully. Although I've heard that the American media doesn't report everything.

2. The 'Saddam thing' is irrelevant. No one supports him here. Although I'd say Saddam was far better than what they have now.

pOpe
12-05-2004, 01:56 PM
1. That is a form of torture. It isn't a pleasant thing for someone who doesn't want it. What about the people who were forced to stand on a box blindfolded? Or forced to squat in positions for hours? Or heaven forbid we forget about the ones who were beaten or forced to sodomize each other. Perhaps you should watch the news far more carefully. Although I've heard that the American media doesn't report everything.

2. The 'Saddam thing' is irrelevant. No one supports him here. Although I'd say Saddam was far better than what they have now.


yeah, you're right
________
Silver Surfer Reviews (http://vaporizers.net/silver-surfer-vaporizer)

wheelchairman
12-05-2004, 01:59 PM
yeah, you're right
Don't point out the obvious. It's a waste of space.

4moreyears
12-07-2004, 12:08 AM
Don't get angry at the guys cutting off heads or anything. Let me do a little backround on interrogations. It is a major disgrace to be naked around others in the Arab and Islamic world. Because of these tactics of interrogation, we have received so much information, helping us in certain battles. So, these interrogations and tactics, tragic as you may believe, saved lives. What is more important?

wheelchairman
12-07-2004, 12:30 AM
That's typical military rhetoric. You didn't save any lives from this information. Terrorist and resistance groups are far too decentralized for them to know anything about anything. What you accomplished was breaking international law yet again. On people who had not recieved a proper trial.

And I'm not angry at the guys cutting off heads.

RXP
12-07-2004, 02:35 AM
International law isn't even law. It's a joke. But I can't be bothered to go into it.

T-6005
12-07-2004, 02:39 AM
Really? Torture bad but head cutting good?

I think it's all horrible, the US has really gone down the shitter if soldiers are allowed to do that to people.

Of course, it was always the shitter... nah, I don't know that.

But yeah, results or no results, torture has never been right. You're reducing people to something less than human, hardly worthy of notice... the pictures shown in the world media have triumphant US soldiers standing over prey they have successfully hunted and can now butcher for meat... not other prisoners.

wheelchairman
12-07-2004, 04:27 AM
Where have I stated that cutting heads off was good?

The US military always botches jobs when they invade countries and overthrow the government. From Guatemala and Iran in the early 50's to Iraq and Afghanistan today.

If we wanted to stop mass-murder, we'd stop funding the right-wing death squads that commit massacres in villages in Latin America.

4moreyears
12-08-2004, 02:57 AM
"And I'm not angry at the guys cutting off heads."


You need to seriously do some thinking about yourself. Sawing someones head off with a butcher knife while they are still alive. If you dont care about that, but you get pissed at the first sign of an arab with underwear on his head, it would seem that you do not care about right and wrong, but instead, just absolutely NEED to be an anti-American. Now THAT is defending terrorists.

wheelchairman
12-08-2004, 03:01 AM
"And I'm not angry at the guys cutting off heads."


You need to seriously do some thinking about yourself. Sawing someones head off with a butcher knife while they are still alive. If you dont care about that, but you get pissed at the first sign of an arab with underwear on his head, it would seem that you do not care about right and wrong, but instead, just absolutely NEED to be an anti-American. Now THAT is defending terrorists.
We can go in on the high civilian death toll if you want. Personally I believe it's America that is the obvious occupational force, and all forms of resistance are to be expected when you botch a country up that badly. If people thought Saddam was bad, well how could they have ever guessed that Americans would be worse?

I've defended Americans enough times to be pretty sure that I'm not anti-American, I just believe that when it comes to national resistance, of course you're going to piss off the population.

Panzerfaust92
12-08-2004, 04:43 AM
Sawing someones head off with a butcher knife while they are still alive. If you dont care about that, but you get pissed at the first sign of an arab with underwear on his head, it would seem that you do not care about right and wrong, but instead, just absolutely NEED to be an anti-American. Now THAT is defending terrorists.

I think the fact that an American was killed so brutally like that is only further proof that the war shouldn't have been started in the first place. I don't like it when Americans are slowly hacked to death. That's just not the kind of guy I am.

offspringueuse
12-08-2004, 07:34 AM
yes I know since I'm french but I don't know if the american aware about it!!! are there american here who can say me that they know it?

Not Ozymandias
12-08-2004, 03:52 PM
"And I'm not angry at the guys cutting off heads."


You need to seriously do some thinking about yourself. Sawing someones head off with a butcher knife while they are still alive. If you dont care about that, but you get pissed at the first sign of an arab with underwear on his head, it would seem that you do not care about right and wrong, but instead, just absolutely NEED to be an anti-American. Now THAT is defending terrorists.
There's been less than a dozen victims of the decapitating freaks.
14000+ Iraqi civilians have died from their "liberation".
Prioritize.

SicN Twisted
12-08-2004, 04:25 PM
I hate to seem biased, but this thread has made me notice that most right wingers are idiotic and uninformed, and most liberals/leftists are intelligent and concice.

Why is this, I wonder?

4moreyears
12-09-2004, 02:00 PM
LOL, If you think having a brain overload of propaganda bullshit is being intelligent and concise, you're the one with the problem. You complain if there is a civilian casualty, you complain when we remove all the civilians to avoid casualties, you complain when gas prices are low, you complain when prices are high, you act like you have been to Iraq when I have actually seen what goes on there. I could not go down the Baghdad main without getting a thank you or a handshake for the liberation. My main post was to guard Baghdad Arena, where Iraqi competitors were "trained" to compete by being tortured. Well, you know what? I don't even care what you all think, because until you actually decide to get your ass over to Baghdad, you're all just worthless propaganda machines. You all have a nice life.

Thank God for 4 More Years

Wake Up People

Vera
12-09-2004, 02:17 PM
Have you ever thought that maybe the military would certainly love you to think the way you do so that the next time they feel a need to "spread freedom" somewhere, they're able to send you over there?

But nooo, the military wouldn't do that! War propaganda? Surely not! Has NEVER existed!

The thing is that when you go to Iraq, you're either on one side or the other and only get to hear one side's views about things. That's pretty much what happens you have a war-type of situation going on in there. It's hard to an unbiased journalist when you need someone to protect you in a country where there's a war going on.

As a soldier, you're probably more willing to believe that you didn't fight for no good reason, in an illegal war started by an asshat of a president. I understand so much, but come the fuck on.

Ever heard that saying, "something something, fucking for virginity"? Yeah. Try to get where we're coming from.

Also. Capitalization Doesn't Make Your Points Any More True.

wheelchairman
12-09-2004, 02:25 PM
Well Vera basically covered what I was going to say.

You may have been to Iraq (this is something you most certainly cannot prove, just like you can't prove that I've never been to Iraq), that is a null and void point.

Furthermore if Iraqi's love the occupation, how come it seems that the resistance is gaining more and more popular support and coalition troops are generally forced to patrol in armored vehicles from fear? Or why before engaging a city with 'enemy hostiles' or whatever stupid term, you basically carpet bomb it because the ground troops are so few compared to the enemy?

America claims that the resistance is ba'athist loyalists and Islamic fundamentalists (two groups who certainly wouldn't be able to work together) but America forgets that the average man has lost his livelihood and more than likely a loved one in the invasion, that there is far less security, and far less democracy, far less electricity for that matter. You have everyone against you, yes the ba'athists and the muslims, but all the christians, also communists, also the patriots and the nationalists, also the average people.

And speaking of worthless propaganda machines, which one of us is tugging the DC line full-on dogmatic style? It certainly isn't me. Which one of us doesn't have valid points and where even the CIA's latest report (which was leaked to the press) seems to contradict?

I know I ain't living in a dream world. So which one of us is?

Not Ozymandias
12-09-2004, 03:30 PM
LOL, If you think having a brain overload of propaganda bullshit is being intelligent and concise, you're the one with the problem. You complain if there is a civilian casualty, you complain when we remove all the civilians to avoid casualties, you complain when gas prices are low, you complain when prices are high, you act like you have been to Iraq when I have actually seen what goes on there. I could not go down the Baghdad main without getting a thank you or a handshake for the liberation. My main post was to guard Baghdad Arena, where Iraqi competitors were "trained" to compete by being tortured. Well, you know what? I don't even care what you all think, because until you actually decide to get your ass over to Baghdad, you're all just worthless propaganda machines. You all have a nice life.
Loser.



Never return.

SicN Twisted
12-09-2004, 04:56 PM
4moreyears, because you're a staioned soldier, I can't address you as someone who I respect. Bush says not to negotiate with terrorists, but I guess I will anyone. I don't know what your idea of a thank you is, but I see on the news how many Iraqi rebels thank you by defending themselves against you with every ounce of strength they have. Rebels have been turning your war of "liberation" into a complete catastrophy and you still think that you're doing the right thing. You're not the one to be calling people brainwashed, you fucking government pawn. And I've yet to here you acknowledge, let alone reply to the fact that thousands more civilians have been slaughtered by your terrorist army then soldiers by Iraqis.

Since the militants are not that organized, the brutal death of you and your entire platoon seems very unlikely, but I'll let you know that despite the fact that I have pity and empathy for some American soldiers, whenever I here on the news that some of you are killed, I feel proud of the Iraqis for defending their land. Hopefully, the US will go through a surge of sanity and justice and you'll be court martialled and imprisoned like you deserve with the rest of your terrorist troops.

SicN Twisted
12-09-2004, 05:05 PM
I'll agree with Betty in saying it's unfair to call you and idiot. You're obviously someone with convictions and backs them up reletively intelligently. I do however consider you a terrorist, and for all your friends in Iraq, I have friends who live in Chilie, Guatamala, and even one friend in East Timor who have had families massacred by your "humanitarian" intervention. So if you have the nerve to play "I was there" card, be careful who you play with. The US army has been responsible for fascist insurgencies, genocides, and the overthrowing of several different democracies, and I'm well within my rights, through personal experience and through political and historical knowledge, to look at you and your worthless marine friends in the same regard as the SS.

Moose
12-09-2004, 09:45 PM
you people throw around the word terrorist as if it were an everyday used concept such as existence. Calling a soldier who is defending his country a terrorist is pretty weak. And just because he believes in his country and the war doesnt make him an idiot. Also i believe sic that you said you can respect him because he was a soldier...that doesnt seem to be a reason not to respect someone. Im not saying I agree with this was, im just saying you people are calling the one's such as 4 more years an idiot and a fool because he believes his country is doing the right thing and that he is a terrorist because he is a soldier. That just seems overblown. Either way these are just opinions of things that we will never ever know the full and total story behind...but maybe im the idiot here...and im sure some of you will say that...starting now.

Betty
12-09-2004, 10:37 PM
Okay, this is kinda lame... but I thought it was kinda interesting when I read it.

"Believe it or not, some people were even pro-American! I couldn‘t believe it. They talked about the vast amounts of foreign aid the the US gives countries in the Middle East every year, and some even said that they were glad that Saddam is gone! They were also frustrated with the dangerous image that the Middle East has now. They blamed the media for sensationalizing certain events, making it seem like the whole region is like that all the time. I thought that was a really good point. How many times have I watched CNN showing kidnappings, or suicide bombings, or demonstrations in the streets, and thought, this must be how it is everywhere over there all the time?

Now, I don‘t want to get into whether we should be in Iraq or not, or whether Bush is bad or not, because it‘s a really divisive and complicated situation. However, I thought it was a very enlightening and educational experience to actually talk to the people that are living it" - Dexter

I don't really wanna get involved in the discussion, cause I really don't know what I think about the war... I think I would have to learn a LOT about the issues to come to a conclusion... but this sorta follows along the actually talking to the people there line... it is just another perspective to add.

Scarecrow
12-10-2004, 01:47 AM
It was wrong to go to Iraq.. but at least the american soldiers have the right to defend theirselves over there. Few months ago a dutch soldier fired a warning shot and got courtmarshaled :mad: cause a Iraqi rioting guy died of a bullit (wich after all wasn't fired by the dutch soldier).

And like said we can discuss if it was right to go there, but maybe its better to discuss how this can be resolved in the best way for both sides.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 04:08 AM
you people throw around the word terrorist as if it were an everyday used concept such as existence. Calling a soldier who is defending his country a terrorist is pretty weak. And just because he believes in his country and the war doesnt make him an idiot. Also i believe sic that you said you can respect him because he was a soldier...that doesnt seem to be a reason not to respect someone. Im not saying I agree with this was, im just saying you people are calling the one's such as 4 more years an idiot and a fool because he believes his country is doing the right thing and that he is a terrorist because he is a soldier. That just seems overblown. Either way these are just opinions of things that we will never ever know the full and total story behind...but maybe im the idiot here...and im sure some of you will say that...starting now.
I think perhaps you should take a reading-comprehension test. Somehow I think you've misunderstood over half of what Sic said.

And how is the war in Iraq in any way, a defensive war? You basically have justified the resistance because they are defending their own country. Unlike USA who is not defending itself because it never needed to.

pOpe
12-10-2004, 06:10 AM
Well, the only thing that is true is that american soldier shouldn't be there, 'cause they don't do anything... no, sorry, they do one thing, KILL. The president of USA invaded Irak 'cause this country had weapons.... what weapons???? then Bush said that american soldiers are in Irak to liberate iraqui people.... how? with tortures??? why Bush doesn't "liberate" Cuba for example? oh sorry, I forgot it, Cuba don't have oil

And what about Guantanamo... whichever way you look at it Bush stinks out :mad:


Pd: sorry about my english :p
________
Mercedes-Benz W212 History (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W212)

lousyskater
12-10-2004, 11:30 AM
you people throw around the word terrorist as if it were an everyday used concept such as existence.
it is an everyday concept. you turn on the news and it's there. you hear the word at least 10 times an hour.

Vera
12-10-2004, 01:36 PM
I think I may actually hear the word "terrorist" more than the word "existence".

Not all of us live in Philosophy class, mate.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 01:38 PM
Loser.



Never return

(dont know how to copy text)


Okay then. I guess If I am outnumbered, I will check out of this discussion. Bush already won, and I am going back to Iraq soon. But just to let you know, I am not defending my opinions because I want them to be correct. I have never seen an American kill an Iraqi civilian for no reason. All I have seen is my enemy hiding behind white flags. They fake like they are injured, so we help them, and get killed. That is how I was wounded. My buddy, Cpl. John Miller, USMC, was killed in our encounter. This is what I have witnessed. Just expressing another side of the story. See you all in the afterlife.

Semper Fidelis

Cpl. Michael Barker, USMC

Vera
12-10-2004, 01:44 PM
Do you really want to fight this war?

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 01:49 PM
Yeah, those kids are nasty little fuckers. So are women, damn bitches.

SicN Twisted
12-10-2004, 02:05 PM
Okay then. I guess If I am outnumbered, I will check out of this discussion. Bush already won, and I am going back to Iraq soon. But just to let you know, I am not defending my opinions because I want them to be correct. I have never seen an American kill an Iraqi civilian for no reason. All I have seen is my enemy hiding behind white flags. They fake like they are injured, so we help them, and get killed. That is how I was wounded. My buddy, Cpl. John Miller, USMC, was killed in our encounter. This is what I have witnessed. Just expressing another side of the story. See you all in the afterlife.



Wonderful. I hope they excersize their right to defend their country and murder you brutally.

pOpe
12-10-2004, 02:54 PM
I have never seen an American kill an Iraqi civilian for no reason.

what??? I see in TV a week ago more ore less that one american soldier shot an iraqi person 'cause "he was imitating a death" (I don't know if this words are right... sorry, my english is so poor :( ). This iraqi man was injured and defenceless... what do you tell me about that? do you belive that this is a good reason to kill a man?? please answer these question, I want to know it
________
Marijuana Seeds (http://marijuanaseeds.org/)

number70
12-10-2004, 03:05 PM
tell me about it, this is offending americans but, he has got to be the most annoying, stupid, arrogant, ignorent, crazy and worst leader ever.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:11 PM
Ah sounds like a good time for this:
http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/images/war.312.gif

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:14 PM
Again, you said he murdered a defenseless iraqi. 3 times before this Iraqi was killed, other insurgents were hiding behind white flags...imitating death. They faked to be wounded, pleading for help, but as we tried to help them, the deceivers dropped grenades or pulled out pistols. I stated this once, maybe you should read the posts fully, and not just the parts you want to hear. Again, that is how I was injured.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:17 PM
It is also funny how you state actions I have never seen nor done. I have never killed an innocent Iraqi. I have never seen one killed. I am sure there have been casualties in war, as there always are. If we based the choice to never go to war off of whether or not there would be casualties, the Spanish guy would be speaking German, as Hitler would have conquered Europe, and about 75% of these countries in the world today would not exist.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:21 PM
wheelchairman Yeah, those kids are nasty little fuckers. So are women, damn bitches.
Today 01:44 PM


Yep, that is why Saddam killed over 400,000 of his own people, 1/2 of which were women and children. We expect to find a million more bodies in the Iraqi desert. What a nice place to live.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:22 PM
How you say you were injured, I was in Iraq and all I saw was soldiers shooting everybody.

See how credible that is?

Let's face it, the civilian death toll numbers go against what you say. The Iraqis are following typical guerilla tactics during war, why that comes as a surprise to you, I don't know.

However, for example, there was a scandal in Denmark when Danish soldiers were investigating a truck with some Iraqis in it. At one point a soldier was one top of it, bullets went off, and all the drivers and passengers were shot. The funny thing is, the people inside the truck had no weapons, it was only the Danish soldiers who had weapons.

At another point Danish soldiers shot a boy who was riding his bike at night because it didn't have a light on it.

This is the same thing we saw in Vietnam, people were shooting children because they were afraid the Vietcong had tied grenades to their backs. That's justification, but then again, there is justification to everything and you have no one who will hold you accountable to it, that is unless it gets caught on tape.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:25 PM
Yep, that is why Saddam killed over 400,000 of his own people, 1/2 of which were women and children. We expect to find a million more bodies in the Iraqi desert. What a nice place to live.
If you want to quote somebody, press the 'quote' button near their post. Twill save you a lot of extra work.

Can you give me a link to the number 400,000?

Either way he hadn't done anything like that in over 14 years. He was basically a powerless and useless dictator.

But that was a nice diversionary tactic there, still doesn't excuse the continued killing of women and children by occupational forces in Iraq.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:27 PM
It is also funny how you state actions I have never seen nor done. I have never killed an innocent Iraqi. I have never seen one killed. I am sure there have been casualties in war, as there always are. If we based the choice to never go to war off of whether or not there would be casualties, the Spanish guy would be speaking German, as Hitler would have conquered Europe, and about 75% of these countries in the world today would not exist.
Well you should learn some history, Spain was allied with Hitler, seeing as Franco was a fascist dictator who's dictatorship lasted until the late '70's I believe.

Saddam was not Hitler, since he couldn't go anywhere. In fact, it would be easier to compare America with Fascist Germany.

But as long as we are going completely off-topic, then please, explain to me the justification of the CIA funding the Contras? Or of the democratically elected governments we overthrew in South America? Or the tragedy of Mossadegh?

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:28 PM
Exactly. My point of actually being in Iraq is not credible at all, due to the fact that I can't prove it, just like you can't prove Bush went to war for oil, some of the civilians are actually "innocent". That's right, I have seen "innocents killed". The rocket propelled grenade launcher usually gives away their "innocence". All you can do is take me at my word. Heck, why not? You took Michael Moore's word without question.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:30 PM
Can you give me a link to the number 400,000?




Google it.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:31 PM
Really now, please show me where I took Michael Moore's word without question.
Please show me where I said I have proof that Bush went to war for oil?

I only know why he didn't go to war.

I also know that as an American soldier, you are a blind patriot and more than likely, a liar. Or someone who twists words like "innocent" and "justification" to say and mean just about anything.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:31 PM
Google it.
No give me a fuckin' source, or I will tell you that you made that number up, and that Saddam killed nobody. Wouldn't that be a cryin' shame.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:37 PM
Read all the previous posts. I didn't mean YOU in particular. Where do you get the credibility to call me a blind patriot? You don't know why I enlisted, or what I have seen.


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5773

There is your link.

Around paragraph 14

I have no doubt you will say this isn't enough, so just say so and i will get another.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:39 PM
And please, read the WHOLE article...not just what you want to hear...

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:41 PM
Right cause The New York Times is purely unbiased.

I meant sources like, from the Iraqi archives, or from someone who studied the situation carefully (an expert), a journalist could never know the number, he would've gotten his numbers from somewhere.

Edit:

Just read the article more carefully. Apparently the majority of deaths in Iraq happened due to the Iran-Iraq war (a war that America goaded and supported both sides in, mostly Iraqi though). So yeah, half of those deaths were women and children, at the hands of Khomeini. The same as when Saddam bombed Tehran. But then, that means the combined deaths of Afghanistan and Iraq are directly at Bush's responsibility. And basically making him another Saddam or Pol Pot or whatever you want. Nope, you're gonna need to find better logic buddy.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:46 PM
Like I said, read the whole article.

And a majority of these mass murders DID occur during the Iran-Iraq War. Google up a city called Halabja. But be sure to google it under images...if you have a strong stomach.

4moreyears
12-10-2004, 03:47 PM
All right guys, have a nice life, I will actually leave now. Talk to you in four years. Oh yeah, and people from other countries...You don't know anything about what Bush has done for America, so don't act like you do. See you.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 03:52 PM
And what the fuck do you know about people from other countries? I live in Denmark, I'm an American citizen, I lived in America when Bush was 'elected' the first time.

Yes, but the Iran-Iraq war casualties don't really count for anything. That would be like saying Roosevelt was responsible for German casualties during WW2. He obviously was, but that kind of logic is stupid and will only get you in backwards fucked situations because America has created a lot more deaths than it has ever saved. For your own good, don't use such stupid logic, it will only get you into traps you could've avoided.

And I already know about the tragedies of the Iran-Iraq war, when both nations started bombing each other's capitals, the kind of tragedy that creates is just awful, since both were heavily populated.

Your article was full of inaccuracies. Like Stalin killing 20 million. (a highly exaggerated number, most people who've done the research will say it's closer to 5 million. Obviously if any article has a margin of error of 15 million, then it's numbers are pretty much worthless.)

And you've already said goodbye once on this forum. Who are you really? I'm betting you are a forum member, who didn't want to share your real screen name.

Vera
12-10-2004, 04:08 PM
I still don't understand why one'd want to fight in an illegal war, but suit yourself.

Mota Boy
12-10-2004, 04:39 PM
Right cause The New York Times is purely unbiased.

I meant sources like, from the Iraqi archives, or from someone who studied the situation carefully (an expert), a journalist could never know the number, he would've gotten his numbers from somewhere.


So... you would trust "Iraqi archives" over mainstream media? Wcm, your skepticism often seems to amount to self-imposed brainwashing. You challenged him to provide a source to back up his claims and he did in one of the most respected journalist sources. Without providing any evidence of your own to disprove it, you brush it off due to bias (ironically, a great number of conservatives would also claim that the Times is biased, but in a direction that would undercount rather than exaggerate deaths under Saddam's regime).

Unless you can provide better statistics from better sources, I think that you have little room for challenging it.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 05:02 PM
I'm not the one defending the invasion of Iraq. I have no need to get credible sources.

The New York Times is right up there with The Washington Post.

Of course I don't trust mainstream media, there are inaccuracies in every article. Especially since that article was written by John F. Burns, a man notorious for being pro-war in his writings, I would have no doubt that he'd fudge the numbers. He fudged the Stalin numbers.

And yes I would trust the archives more, Saddam was an administrator, everything was recorded. I wouldn't trust them solely, but I would say they are far more reliable than a journalist in the states. Wouldn't you say?

Betty
12-10-2004, 05:09 PM
I'm not the one defending the invasion of Iraq. I have no need to get credible sources.

I don't agree with THAT at all. Holy double standard.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 05:15 PM
Why should I find a credible source for the numbers of death done by Saddam when I'm not trying to justify the war?

That's not a double standard, that's looking for things that wouldn't be relevant.

Betty
12-10-2004, 05:20 PM
That argument does not make sense to me. Because if you're trying to justify that his source is not valid, would you not need your own source?

Or even, you're trying to argue that the war isn't justified so would you not need to either say the number of deaths was acceptable, OR have a source to say they aren't high?

Maybe it's just me here, but it still really seems like a double standard.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 05:27 PM
I could choose to have a valid source on the deaths done by Saddam. But I chose to think that massacres were impossible for him, and have been for 12-13 years. So when people pull the butcher-card, I generally say that it's irrelevant in today's world. Or 2003's.

And I don't need a good source to say his is bad. I would need a good source if I wanted to give him a better source.

Besides, his source was based entirely upon the deaths of the Iran-Iraq war. By most standards that is stupid.

Betty
12-10-2004, 05:33 PM
I don't know... if it just comes down to how you interpret things... then I guess you can disregard sources, but it's not fair to demand them from others.

Also... the fact that you say his source is bad without provididng a better one... while you might think it is okay... I don't think it gives you any credibility.

Sources suck anyway due to bias for the most part.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 05:36 PM
In my mind, sources are for people defending their views. I'll gladly offer sources when I'm defending my views. But when criticizing views, then I ask for the sources, since I am contesting the view that the defender is trying to establish.

In my mind, it's simply the rules of the contradiction between the defendent and antagonist.

Betty
12-10-2004, 05:51 PM
My boyfriend gives me that exact same argument all the time, so I guess you're not crazy. (Or not the only crazy one)

Whatever, I still have a hard time agreeing with either of you cause it doesn't seem fair.

I'll just have to use that against you some time. I'm allowed to criticize any view you defend, but not have to offer sources. I can just say anything I feel like.

And even if it's not based on "fairness", I can't see how I could properly criticize your defence in that situation. Simply in terms of who can make the better argument.

I don't really see it as defender/antagonist though. It starts off that way, but then I think that both people are essentially defending a point of view. Unless one is simply picking out errors, and not really backing up the opposite side. But you seem to be actually backing the opposite side.

I don't know... doesn't makes sense to me... maybe I'm the crazy one though... maybe your view is common among stubborn people (note: I am also slightly stubborn).

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 05:56 PM
Well no you couldn't just say anything.

For example if I said (hypothetical situation) that Saddam killed 5 kajillion people. And you replied saying that, no he didn't. I'd have to give you my link. Although if you elaborated and said "no he didn't, he killed 5" then you in one sentence are the antagonist but also proposition yourself to be the defendent because you offer a new view to convince.

I hope I make some sense. It's almost 2 am for me.

Mota Boy
12-10-2004, 06:03 PM
In my mind, sources are for people defending their views. I'll gladly offer sources when I'm defending my views. But when criticizing views, then I ask for the sources, since I am contesting the view that the defender is trying to establish.

In my mind, it's simply the rules of the contradiction between the defendent and antagonist.


In criticizing his view, however, you need to present an alternate version. To make a good case, you can't merely say that he is wrong, but provide evidence to say that you are correct. He provided a source. As uncredible as you may find it, it still carries far more credibility than you do. To me, he's provided evidence that says that the casualties were X (and although he states that many occurred during the Iraq-Iran war, he also claims that 200,000 people have died later through systemic torture and murder rather than large-scale massacres), you have not provided any evidence what soever to disprove his claims other than a general disregard for his sources.

I think that, once you challenge him, the burden is upon you to make a better case. In an argument, two people are defending their views, not just one. To this observer, you come away presenting quite an inept case.

Betty
12-10-2004, 06:05 PM
Yeah, that's what I'm saying exactly. It makes sense.

I checked back over the posts and I guess you mostly pointed out that most of the deaths were from the Iran/Iraq war. (I didn't read the article). So that would mean you are simply criticizing him. But had you offered an opposing view, you should have to supply backup. (for example, possibly with the Stalin numbers, but that's not directly related to the issue). I was under the impression that you did offer an opposing view, but you didn't really too much, at least not directly regarding the article itself.

wheelchairman
12-10-2004, 06:07 PM
Well so be it. Twas never my prerogative to show the number of deaths committed by Saddam. I just wanted him to find a fixed number, instead of changing it by the hundred thousands with every post (not that he was doing that personally. But that happens with genocidal dictators and their reputations.)

I don't see why I need to give the correct number of Saddam deaths. It is not me who is trying to justify the war based on deaths at the hands of Saddam. I only wish to do the opposite.

pOpe
12-10-2004, 06:40 PM
It is also funny how you state actions I have never seen nor done. I have never killed an innocent Iraqi. I have never seen one killed. I am sure there have been casualties in war, as there always are. If we based the choice to never go to war off of whether or not there would be casualties, the Spanish guy would be speaking German, as Hitler would have conquered Europe, and about 75% of these countries in the world today would not exist.


... you are like bush, a nazi :mad: , it's incredible that there are people who thinks like you... it's really so sad
________
IPAD GUIDE (http://ipadguides.info)

Moose
12-11-2004, 01:34 AM
I think perhaps you should take a reading-comprehension test. Somehow I think you've misunderstood over half of what Sic said.

And how is the war in Iraq in any way, a defensive war? You basically have justified the resistance because they are defending their own country. Unlike USA who is not defending itself because it never needed to.


i dont remember sic's post and im not going back to read it, but from what it seems or remember or whatever, it is as if he or you or some of you are calling the soldiers terrorists...im just saying they are doing their job and they shouldnt be hated by people for doing it in this case.

Moose
12-11-2004, 01:58 AM
also wcm...the fact that you said you would take and trust reports and accounts from hussan is pretty sad...you are defending him as if he were some sort of great leader...he was a fucking killer, we know this stop being a fucking wise ass and say show me the numbers...you call 4moreyears being ignorant, well you are doing the same, in this case...we know he raped and killed and took the people's money...stop being so fucking ridiculous and at least give 4moreyrs that ground...cant u at least admit hussan was a vicious killer? i mean i know you hate america and want to prove how they are so big and bad everytime, but sometimes you have to give up some ground when certain things are obvious as that.

you all react to this guy as if he were evil...even that pope killed called him a nazi...pope you are a fucking idiot...the guy is doing his job, he isnt fucking raping and killing people for no fucking reason...he is in a mode of self-defense...he doesnt have much of a choice right now...the guy isnt evil...he has his own opinions like we all do...he isnt saying rape little boys and girls, cook them, and eat them...all he is saying is his opinion on the war...fuck give him a break you fucking america hating fuckers...and i dont really even agree with the war...

i guess it just annoys me when i read a post and it says they "I hope they excersize their right to defend their country and murder you brutally"...that is a real fucked up thing to say, and i am a person that is coming from a person that says a lot of fucked up things...you are basically wishing death on this person who merely believes he is doing the right thing...how do you expect for people who dont lean one way or the other to take you seriously or listen to what you say? some of you people are fucking sad...and im not saying im not say or perfect or anything, but at least i dont go wishing death on someone because i disagree with their ideas on this war.

Scarecrow
12-11-2004, 03:52 AM
i dont remember sic's post and im not going back to read it, but from what it seems or remember or whatever, it is as if he or you or some of you are calling the soldiers terrorists...im just saying they are doing their job and they shouldnt be hated by people for doing it in this case.

You invade a country, steal their oil, accuse the former leader of having WMD (which he has not) and the people shouldn't hate you for doing this?

Sure saddam was wrong, but why must the 2nd oil country in the world be invaded and not a country with a worse regime?

wheelchairman
12-11-2004, 04:24 AM
i dont remember sic's post and im not going back to read it, but from what it seems or remember or whatever, it is as if he or you or some of you are calling the soldiers terrorists...im just saying they are doing their job and they shouldnt be hated by people for doing it in this case.
They are the arm that defends the imperialist occupation of Iraq. This is a wrong activity to participate in, of course I don't like them.

I have compassion only for those forced into soldiering through poverty.

wheelchairman
12-11-2004, 04:34 AM
also wcm...the fact that you said you would take and trust reports and accounts from hussan is pretty sad...you are defending him as if he were some sort of great leader...
These two statements are completely unrelated. Base your arguments on something relevant.


he was a fucking killer, we know this stop being a fucking wise ass and say show me the numbers...
Why?


you call 4moreyears being ignorant, well you are doing the same, in this case...we know he raped and killed and took the people's money...
haha that's a new one. Oh you are so going have to source that. Please give me a single source where it says he raped people.


stop being so fucking ridiculous and at least give 4moreyrs that ground...cant u at least admit hussan was a vicious killer?
For the past 12 years Hussain was a pussy dictator. Not nearly a vicious killer.


i mean i know you hate america and want to prove how they are so big and bad everytime,
This is more stupidity, just because I'm against the occupation I must hate America. Real smooth jackass.


but sometimes you have to give up some ground when certain things are obvious as that. ¨
Let's put it this way, unlike you, I choose not to believe every single thing that other people accept as true. Cause that would be stupid. Like that whole killer-bee media scare.


you all react to this guy as if he were evil...even that pope killed called him a nazi...pope you are a fucking idiot...the guy is doing his job, he isnt fucking raping and killing people for no fucking reason...
The civilian death count shows otherwise.


he is in a mode of self-defense...he doesnt have much of a choice right now...the guy isnt evil...he has his own opinions like we all do...
what the fuck are you going on about? self-defence mode? like that's an excuse to shoot civilians?


he isnt saying rape little boys and girls, cook them, and eat them...
No he's just a member of a brutal occupation force that fucked up an entire country.



all he is saying is his opinion on the war...fuck give him a break you fucking america hating fuckers...and i dont really even agree with the war...
Get over your lack of dick size already, just because we disagree doesn't mean we hate America. Jesus I hate fools like you who draw such conclusions.


i guess it just annoys me when i read a post and it says they "I hope they excersize their right to defend their country and murder you brutally"...that is a real fucked up thing to say, and i am a person that is coming from a person that says a lot of fucked up things...you are basically wishing death on this person who merely believes he is doing the right thing...
Bejaysus I thought we would get a better reason than that. Hitler thought he was doing the right thing you know. but omg he wuz juzt mizgu1d3d!!?



how do you expect for people who dont lean one way or the other to take you seriously or listen to what you say? some of you people are fucking sad...and im not saying im not say or perfect or anything, but at least i dont go wishing death on someone because i disagree with their ideas on this war.
Why shouldn't Sic wish Americans to lose the occupation? Sic has every right to be sympathetic with the resistance in Iraq, what is your hurry to say this is a bad thing when Sic says he wants the occupation to lose?

4moreyears
12-11-2004, 10:17 AM
haha that's a new one. Oh you are so going have to source that. Please give me a single source where it says he raped people.


http://www.alittlemoretotheright.com/journal/00000405.html

http://www.defensesupplier.com/defense/defensenews/general-crime-in-the-news/general-crime-in-the-news-p-326.html

Here are some links to source that.

4moreyears
12-11-2004, 10:34 AM
Just a sum up of what you just said...



[QUOTE=wheelchairman]
For the past 12 years Hussain was a pussy dictator. Not nearly a vicious killer.

Killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people for no reason. Halabja. That is a city in Iraq. Look it up.

¨

Let's put it this way, unlike you, I choose not to believe every single thing that other people accept as true. Cause that would be stupid. Like that whole killer-bee media scare.

Hmm...I'm actually pretty sure you believe Michael Moore in Fahrenheit 9/11, when I alone can defeat any accusation he throws out there...just try.



what the fuck are you going on about? self-defence mode? like that's an excuse to shoot civilians?

Like I said, I have never shot an innocent person, nor have I seen an innocent person shot. And neither have you, unless of course you believe every single thing the left-wingers accept as true...you can't have it both ways.



No he's just a member of a brutal occupation force that fucked up an entire country.

Yep, and that's why I couldn't go down a street without getting a thank you from an Iraqi civilian.



Bejaysus I thought we would get a better reason than that. Hitler thought he was doing the right thing you know. but omg he wuz juzt mizgu1d3d!!?

When I kill 6 million Jews, you can use that argument against me.



Why shouldn't Sic wish Americans to lose the occupation? Sic has every right to be sympathetic with the resistance in Iraq, what is your hurry to say this is a bad thing when Sic says he wants the occupation to lose?

I agree...Sic has every right to wish for our loss, or my death. If he were American, I would be defending his right to believe that.

4moreyears
12-11-2004, 10:55 AM
Your article was full of inaccuracies. Like Stalin killing 20 million. (a highly exaggerated number, most people who've done the research will say it's closer to 5 million.



Give me a source

wheelchairman
12-11-2004, 11:13 AM
Those links, reading those critically, that was like eating a nice dish of veal. Thank you.

Alright, first link: A Little More To The Right.

hmm...well obviously I'm gonna trust a source that is not only right wing, but A little More right wing, yeah real convincing stuff that. Especially since that article came from the "Humor and Opinion" section. Well bi-golly it must be true.

And again, I will re-iterate, because it stands in a newspaper does not make it true. Especially an online newspaper inside the Humor and Opinion section of what is an extreme right wing periodical.

The second link obviously more professionally done. However what in your right mind thinks I'm going to trust the newsletter of a Defense Supplier. Right....cause they have no monetary interests in war....

Now time for the best article of all. The very last article. When I first read it, it sounded like the guy had some knowledge of what he was saying. Despite the fact that all his 'evidence' were completely hypothetical situations. (which baffles me why you'd chose that as proof.) Then I decided to go and read his other articles.

Here's a good one: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=35713

This is brilliant, your source here, is a man who also believes that Al-Qaida is the creation of the CIA and the NWO. (And for people who aren't familiar with nutjob conspiracy crackpots, NWO means New World Order) there was also some throw around with Faction 2 who he probably got from some video game.

So let's sum up, your sources on Saddam raping people (none of them stated that, only one of them eluded to Uday raping but offered no real proof), but furthermore, the sources you deemed credible were
1. A Little More to the Right- A right-wing republican online blog, in which the article came from the Humor and Opinion section. Woowiee that's a shocker.
2. Defense Supplier, apparently a website that offers it's opinion, and it's products all in one. Defense Suppliers, folks you can trust!
3. A nutcase who believes that Al-Qa'ida was created by the CIA and the NWO.

Thank you, that was easy.


Killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people for no reason. Halabja. That is a city in Iraq. Look it up.
How does that defeat my point that he's been harmless for the past 12 years and that our allies in this war have been far worse than him. (Uzbekistan, look it up.)



Hmm...I'm actually pretty sure you believe Michael Moore in Fahrenheit 9/11, when I alone can defeat any accusation he throws out there...just try.
Objection your honor! lack of relevance!



Like I said, I have never shot an innocent person, nor have I seen an innocent person shot. And neither have you, unless of course you believe every single thing the left-wingers accept as true...you can't have it both ways.
This is how we should base our court system. We will ask all suspected killers if they killed an innocent human being, we will allow them repeatedly use the word "innocent" in quotation marks and then let them deny everything.



Yep, and that's why I couldn't go down a street without getting a thank you from an Iraqi civilian.


Riiiiiight
There is no resistance. Iraq has always been our enemy. Love is war. Freedom is Slavery.



When I kill 6 million Jews, you can use that argument against me.
That's a logical fallacy. This wasn't about crimes, this was about justification for the crimes. I merely made the comparison that you both thought what you were doing was right.

Although, does this mean you find jews to be more special than arabs or persians?


I agree...Sic has every right to wish for our loss, or my death. If he were American, I would be defending his right to believe that.
I am not sure, but are you trying to relate this to the war in Iraq? Or did you just mean metaphorically so? Normally I'd assume metaphorically, but I've heard that stupid argument before.

wheelchairman
12-11-2004, 11:14 AM
Give me a source
Gladly.

http://www.thewalls.ru/truth/repress.htm

4moreyears
12-11-2004, 11:22 AM
LOL, I knew I should've taken more than 2 years of Russian in HS.

wheelchairman
12-11-2004, 11:25 AM
The most important part of that was the statistics. You can translate most of them with:

www.babelfish.altavista.com/tr
probably with the Google language tools.
and I don't know, but freetranslation.com might do Russian as well.

Scarecrow
12-12-2004, 03:05 PM
http://www.worldlingo.com/products_services/worldlingo_translator.html

try this one

SicN Twisted
12-12-2004, 06:54 PM
You've never killed an Iraq civilian yourself, but you're still part of a force that regularly murders civilians. As your own president said, you're a terrorist if you affiliate yourself with a terrorist group. American taxpayers are all terrorists by that definition, so you certainly can't get off saying you personally haven't killed any innocent Iraqis. If you don't think it's happened a whole lot, you're delusional.

*motions toast towards Iraqi resistence and takes a swig*

Moose
12-12-2004, 07:22 PM
nice, now im a terrorist! YAY!!!!!!!

4moreyears
12-12-2004, 10:22 PM
I understand what you mean there. I know it has happened, and it is a tragedy. I wish war could be prettier. I'm irritated at those scumbags who actually do kill civilians. And the reason I have put the word "innocent" in quotation marks, is I have been shot at by someone who seemed to be "innocent". Oh, and sorry about that first link wheelchairman, bad example. I can understand if you don't want to trust that. Heck, I wouldn't trust prisonplanet.com, so we're even. And I know...I have said goodbye a lot, but politics is one of my favorite topics to talk about, so I can't resist. I will probably stick to this board until I go back.

SicN Twisted
12-13-2004, 12:13 AM
If you love politics, then it would be in your best interest to learn more about it. You obviously have minimal understanding of post wwII American foreign policy and it's motives. Do you know anything about the School of the Americas, or the numerous fascist coups and genocides your government has supported? Do you know that the US supported Saddam Hussein throughout his worst atrocities, and even assisted him in covering them up?

meaning_of_life
12-13-2004, 05:16 AM
ive got to say revolver 2005 is a fool. how can you say president bush is an "idiot" and "stupid" because he nearly choked on a pretzel, and continued to read a childrens story when he heard about 9/11. this is PURE idiocy, anyone can choke on a pretzel, even the smartest of smartest and i wonder how YOU would have dealt with hearing the trade center has been destroyed. what was he meant to do, start screaming and run out of the room? i understand your view on bush but i cannot take anyone seriously if they are going to argue and use this shit to back it up. stick to the important facts.

wheelchairman
12-13-2004, 05:46 AM
ive got to say revolver 2005 is a fool. how can you say president bush is an "idiot" and "stupid" because he nearly choked on a pretzel, and continued to read a childrens story when he heard about 9/11. this is PURE idiocy, anyone can choke on a pretzel, even the smartest of smartest and i wonder how YOU would have dealt with hearing the trade center has been destroyed. what was he meant to do, start screaming and run out of the room? i understand your view on bush but i cannot take anyone seriously if they are going to argue and use this shit to back it up. stick to the important facts.
It's alright to be an apologist when it comes to the pretzel. Especially since it was Cheney who choked on it. However, if I were president, and I heard that there was an attack on American soil, I would get in contact with Washington immediately, and I would try and get as much information as possible. The fact that Bush was completely clueless as to what action to take, makes it seem a sure sign to me that he often acts on the advice he gets, and without advisors he is clueless.

4moreyears
12-13-2004, 10:52 AM
President Bush was informed by his Chief of Staff during the photo-op to continue reading with the children. The argument that Bush didn't know what to do was used in Fahrenheit 9/11, but it was broken down pretty well during FahrenHYPE 9/11. If you have seen Moore's movie, and have a couple dollars on you, it couldn't hurt to see both sides.

wheelchairman
12-13-2004, 01:50 PM
President Bush was informed by his Chief of Staff during the photo-op to continue reading with the children. The argument that Bush didn't know what to do was used in Fahrenheit 9/11, but it was broken down pretty well during FahrenHYPE 9/11. If you have seen Moore's movie, and have a couple dollars on you, it couldn't hurt to see both sides.
I'm in Denmark, it'd be more than a couple of dollars, if I were able to find it. Why don't you break it down for me or give me a script-type thingie if you have the time?

UgLy_eLf
12-13-2004, 03:19 PM
I'm in Denmark, it'd be more than a couple of dollars, if I were able to find it. Why don't you break it down for me or give me a script-type thingie if you have the time?




Download it or something.

wheelchairman
12-13-2004, 03:23 PM
Jee thanks man, that's a lot of fuckin' help.

felix_leiter
12-13-2004, 03:59 PM
So a new generation of American kids has "woken up" to how America is really bad and all that.

Welcome to the real world. People fight. Innocent people die.

The French government wasnt against the war because they're peace-loving, but because they were already getting iraqi oil, and they didnt want competition raining on their tea-party.

Everyone knows America is in it for the money and the oil-Good! The Iraqis were in a dictatorship where their oil-selling potential wasnt being taken advantage of, and you cant make Offspring CDs without oil...

Bare in mind though, that America didnt start any wars till after 9/11, a direct attack. Afghanistan was the direct enemy and got caned for it.

All this hype about killing civilians: Do terrorists wear terrorist uniforms? No. Can children pull triggers? Yes. Are Islamists more nazi than the evangelists in America? Yes. Do they blow themselves up? Yes.

Betty
12-13-2004, 04:13 PM
WCM, Fahrenhype is a very good movie. Unfortunately I would be just as able to find information about it as you would. No idea if it's easily accessible on the Internet, but I saw a downloaded version so it must be available somehow. I'm not really the expert when it comes to that stuff.

Overall I don't think much of Fahrenheit has much credibility to it. And I think having the views you do, you could easily back up a case against Bush without relying on many of the things Moore did. Most were pretty cheap shots, or were hardcore conspiracy theories. I guess I just think it best to back up a case against Bush by saying what is fundamentally wrong, than by nitpicking on a bunch of little things that mostly aren't even true.

And to Sic, regarding learning more about politics. I may know way more about politics than a bunch of my friends, but in the scheme of things I know next to nothing. Basically what I wanted to ask though, is you have obviously read a lot about marxism, anarchism, lots of history, etc, etc, but have you read much actually supporting the other side of the story? Have you attempted to read anything pro-capitalist? I'm just curious. Because I would obviously want to inform myself about capitalism before communism since it seems more interesting and logical, however I know it would be good for me to read about everything. I guess the point is that there are very different slants on things, and one could easily educate themselves only following one theory. And even history, which should be basically facts, can take on different meanings depending how you look at it.

wheelchairman
12-13-2004, 04:58 PM
So a new generation of American kids has "woken up" to how America is really bad and all that.

Welcome to the real world. People fight. Innocent people die.

The French government wasnt against the war because they're peace-loving, but because they were already getting iraqi oil, and they didnt want competition raining on their tea-party.

Everyone knows America is in it for the money and the oil-Good! The Iraqis were in a dictatorship where their oil-selling potential wasnt being taken advantage of, and you cant make Offspring CDs without oil...

Bare in mind though, that America didnt start any wars till after 9/11, a direct attack. Afghanistan was the direct enemy and got caned for it.

All this hype about killing civilians: Do terrorists wear terrorist uniforms? No. Can children pull triggers? Yes. Are Islamists more nazi than the evangelists in America? Yes. Do they blow themselves up? Yes.
Yes Felix (great name by the way, reminds me of Felix Dzherzhinsky, I'm sure you'd love him. I'm quite positive Sic would.) all who go against the government are just 'dem crazy rascally kids oos gots nutin' better teh do en rebul'

Second, don't care about France, never liked De Gaulle personally.

Glad we can agree on your 3rd poaragraph.

America's been in 50 military operations since WW2. It's hardly like it's rare. Iraq has just been the biggest thing since Vietnam (omg not a real war!). However Saudi Arabia was the direct enemy. Do your research. What is the ideology of Al-Qa'ida? (Answer: Wahhabism) Where does Wahhabism originate and have it's power base? (Answer: Saudi Arabia, it's been put into state power effectively due to it's symbiotic relationship with the Royal House of Saud), This is all important because you will find your average joe al-qaida supporter is going to be most likely a backwards peasant from somewhere inside Saudi Arabia. This is where the enemy has always been, but duh...er Afghanistan is the enenmy. That's why we invaded Kabul and why the Taliban is still able to administrate 30% of the country duh-er.

Oh and it's great that you are justifying the shooting of children. They did the same in Vietnam. (It was believed the Vietcong would tape grenades to childrens backs. So whenever a child came running to a soldier, the US troops shot them.) Your point is null void. Evangelists are terrorists, ask any abortion doctor. Furthermore the US army is a group of state-terrorists, they occupy a nation with their brutal force, quell any form of opposition and then set-up yet another line of tin-pot dictato-democracies that America is so good at doing. And we haven't even gotten to the Israel question.

Betty, I'm sure it is good. The problem films like this is, people generally always sympathise with the person who denies the evidence. So when you watch a film like Fahrenhype 911 you have to be even more careful for the same old, same old.

As far as Michael Moore goes, it's not like he isn't doing anything that Fox News hasn't tried. In fact I would say they do it at a far larger scale than he could dream. Sure it's pure propaganda, sure it's disgustingly partisan,(I liked Moore better as a Green) sure it was full of cheap shots and slander. But then again the target audience was never Republicans.

Oh and finally, you should read Adam Smith. In fact I would recommend every communist to read Adam Smith. He basically writes every single fault that could possibly come into his system, in his own works (and this was before industrialization), it's really quite a valuable piece of left wing material. If you are going to read about Communism, I can tell you the general books to read. Don't read the Manifesto, it's overrated and basically useless.

SicN Twisted
12-13-2004, 08:01 PM
I've read everything by Adam Smith, I've read Ayn Rand, and William F. Buckley Jr. (the right's answer to Noam Chomsky). My favorite writer of all time is Voltaire, a staunch capitalist. I understand the theories of capitalism and respect and understand it, although I disagree with it. I'm not insulting the intelligent of Adam Smith, or even Ayn Rand. I'm insulting to intelligence of brain washed right wing idiots who have been infused since birth with a cowboy mentality that renders them incapable of reasoning. I also resent terrorism. I acknowledge that Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were both tactical, intelligent political leaders, but I still critisize people who support them. By definition, George Bush is a terrorist. It's my opinion that he's lying to his people and that he's a bad president, but it's a fact taht he's a terrorist and it's a fact that he's the leader of, essentially, a death squad that murder innocents for it's own self interest and does not make desisions with regard to human rights.

So, most right wing people I talk to are morons (you're an acception). Most right wing theorists, and political leaders, are not morons, but I disagree with them. That's all.

Betty
12-13-2004, 10:06 PM
Good good.

I wish I could read more, but school is so all-consuming, and my program is super demanding, etc, etc. I used to read SO much when I was younger. Now I just read chemistry textbooks.

I intend to read at least a few books over Christmas break... I got that Toole book at the library today and it's literally falling apart. I guess that's probably not overly politics related, but whatever. Hopefully it keeps me entertained.

Anyway, if you guys have any really good books to recommend, I will write them down, at least so I know what I have to be disagreeing with. Although, keep in mind I'm kinda dumb when it comes to history, so easier is better.

Also, "acception" was such absolutely wrong spelling, just had to say.

SicN Twisted
12-13-2004, 10:10 PM
Nothing is recommended before A Confederacy of Dunces, cause I believe it's the most entertaining book in existence.

If you want something more thought provoking, I'd recommend the Fall and the Stranger by Albert Camus (if you can read French, get the originals, alot is lost in the translations). I'd also recommend Naked Lunch, by William S. Burroughs.

Betty
12-13-2004, 10:20 PM
I read L'Etranger in my OAC (grade 13) Francais class... one of my favourite books ever. Meursault is my hero.

SicN Twisted
12-13-2004, 10:42 PM
That's one of myt favorite books. I'd elaborate on it if it had it's own topic, but I don't deprive the peons of their history lessons.

Betty
12-13-2004, 10:57 PM
Screw that.

I typed up my favourite part years ago and saved it on my computer.

Although I haven't decided whether I'm supposed to assume you do or don't understand french, cause you said a lot was lost in translation (were you just making that up) but then again, I've never seen you write any french, etc.

This book actually tremendously impacted my way of seeing things. I guess because it was at that influential point in my life when I read it, etc.

“Alors, je ne sais pas pourquoi, il y a quelque chose qui a crevé en moi. Je me suis mis à crier à plein gosier et je l’ai insulté et je lui ai dit de ne pas prier. Je l’avais pris par le collet de sa soutane. Je déversais sur lui tout le fond de mon coeur avec des bondissements mêlés de joie et de colère. Il avait l’air si certain, n’est-ce pas? Pourtant, aucune de ses certitudes ne valait un cheveu de sa femme. Il n’était même pas sûr d’être en vie puisqu’il vivait comme un mort. Moi, j’avais l’air d’avoir les mains vides. Mais j’étais sûr de moi, sûr de tout, plus sûr que lui, sûr de ma vie et de cette mort qui allait venir. Oui, je n’avais que cela. Mais de moins, je tenais cette vérité autant quelle me tenait. J’avais eu raison, j’avais encore raison, j’avais toujours raison. J’avais vécu de telle façon et j’aurais pu vivre de telle autre. J’avais fait ceci et je n’avais pas fait cela. Je n’avais pas fait telle chose alors que j’avais fait cette autre. Et après? C’était comme si j’avais attendu pendant tout le temps cette minute et cette petite aube où je serais justifié. Rien, rien n’avait d’importance et je savais bien pourquoi. Du fond de mon avenir, pendant toute cette vie absurde que j’avais menée, un souffle obscur remontait vers moi à travers des années qui n’étaient pas encore venues et ce souffle égalisait sur son passage tout ce qu’on me proposait alors dans les années les plus réelles que je vivais. Que m’importaient la mort des autres, l’amour d’une mère, que m’importaient son Dieu, les vies qu’on choisit, les destins qu’on élit, puisqu’un seul destin devait m’élire moi-même et avec moi des milliards de privilégiés qui, comme lui, se disaient mes frères. Comprenait-il, comprenait-il donc? Tout le monde était privilégié. Il n’y avait que des privilégiés. Les autres aussi, on les condamnerait un jour. Lui aussi, on le condamnerait. Qu’importait si, accusé de meurtre, il était exécuté pour n’avoir pas pleuré à l’enterrement de sa mère? Le chien de Salamano valait autant que sa femme. La petite femme automatique était aussi coupable que la Parisienne que Masson avait épousée ou que Marie qui avait envie que je l’épouse. Qu’importait que Raymond fût mon copain autant que Céleste qui valait mieux que lui? Qu’importait que Marie donnât aujourd’hui sa bouche à un nouveau Meursault? Comprenait-il donc, ce condamné et que du fond de mon avenir… J’étouffais en criant tout ceci. Mais, déjà, on m’arrachait l’aumônier des mains et les gardiens me menaçaient. Lui, cependant, les a calmés et m’a regardé un moment en silence. Il avait les yeux pleins de larmes. Il s’est détourné et il a disparu.”

SicN Twisted
12-14-2004, 12:32 AM
That's an amazing segment. I couldn't possibly pick a favorite, because I find the whole book so dynamic and I relate to Meursault on so many different levels. The book has so many powerful themes and ideas that it's impossible to summarize even with five pages. have you ever read the Fall? My Camus obsessed friend says it's better then the Stranger, and I consider it definately equal.

et aussi, il y a une loi aux Etats-Unis que chaque personne de gauche doit apprendre un petit peu de français. C'est comment nous prouvons notre superiorité tout le monde.

wheelchairman
12-14-2004, 06:58 AM
That's an amazing segment. I couldn't possibly pick a favorite, because I find the whole book so dynamic and I relate to Meursault on so many different levels. The book has so many powerful themes and ideas that it's impossible to summarize even with five pages. have you ever read the Fall? My Camus obsessed friend says it's better then the Stranger, and I consider it definately equal.

et aussi, il y a une loi aux Etats-Unis que chaque personne de gauche doit apprendre un petit peu de français. C'est comment nous prouvons notre superiorité tout le monde.
C'est parce que le gauche est plus tolerant avec les autres cultures (français par example,) mais le droit, en general, detestent le France et sa culture.

And I apologize for my lack of grammar and vocabulary.

T-6005
12-14-2004, 07:29 AM
je ne savait pas que c'etait une loi.... haha.

wheelchairman
12-14-2004, 07:58 AM
je ne savait pas que c'etait une loi.... haha.
(It's very close to the english word, law)

SicN Twisted
12-14-2004, 10:27 AM
t-0006 or whatever, I was completely joking, you con

Betty
12-14-2004, 12:24 PM
French is the only cultural soft spot I have... don't abuse it!

In Canada, you DO actually have to learn French though, but a lot of people never actually become fluent enough to communicate.

And also, no I've never read any more Camus, I always mean to, but just haven't yet.

SicN Twisted
12-14-2004, 05:48 PM
I can say what I want about French culture, cause I'm French, well - half. But if a mullato can say nigger, I can critisize those leeching, dishonest, snobby frogs (of which I am one).

Betty
12-14-2004, 06:21 PM
I don't think you understood... I didn't say that you said anything bad... and I don't care if you do... and... ah, nevermind. The point was missed.

SicN Twisted
12-14-2004, 11:26 PM
Damn the internet and it's communcation barriers.

I was joking though - I have much more contempt towards my American half then my French. I think France is just fine - the Quebecois, on the other hand, do very much piss me off. Especially Russians who become Quebecois.

4moreyears
12-14-2004, 11:28 PM
About the FahrenHYPE transcript, I'll do some searching online to find it. Man, I like it better when I'm not some scumbag asshole trying to get a point across. More peaceful this way. Sorry if I offended anyone earlier on the board.

SicN Twisted
12-14-2004, 11:34 PM
You're in the marines, so I'd say you're automatically a scumbag asshole.

Dead Cheerleader
12-14-2004, 11:58 PM
To the original poster of this topic, fuck you. I am amazed at these assholes who say the U.S. is so horrible for all the death and destruction we cause but then they end with how we deserve to be attacked by terrorists and brutally murdered. Oh, yes how compasionate of you, I can see the philanthropic values just radiating from you. Do you not feel at all like a hypocritic?

And don't think just because you watch some non-American news channel that you are so enlightened. I bet you don't know the first thing about the motivations behind the terrorist attacks that you are so fucking thirsty for.

I have talked to people who grew up in Israel and experienced Saddam Hussein's destruction first hand...they were the people behind me in line on November 2nd voting for Bush, thanking god that someone took Saddam out of power. Even though this war was begun with lies, that doesn't mean that nothing good is coming from it. But you only like to focus on the bad aspects of everything, don't you.

And just remember that only 31% of people in the United States voted for Bush, so when you come here to make these fucked up attacks and insults, why don't you address them instead of the entire U.S.

And lastly, if you have such a problem with the current state of American politics, why don't you do something about it? If not, shut your fucking mouth.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 09:29 AM
Don't even bother man. I agree with you and all, but now someone is just gonna quote you and break apart your post sentence by sentence, telling you how stupid you are. No point...

I tried...

And sic, you don't know the first thing about the Marines...

Moose
12-15-2004, 10:45 AM
You're in the marines, so I'd say you're automatically a scumbag asshole.

wow, you really are a fucking idiot...you are basically stereotyping the guy...hell it isnt even a stereotype...you are just making a claim that everyone that is in the marines is a scumbag asshole...does that make any fucking sense? stop talking out of your asshole mr. im so fucking rebel im cool.

wheelchairman
12-15-2004, 10:46 AM
To the original poster of this topic, fuck you. I am amazed at these assholes who say the U.S. is so horrible for all the death and destruction we cause but then they end with how we deserve to be attacked by terrorists and brutally murdered.
Yes, terrorists attack the US so frickin' often. It's almost amazing how often terrorists attack the US. You must feel like children on the west bank.


Oh, yes how compasionate of you, I can see the philanthropic values just radiating from you. Do you not feel at all like a hypocritic?
Not a single bit.


And don't think just because you watch some non-American news channel that you are so enlightened. I bet you don't know the first thing about the motivations behind the terrorist attacks that you are so fucking thirsty for.
I know far more about the motivation than I imagine you do. I've spent time studying at least the basics of Wahhabism. Have you?


I have talked to people who grew up in Israel and experienced Saddam Hussein's destruction first hand...they were the people behind me in line on November 2nd voting for Bush, thanking god that someone took Saddam out of power. Even though this war was begun with lies, that doesn't mean that nothing good is coming from it. But you only like to focus on the bad aspects of everything, don't you.
Ah right, because Israeli's are the kindest people in the middle East. They would have no problem with an Arab-nationalist government in the slightest.

As for the good things, I just simply don't think they outway the bad things.


And just remember that only 31% of people in the United States voted for Bush, so when you come here to make these fucked up attacks and insults, why don't you address them instead of the entire U.S.
I do. I'm an American myself.


And lastly, if you have such a problem with the current state of American politics, why don't you do something about it? If not, shut your fucking mouth.
Analysis and critique are always the first steps towards change. Of course you wouldn't have thought about that. You're all about action aren't you?

SicN Twisted
12-15-2004, 11:11 AM
I don't know much about the inner working of the Marines, but I do know that they are officially, by definition, the world's biggest terrorist organization. I'm not stereotyping anyone - I'm just saying that he's part of a force that's reigned tyranny on the entire world for more then 50 years now. II critisize Marines with as much conviction as the critisize the SS. Instead of blindly critisizing me, prove me wrong with your knowledge of world affairs.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 11:54 AM
I don't know much about the inner working of the Marines, but I do know that they are officially, by definition, the world's biggest terrorist organization. I'm not stereotyping anyone - I'm just saying that he's part of a force that's reigned tyranny on the entire world for more then 50 years now. II critisize Marines with as much conviction as the critisize the SS. Instead of blindly critisizing me, prove me wrong with your knowledge of world affairs.


Okay...

First of all, the Marines have been around since 1775, not just 50 years.

The Marines were in charge of every single island campaign in the pacific during World War II, including those of Guadalcanal, Okinawa, and the infamous Iwo Jima.

The United States Marine Corps defended the Pusan Perimeter and struck back at the North Korean and Chinese coalition, stabilizing South Korea, and keeping them a free and sovereign nation.

And how are they the biggest terrorist organization in the world..."by definition". Because they answered the call? Listen, Marines don't go to war because they want to, or because they think it's right or wrong.

Marines fight for the man on their right and the man on their left.

Unit, Corps, Country, God

Without God there is no country...

Without this country there is no Corps...

Without the Corps, there is no Unit...

Fight so others don't have to...

Die so others may live...

From my Great-grandfather, to my grandfather, to 10 of my uncles, to my father, to my cousins...

They have served under this code.

The Marines died at Yorktown so you may have a nation
They died at Gettysburg so the nation could be indivisible
They died at Belleau Wood to stop the German war machine
They died on the shores of Iwo Jima to end the war in the Pacific
They died in the Chosin Reservoir to preserve another nation's sovereignty
They died in Saigon loading women and children into helicopters
They died in Beirut while on a PEACEKEEPING mission, with no ammunition
They died for you, for me, for everyone in the United States of America.

They serve on the wall, so you can live behind it.

Next time you title these brave men as terrorists, think twice about how much you actually don't know.

wheelchairman
12-15-2004, 11:58 AM
The United States Marine Corps defended the Pusan Perimeter and struck back at the North Korean and Chinese coalition, stabilizing South Korea, and keeping them a free and sovereign nation.

You do realize that after the Korean War (a War America should never have been involved in) South Korea was a brutal dictatorship up until the early 1980's I believe. A brutal American supported dictatorship. No better than Kim Il-Sung.

And the marines are terrorists, by the CIA definition at least.

Since the Monroe Doctrine. And most especially in the past 50 years. However, that doesn't single them out from anyone else in the American Offense Forces.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 12:36 PM
ter·ror·ism

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.


That is directly from your own post wcm. Now, I don't think this is the CIA definition, so what is it?

And the Marines don't fall into this definition's category

oh yeah, and BTW, dead cheerleader, I told you wcm would copy and paste your whole post, breaking it down into his own opinion, making you look like an idiot.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 12:41 PM
Analysis and critique are always the first steps towards change. Of course you wouldn't have thought about that. You're all about action aren't you?


LOL, this coming from the guy with the sovietrevolution.net link on the bottom of all his posts.

wheelchairman
12-15-2004, 12:44 PM
LOL, this coming from the guy with the sovietrevolution.net link on the bottom of all his posts.
Relevance? Do you believe I uphold the Soviet Union uncritiquelly or something? Or perhaps that I was the one who named the site?

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 12:45 PM
Well you should learn some history, Spain was allied with Hitler, seeing as Franco was a fascist dictator who's dictatorship lasted until the late '70's I believe.


I also meant to do this a while back...

Hitler was also allied with Russia.

Hmm...doesn't sound like a guy who keeps his promises.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 12:47 PM
The relevance is that you are telling people that talking and debating about things are the baby steps of change. But SOVIET REVOLUTION? In taking a look at the site, it seems that you guys are looking forward to a little more than just baby steps...

Lithuanian Offspring
12-15-2004, 12:50 PM
I also meant to do this a while back...

Hitler was also allied with Russia.

Hmm...doesn't sound like a guy who keeps his promises.
You forgot to mention that Lenin, Stalin and company were all totalitarian rulers who were COMMUNIST!!! Suck on that Wheely!

wheelchairman
12-15-2004, 12:56 PM
Hitler was also allied with Russia.

Oh I would like to see a copy of this treaty. Most indefinitely. (You're not going to find one. You are referring to the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact of Non-Aggression)
Non-aggression isn't close to allied. Especially since the USSR did more to fight Nazi Germany that America or most of the west did.

So you are saying that revolution does not bring change? Critique and Analyse identify the problem. A revolution is one way to deal with it.

wheelchairman
12-15-2004, 12:58 PM
You forgot to mention that Lenin, Stalin and company were all totalitarian rulers who were COMMUNIST!!! Suck on that Wheely!
You're pretty lame at arguing. Are you going to try and find more insults and arguments for me? I think everyone realizes that Lenin was a communist. Hardly a shocking fact there. And Lenin never hid the fact that his government was a dictatorship. Hell he called it the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 01:03 PM
my bad wcm...alliance was wrong term. You're right...but...Hitler was still an asshole!

wheelchairman
12-15-2004, 01:07 PM
my bad wcm...alliance was wrong term. You're right...but...Hitler was still an asshole!
Agreed.

123

SicN Twisted
12-15-2004, 05:44 PM
Okay...

First of all, the Marines have been around since 1775, not just 50 years. Yes, but most of their military atrocities occured after world war 2.


The Marines were in charge of every single island campaign in the pacific during World War II, including those of Guadalcanal, Okinawa, and the infamous Iwo Jima.

Your point is? That's irrelevent. I'm explaining that the marines committed warcrimes and atrocities.


The United States Marine Corps defended the Pusan Perimeter and struck back at the North Korean and Chinese coalition, stabilizing South Korea, and keeping them a free and sovereign nation.

South Korea was a puppet state of the west, to prevent communism from expanding. I'd hardly call that a soveirg nation. The marines also committed secret purges alongside Japanese fascist police in which thousands of civilians were slaughtered right before the UN got involved.


And how are they the biggest terrorist organization in the world..."by definition". Because they answered the call? Listen, Marines don't go to war because they want to, or because they think it's right or wrong.

No, they fight because they're being ordered to and they've been brainwashed into thinking that what they're doing is okay. Same can be said about the SS.

ter·ror·ism

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

This is the dictionary definition of terrorism. The marines with guilty of this in Chile, Nicaragua, Guatamala, El Salvador, Grenada, Cuba, East Timor (in which we caused the biggest genocide since the holocaust) Iraq, and most of all, Vietnam and Cambodia. Marines are also in charge of School of the AMericas, the school in central America that trains fascist guerillas in torture techniques in order to control their civilian population, or order to consolodate the power of the fascists we support to prevent anti-corperate democratic uprising throughout Latin America. The marines have been ordered by the security council to stand trial for crimes against humanity, which they completely ignored. Yes, you're fucking terrorists.


Marines fight for the man on their right and the man on their left

Loyality amongst you does not mean you're not warmonging terrorists.


Unit, Corps, Country, God

Without God there is no country...

Without this country there is no Corps...

Without the Corps, there is no Unit...

Fight so others don't have to...

Die so others may live...

So they're religious fundementalist terrorists. Al Quaida's code looks just as idyllic and is just as fake.

You pillage sourvern nations to help America expand amongst the globe. You invade countries illegally to uphold your hegemony. You slaughter civilians and have destroyed democracy in conuntries around the world. Your code is bullshit, I don't see honor mindless killers who die so your country can gain power. Contrary to popular opinions, uniforms don't make you any different then any other terrorist group.


From my Great-grandfather, to my grandfather, to 10 of my uncles, to my father, to my cousins...

They have served under this code.

And I'd spit in each one of their faces. Not since the revolutionary war has the US military defended its people. They're imperialist invaders, a more advanced version of the huns.



The Marines died at Yorktown so you may have a nation

They died so rich people didn't have to pay their taxes.


They died at Gettysburg so the nation could be indivisible

Marines from the South also died trying to keep their nation divided.


They died at Belleau Wood to stop the German war machine
They died at Belleau Wood to preserve their own war machine.



They died on the shores of Iwo Jima to end the war in the Pacific

No, they killed thousands of people and destroyed to cities to end the war in the pacific.


They died in the Chosin Reservoir to preserve another nation's sovereignty

They've died in Iraq to take away a nation's soveirgnty


They died in Saigon loading women and children into helicopters

They murdered thousands of civilians all through Vietnam to conquer it and prevent it's democracy in favor of a puppet dictatorship. I will admit that many soldiers in Vietnam were there because it was mandatory, and so sympathies go out to those who died enslaved at their government's greedy hands.


They died in Beirut while on a PEACEKEEPING mission, with no ammunition

They were protecting their interests in Beirut, not peace.


They died for you, for me, for everyone in the United States of America.

No they haven't. Name one time since the war of 1812 have American soldiers died defending our nation. Not once, every other military action was for expantion - global hegemony, not defence. The coastguard defends our country, the marines attempt to police and control thie world.


They serve on the wall, so you can live behind it.[/quotes] No, they serve throughout the world so their bosses can control it. No Marine has protected me.

[QUOTE=4moreyears]Next time you title these brave men as terrorists, think twice about how much you actually don't know.

I know quite abit about AMerican military history. Obviously I know more then you do. These "brave men" you speak of are terrorists, and your glossy newspeak descriptions will not change that.

4moreyears
12-15-2004, 08:46 PM
The marines also committed secret purges alongside Japanese fascist police in which thousands of civilians were slaughtered right before the UN got involved.

Give me a source for that.



ter·ror·ism

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Unlawful - When a nation sends you into combat, you are not being unlawful if it is a wrong or lost cause.



They died at Belleau Wood to preserve their own war machine.

So...you're saying America went to war in the early 1900's in order to maintain a war machine? Hmm...that is strange. The Germans invaded Europe twice, and AMERICA is on the warpath?



No, they killed thousands of people and destroyed to cities to end the war in the pacific.

Wow, good job on your history. Are you trying to say the Marines dropped the atomic bombs? Army Air Corps buddy. Not that it makes a lick of difference, but if you can't even get the small picture, I doubt you can maintain that of the larger image.

Also, what would we have done if we didn't drop those bombs? We would've invaded the mainland of Japan. More casualties on both sides would occur. Millions of people on each side getting killed, including Marines,
British, and Japanese opposition forces. Then, we would have 51 states. Congratulations, that's a much better idea.



They've died in Iraq to take away a nation's soveirgnty

Speaking that I knew many Marines that died in Iraq, I believe I can defend this point better than you can. I aided in giving food and water to assorted villages NEARLY EVERY DAY. This is taking away their sovereignty? By helping them?



They were protecting their interests in Beirut, not peace.

This is a perfect example of how wrong you are. The Muslim-Christian war had been going on in Beirut for years. Reagan sent the Marines there on a PEACEKEEPING mission. The Marines guarding the camp weren't even given ammunition to show how peaceful we were. 2 unknown Muslim extremists drove through the barricades, and crashed into the barracks, killing nearly every person in there. I want to know where you get your information about how the Marines were protecting their own interests in Lebanon. I don't understand how you fail to distinguish between a nation and its military. Disagreeing with a nation is one thing. But assuming their military makes all the choices for them is just idiotic. Think.


No they haven't. Name one time since the war of 1812 have American soldiers died defending our nation.

Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941. Cpl Anderson and LCpl McCroglou fired pistols and anti-aircraft weapons at the Japanese air force. Want another one?




I know quite abit about AMerican military history.

Keep telling yourself that.

I just don't understand your train of thought. We are attacked by Japan, so men go out there to win the war which was declared on us. And you would spit in their faces? You can't live a day without blaming the United States for something. Even when it is clearly from another source. 9/11 for example. Al Qaida attacked us, and you still blame Bush, using nothing but nonsense to back up your point.

You know what I think? I think you're too caught up in this Democrat/Republican thing. I think you are afraid to state your own opinion, so the easiest solution must be that everything Bush does is wrong.

Think about what you believe, before you blurt it out.

SicN Twisted
12-15-2004, 10:31 PM
"Unlawful - When a nation sends you into combat, you are not being unlawful if it is a wrong or lost cause."

If it is against international law, it is unlawful. Countless American military acts directly violated international law.




"So...you're saying America went to war in the early 1900's in order to maintain a war machine? Hmm...that is strange. The Germans invaded Europe twice, and AMERICA is on the warpath?"

Britain, Frace, Germany, and the Ottoman empire basically had an imperialist war over borders and control. America joined the allies quest for expansion. You know that months before we joined in 1917, US officials were considering siding with Germany? That war had no right and wrong, it was just politics, and every country, including the US, acted in self interest.


"Wow, good job on your history. Are you trying to say the Marines dropped the atomic bombs? Army Air Corps buddy. Not that it makes a lick of difference, but if you can't even get the small picture, I doubt you can maintain that of the larger image.

Also, what would we have done if we didn't drop those bombs? We would've invaded the mainland of Japan. More casualties on both sides would occur. Millions of people on each side getting killed, including Marines,
British, and Japanese opposition forces. Then, we would have 51 states. Congratulations, that's a much better idea.

Actually, we rejected a British document showing evidence that Japan was planning to surrender. Japan knew it was going down anyway and was trying to find the best detail. We dropped that bomb to scare Russia.


Speaking that I knew many Marines that died in Iraq, I believe I can defend this point better than you can. I aided in giving food and water to assorted villages NEARLY EVERY DAY. This is taking away their sovereignty? By helping them?

Do you actually know anything about this war besides what you're doing personally? Do you know anything about politics at all? The United States arbitrarily invaded a soveirg nation that was proven to be no threat to it's security. You took over Iraq and know you're occupying it.


"This is a perfect example of how wrong you are. The Muslim-Christian war had been going on in Beirut for years. Reagan sent the Marines there on a PEACEKEEPING mission. The Marines guarding the camp weren't even given ammunition to show how peaceful we were. 2 unknown Muslim extremists drove through the barricades, and crashed into the barracks, killing nearly every person in there. I want to know where you get your information about how the Marines were protecting their own interests in Lebanon. I don't understand how you fail to distinguish between a nation and its military. Disagreeing with a nation is one thing. But assuming their military makes all the choices for them is just idiotic. Think."

The French had ammo in Beirut, the US were basically just there as observors. They wanted to help make sure France was protecting their mutual agenda. Also, I know that the military doesn't make foreign policy desisions. They still uphold them. The German army in the world war two did not make the desision to invade Poland - Hitler did, but it was still a terrorist. The suicide bombers who attacked us on 911 obviously did not calculate the operation themselves.



"Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941. Cpl Anderson and LCpl McCroglou fired pistols and anti-aircraft weapons at the Japanese air force. Want another one?"

Pearl harber was a military colony, I hate when people try to use it as an example. The Japanese wanted more power in the pacific so they attacked an isolated military base. Nobody actually defended our nation from invasion or attack.

"I just don't understand your train of thought. We are attacked by Japan, so men go out there to win the war which was declared on us. And you would spit in their faces? You can't live a day without blaming the United States for something. Even when it is clearly from another source. 9/11 for example. Al Qaida attacked us, and you still blame Bush, using nothing but nonsense to back up your point."

Nonsence? How about a specific understanding of world events? The Americans expanded into Saudi Arabia, and we fund Israeli state terrorism against against Palestine. Bin laden regarded these as attacks, so he retaliated. I don't blame Bush, actually. I'd say it's mainly the fault of Israel and my government for giving it aid in occupying and oppressing Palestine. I don't like Bin Laden, but I think the US needs to hold itself to the same standards as it does the rest of the world. If you do that, you'll see that the marines have committed worse terrorist acts then Bin Laden.

I said already that most atrocities were committed after world war two. I'm not angry at the world war two veterans - a large amount of my family served in that war and I'm proud of them for it. Although I think the war would have been preventable if things were done differently before it, in the circumstanced we did what was neccesary. That's a case of unpreventable war, much different from our post world world 2 expansion.

"You know what I think? I think you're too caught up in this Democrat/Republican thing. I think you are afraid to state your own opinion, so the easiest solution must be that everything Bush does is wrong."

Far from the truth? Do you thik I'm a democrat? I've said nothing implying support for the democratic party. Of course my opinions were influenced by like minded thinkers, but I basically developed them with my conscience and my learning through research.

"Think about what you believe, before you blurt it out."

I have a comprehensive understanding of my thought structure. You know on other hand, are a brainwashed jongoist that can't hold your country the same standards that you apply to everyone else. You like what your president does cause they say it, and you have a false sence of nationalistic duty. But that's okay, soldiers aren't meant to think about why they're killing, cause then the military would be completely dysfunctional. Soldiers just kill.

greencows12
12-30-2004, 06:19 PM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??

Do you know that Bush is a terrorist? Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons? do you know that they kill children? No, you don't know 'cause youre newspapers and youre tv censor the images, and they only tell lies to american people. Before november, I belive that the only bastard in USA was Bush, but now I see that I was wrong, 'cause Bush is the president now. Well, I belive that Bush will start the III WORLD WAR, and he will destroy the world with youre wars and youre contamination. In Spain people we throwed the president Aznar, the terrorist Aznar, cause the 11-M attaks was his fault because 99% spanish people didn't want to go to Iraq war... why didn't you do that? why did you vote a president who helps Sharon to kill all the palestinian? palestinian kids too? Why all the countries who Bush visit there are thousands of people who insult Bush? I know that, because Bush is a nazi, and if he are president now, is because all of you, american people, are nazi. It's too sad that in the most important country of the world live the most ignorant people. It isn't strange that terrorist attaks USA, 'casue you have won it.

Well, I hope that violence will finish someday, and I belive in a wolrd with peace, but with this country that is impossible. If you have more attaks, I won't cry, 'cause american soldiers kill much more people than terrorist.


Pd: sorry about my engllish... I'm spanishI didn't vote for that fucker, and I wouldn't, even if I was old enough to vote. I insisted people vote, even though i'm an anarchist just to get him out of office. He is a terrorist, liar, killer and a sexist.

Satanic_Surfer
01-01-2005, 02:25 AM
Yes, but if you're an Anarchist too. It means that you're aware of that a change of government or president will not change anything but the outside of their image.
I agree, we need to get Bush off the throne, but our job is not to remove him in favour for someone else to take over. Our job is to make sure we remove the PRESIDENT, not BUSH in particular.
Im on the thoughts of that maybe it would have been worth (if i was an American) to vote against Bush... just like everybody else.
But i dont think it's worth it because it wouldent make a change. The problem is not Bush in person, but what he stands for.
Unfortunatelly he is not the only one of his kind that stand for those very same things.
We need to take actions against the power regimes. We want to take actions against what people cannot vote for, Bush is after all the only part of the government and state that people CAN vote for. Him as person is useless to remove.
If we would remove him in person, from the throne, our opposition would only become stronger.

Leo_ARG
01-01-2005, 09:06 AM
Yes, but if you're an Anarchist too. It means that you're aware of that a change of government or president will not change anything but the outside of their image.
I agree, we need to get Bush off the throne, but our job is not to remove him in favour for someone else to take over. Our job is to make sure we remove the PRESIDENT, not BUSH in particular.
Im on the thoughts of that maybe it would have been worth (if i was an American) to vote against Bush... just like everybody else.
But i dont think it's worth it because it wouldent make a change. The problem is not Bush in person, but what he stands for.
Unfortunatelly he is not the only one of his kind that stand for those very same things.
We need to take actions against the power regimes. We want to take actions against what people cannot vote for, Bush is after all the only part of the government and state that people CAN vote for. Him as person is useless to remove.
If we would remove him in person, from the throne, our opposition would only become stronger.


Well, being anarchist doesen't mean you can't vote.You decide.
Within Anarchism there has always been a controversy about it.You had Malatesta that has the same point of view as you (not to vote) and Merlino said that you should vote, but never try to get into the government or a duty on it.

I think you should vote in extreme situations, when your vote counts a lot, for example Ohaio (I think that was the key state), when there is the danger that a man like bush can get re-elected.But everybody has the right to decide to vote, and that's great.
In my country you are not allowed to not vote. :(

Noodles is gay
01-01-2005, 10:49 AM
To Usa People: Bush Is A Terrorist.

Yes he is; well done. :D

Satanic_Surfer
01-01-2005, 10:57 AM
so Leo, what country do u live in, where ure not allowed to vote?
Or is it because you're under the age limit?
That you cannot vote though, is not a very big loss. The way it goes will not be affected, since in te civilizations as we call it, in today. We've got all these big business corporations doing that work, even banks. But that's nothing the people can change.
Of course you can vote if you think it matters, and i think it would be a good idea if i thought it matters.
The problem as i see it, is not to vote or not to vote.
The problem is that is doesnt matter if you vote or not, when the only alternatives are run by the same powers.

wheelchairman
01-01-2005, 11:02 AM
I have the feeling he is from Argentina. And in Argentina you are allowed to vote, you're not allowed to abstain from voting. Which makes sense in many ways.

Satanic_Surfer
01-01-2005, 11:51 AM
Oh... doesnt Switzerland have that rule too?
Sorry people, i simply missread what he said there.
That's sick though. That is no longer that all so "democratic" thing about that everyone has got a right to choose, instead they have to force people to choose whatever is offered by the politicans, that's low.
Individuality is being choked.

wheelchairman
01-01-2005, 12:12 PM
by forcing them to vote? I would hardly call that oppression. Unless you vote by sacrificing your children or something, which I'm fairly confident that the CIA fact book would've mention.

Satanic_Surfer
01-01-2005, 12:26 PM
To force someone else's opinion in a certain direction is simply not nice.

wheelchairman
01-01-2005, 12:56 PM
who says the opinion is going any direction?

Izie
01-01-2005, 01:10 PM
Oh... doesnt Switzerland have that rule too?
Sorry people, i simply missread what he said there.
That's sick though. That is no longer that all so "democratic" thing about that everyone has got a right to choose, instead they have to force people to choose whatever is offered by the politicans, that's low.
Individuality is being choked.

(jesus)
In Belgium we have compulsory voting too, you can vote blanco if you want to (like it's probably the case in 99.99% of the compulsory voting countries). I think it's a better than having non compulsory voting, just like i think a proportional system is better than a "winner takes it all" one.

Leo_ARG
01-01-2005, 05:41 PM
I have the feeling he is from Argentina. And in Argentina you are allowed to vote, you're not allowed to abstain from voting. Which makes sense in many ways.

Yeah, that is the rule here.

SicN Twisted
01-01-2005, 07:54 PM
Am I the only one that thinks compulsory voting is completely insane? Nobody should be forced to participate in politics, compulsory voting I think is a clear offence to a human's self determination.

wheelchairman
01-01-2005, 07:59 PM
I personally wouldn't institute it. But I don't really see how it's a form of oppression in any way. Perhaps a bother at most.

SicN Twisted
01-01-2005, 10:16 PM
I'm not surprised that you think that, since you obviously don't consider forced State collectivization censoring the press oppression either, but I think that the most important thing someone can have is their self determination, and it's ridiculous that the state can force someone to participate in something they don't believe in (neither of us believe in elections, I don't think we'd be happy in a compulsory voting system) or don't want to do for any particular reason. It's perfectly legit that someone might just not care about politics.

It's also impractical, because people might vote for a candidate they don't actively believe in. Practicality aside, I consider it a moral issue simply because it impinges on somebody's freedom. In the event that someone refuses to vote in such a system because of their beliefs, they'd be jailed, making them a prisoner of conscience, which is inexusable.

wheelchairman
01-02-2005, 04:20 AM
You realize they can vote blanc right?

Izie
01-02-2005, 05:23 AM
(Jesus)


it's ridiculous that the state can force someone to participate in something they don't believe in

That's quite a statement, completely impractical though. The state does it non stop. Taxes, laws, social security whatever. Following that logic you would end up in something like anarcho capitalism.



In the event that someone refuses to vote in such a system because of their beliefs, they'd be jailed, making them a prisoner of conscience, which is inexusable.

You don't even have to vote, you only have to show up basically. You can just give the form/electronic card back (that way you voted blanc). Not showing up here costs around 25 euros I believe.

The only bad thing about compulsory voting is that it benefits the extreme right, but that's about it.

SicN Twisted
01-02-2005, 01:57 PM
Taxes are neccesary and mutually beneficial. So are laws, but not compulsory voting. I know that all it can be is an inconvinience, but I feel the same way that I do about the seatbelt law, it's unneccesarily enforced authority. Voting to me is something I think someone should have a choice in, even if you can vote blanc, your blanc vote will be repressented in the polls, and if you don't believe in elections, you'd still be forced to go against your conscience. And Belgium's not that bad, but there are people around the world who are in jail for refusing to vote.

Satanic_Surfer
01-02-2005, 04:30 PM
So you do believe in taxes and laws by all their means. But not in illegalize non-voting? For what reason? Because it's degrading to make people act in certain ways, just for the sake of it?
State and laws are only made to protect the rich people's interests from the "scum" (well... us) who would, by any chance given, lessen the gap between the classes.
While taxes... yes, of course the removal of taxes would be a stupid idea under this system we live in.
But to change the system is the ultimate goal, is it not?
Without economy at all, there would be no way to steal money from the poor.
There would be no ways of expanding the gap between the classes.
While... if we always will have all those mentioned things... we will always see class gaps, where the rich people always will be the ones who rule.

HornyPope
01-02-2005, 06:02 PM
Especially Russians who become Quebecois.

Never liked those either. Fucking immigrants.

Betty
01-02-2005, 09:11 PM
Taxes are neccesary and mutually beneficial. So are laws, but not compulsory voting. I know that all it can be is an inconvinience, but I feel the same way that I do about the seatbelt law, it's unneccesarily enforced authority. Voting to me is something I think someone should have a choice in, even if you can vote blanc, your blanc vote will be repressented in the polls, and if you don't believe in elections, you'd still be forced to go against your conscience. And Belgium's not that bad, but there are people around the world who are in jail for refusing to vote.

I agree with you Sic... I think.

I agree with the seatbelt law.

And I'd imagine the same applies to something like marijuana.

But what about hard drugs? It would be totally an individual's choice and they would be harming themselves, like with the seatbelt... Except I've heard you say it's not a good idea because they are just that dangerous. So to me, that doesn't quite mesh. (Note that I realize you could say that using hard drugs could possibly affect others... if you think that's a strong enough argument... but I'm just trying to call you on the reasons you gave before)

SicN Twisted
01-02-2005, 10:09 PM
I do believe in descriminalization of everything, but I understand the government's efforts to stop tons of heroin being shipped into the country. People's rights shouldn't be restricted, but the unregulated flow of dangerous substances should be kept in check.

malumboman
01-03-2005, 12:15 AM
those kids deserveed to die. dont mess with the usa!

ATOM_01
01-06-2005, 02:00 AM
Do you know that Bush is a terrorist?

nazi too

http://groups.msn.com/punkconspiracy

Strider
01-06-2005, 07:59 AM
I HATE BUSH

Skate Rat 19
01-06-2005, 07:13 PM
Know what, those rag headed bastards came here on 9/11 and slughtered thousands, put millions out of work, wrecked our economy, destroyed awsome buildings, and pissed me off. Yes bush is a fag but i support every soldier in the us armed forces. I say those motherfucking arabs started it, kill em all! I'd go down there myself and bag me some of those motherfuckers if i was old enough. oh yeah and u don't even live in america so suck my balls, swear to god if i was president on 9/11 i would have nuked every goddamned country that i even thought had something to do with Al Quida.



"Burn Motherfucker Let The Mother Fucker Burn!!"

Skate Rat 19
01-06-2005, 07:17 PM
I'm an anarchist, so I wouldn't vote anyways, and i'm too young, but I insisted people vote to get bush out of office. I'm surprised there wasn't a riot when he got re-elected. I'm just ignoring anything he says nows, because he's a joke. bush is a big douche.



Well their definnatly would be riots but he got in without cheating this time and cause John Kerry gave up. (what a dumbass)

SicN Twisted
01-06-2005, 09:06 PM
He's not a Nazi. The religious right and Nazis are completely different. Nazis deserve alot more respect then Bush, because they actually had a complex ideology with a philosphical basis, and they were intelligent and concice. Hitler also had a much more succesful domestic policy.

wheelchairman
01-07-2005, 07:11 AM
Know what, those rag headed bastards came here on 9/11 and slughtered thousands, put millions out of work, wrecked our economy, destroyed awsome buildings, and pissed me off. Yes bush is a fag but i support every soldier in the us armed forces. I say those motherfucking arabs started it, kill em all! I'd go down there myself and bag me some of those motherfuckers if i was old enough. oh yeah and u don't even live in america so suck my balls, swear to god if i was president on 9/11 i would have nuked every goddamned country that i even thought had something to do with Al Quida.



"Burn Motherfucker Let The Mother Fucker Burn!!"
I would say that you are the archetype of everything I despise in myself and others. An ignorant, loud-mouthed dumbass.

We are the ones who started it with the Middle East. In almost everyway. In fact for decades the Middle East basically tolerated us and believed our lies about things would get better. They didn't and they started getting pissed.

And there was nothing awesome about the World Trade Center buildings, in fact, the only tragedy that the world center collapsed, would be for the innocent firemen, mailmen, or other non-trade related professionals. The janitors, the cleaning folk, that's what makes me sad. Business professionals and traders, could really care less about.

They certainly didn't wreck our economy, you know nothing of economics, and this is coming from a person who has only a very basic knowledge of economics.

And I would bet that I've lived in America longer than you've been alive, and that I know more of it than you do as well.

pOpe
01-07-2005, 07:18 AM
I haven't posted here since.... I don't remeber, many time ago, and I dont want to read all the posts... so I only want to say that :D

http://www.thewayfarer.info/imagenes/humor.bush-aznar.jpg
________
Excursion (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Excursion)

shatskater
01-07-2005, 07:36 AM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??

Do you know that Bush is a terrorist? Do you know that american's soldiers kill people without reasons? do you know that they kill children? No, you don't know 'cause youre newspapers and youre tv censor the images, and they only tell lies to american people. Before november, I belive that the only bastard in USA was Bush, but now I see that I was wrong, 'cause Bush is the president now. Well, I belive that Bush will start the III WORLD WAR, and he will destroy the world with youre wars and youre contamination. In Spain people we throwed the president Aznar, the terrorist Aznar, cause the 11-M attaks was his fault because 99% spanish people didn't want to go to Iraq war... why didn't you do that? why did you vote a president who helps Sharon to kill all the palestinian? palestinian kids too? Why all the countries who Bush visit there are thousands of people who insult Bush? I know that, because Bush is a nazi, and if he are president now, is because all of you, american people, are nazi. It's too sad that in the most important country of the world live the most ignorant people. It isn't strange that terrorist attaks USA, 'casue you have won it.

Well, I hope that violence will finish someday, and I belive in a wolrd with peace, but with this country that is impossible. If you have more attaks, I won't cry, 'cause american soldiers kill much more people than terrorist.


Pd: sorry about my engllish... I'm spanish

Well friend,

America is way different than Spain....first off, Spain has a King...we have a president...secondly we cannot just overthrow our president...he can only be impeached. And for that to happen Congress has to find a "GOOD" reason for it to happen.

And I will tell you why Bush starting war isn't a good reason....becuase bush didn't start war...Bush cannot start war. Congress is the only branch of our government that can declare war, now bush can approve it, and overlook it. so if anyone starts World War III it would be those terrorists or Congress. but he did not declare war on Iraq.

And yes I know Iraq didn't attack us. It was a small group of terrorists. Thats why this is the war AGIANST terrorism. Now I believe that you will never be able to get rid of terrorism. But thats just me.

And yes the american soldiers are over there killing people. Now whether or not they are killing children i dunno. if they are its an accident becuase we usually save the children, home them, feed them, and cloth them.

And even tho yes all americans are ignorant...I agree with that....you should say we are all bastards or anything else, becuase we didnt ALL vote for bush. im to young to vote. there are others to young. some people just didnt vote. some people voted for Kerry or the other parties.

So before you criticize America.....understand what your talking about. You just made a fool of yourself. I'm not trying to be mean but don't talk shit about america. thats my job. :)

wheelchairman
01-07-2005, 07:43 AM
And then you again are ignorant Shatskater. You're stupid enough to believe that the king has more than symbolic power.

Bush didn't start the war, but then again, his party did. shockzorz omg impossibles! You're being pedantic.

Of course they are killing children.

So before you post again, make sure you know what you're talking about.

shatskater
01-07-2005, 07:48 AM
[QUOTE=wheelchairman]And then you again are ignorant Shatskater. You're stupid enough to believe that the king has more than symbolic power.

for once i thought we would agree....and yet agian i have failed to complete that thought. i didnt say that. you are putting words in my mouth. i just said he cannot just overthrow bush like they may be able to overthrow there king. i no the king doesnt have much to do with there government.

shatskater
01-07-2005, 07:51 AM
Bush didn't start the war, but then again, his party did.
thats right, neither did his party. it was CONGRESS who started the war, bush just agreed with it. you cant say anything agianst him becuase of that. there are lots of people who agree with it.

pOpe
01-07-2005, 07:56 AM
Congress is the only branch of our government that can declare war, now bush can approve it, and overlook it. so if anyone starts World War III it would be those terrorists or Congress. but he did not declare war on Iraq.



and who votes the Congress' members?? I think american people....I'm not sure, but I think that... this is why I think that 99% of americans are ignorant, 'cause is not one person (like bush, or aznar in spain), there are many people who think like bush... this is sad

sorry about my english.. if you dont understand something say it, and I'll try to explain better :p
________
Mazda g4a-el transmission picture (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_G4A-EL_transmission)

shatskater
01-07-2005, 08:04 AM
actually congress votes thereselves into the positions so ya.

wheelchairman
01-07-2005, 08:07 AM
[QUOTE=wheelchairman]And then you again are ignorant Shatskater. You're stupid enough to believe that the king has more than symbolic power.

for once i thought we would agree....and yet agian i have failed to complete that thought. i didnt say that. you are putting words in my mouth. i just said he cannot just overthrow bush like they may be able to overthrow there king. i no the king doesnt have much to do with there government.

You compared the King to your president, what other reason to do this than to equate them?

And congress passed it, but you have to know that Bush and his gang have been feeding propagandistic lies about it, and backing it up with lies from intelligence agencies. And they've been planning this for a decade. omg it's congress!

shatskater
01-07-2005, 08:13 AM
lol, yup, congress is the purpatraitor. welcome to america.

pOpe
01-07-2005, 08:15 AM
actually congress votes thereselves into the positions so ya.
what kind of country is america??? a dictatorship???
________
Volcano vaporizer (http://twitter.com/vaporizer)

wheelchairman
01-07-2005, 08:35 AM
what kind of country is america??? a dictatorship???
Quite effectively yes.

shatskater
01-07-2005, 08:44 AM
Quite effectively yes.

actually as much as u would like it 2 be, no.....becuase if that even got close to happening he would be impeached and placed on trial probably for traitorism.

wheelchairman
01-07-2005, 09:01 AM
actually as much as u would like it 2 be, no.....becuase if that even got close to happening he would be impeached and placed on trial probably for traitorism.
Did I ever say Bush was the dictator? It's no secret that the same people have been in power for far more than they really should be.

pOpe
01-07-2005, 09:11 AM
actually as much as u would like it 2 be, no.....becuase if that even got close to happening he would be impeached and placed on trial probably for traitorism.


but if all americans think that genocide in irak is allowed... what happend? nothing.. the congress won't do nothing, no? this is like CIA, CIA is allowed to kill people, except leaders, and in my opinion, this is a crime, no?
________
Gsr600 (http://www.suzuki-tech.com/wiki/Suzuki_GSR600)

shatskater
01-07-2005, 09:13 AM
Did I ever say Bush was the dictator? It's no secret that the same people have been in power for far more than they really should be.

he has been in power for 4 years. and now another 4. then he is gone, he can only serve 2 terms. but ther is a loop. after he leaves for 4 years, he could come back, becuase it says 2 consecutive terms.

shatskater
01-07-2005, 09:15 AM
but if all americans think that genocide in irak is allowed... what happend? nothing.. the congress won't do nothing, no? this is like CIA, CIA is allowed to kill people, except leaders, and in my opinion, this is a crime, no?

actually the CIA doesnt kill any1, it is the Central Intelligence Agency, it deals with spys, strategic plans, foerign affairs.

pOpe
01-07-2005, 09:27 AM
I hear that CIA was thinking in change the law, and then CIA will be allowed to kill leaders too... so kill people I'm sure that they do that
________
Silversurfer vaporizer (http://vaporizers.net/silver-surfer-vaporizer)

shatskater
01-07-2005, 09:49 AM
I hear that CIA was thinking in change the law, and then CIA will be allowed to kill leaders too... so kill people I'm sure that they do that

lol, the CIA cannot change the laws or make new ones. Only Congress can do that, and the president, but congress has to have 2/3 of them to agree on it, and then the president has to approve it.

Leo_ARG
01-07-2005, 10:18 AM
I hear that CIA was thinking in change the law, and then CIA will be allowed to kill leaders too... so kill people I'm sure that they do that


Well, isn't that what they did with El Che Guevara in Bolivia?
Where was that law there?

pOpe
01-07-2005, 12:15 PM
Well, isn't that what they did with El Che Guevara in Bolivia?
Where was that law there?
yeah, but I wanted to say that leaders of countries (kings, presidents etc etc... not ideological leaders)... why do you think that sadam is alive now? and fidel castro??

And I know that laws are aproved for (for or by? I dont know what is the right word) the congress, but they wanted to change the law that I said before... so kill is a crime.. and this is true
________
Swed (http://smokeweedeveryday.org/)

Skate Rat 19
01-07-2005, 01:50 PM
I would say that you are the archetype of everything I despise in myself and others. An ignorant, loud-mouthed dumbass.

We are the ones who started it with the Middle East. In almost everyway. In fact for decades the Middle East basically tolerated us and believed our lies about things would get better. They didn't and they started getting pissed.

And there was nothing awesome about the World Trade Center buildings, in fact, the only tragedy that the world center collapsed, would be for the innocent firemen, mailmen, or other non-trade related professionals. The janitors, the cleaning folk, that's what makes me sad. Business professionals and traders, could really care less about.

They certainly didn't wreck our economy, you know nothing of economics, and this is coming from a person who has only a very basic knowledge of economics.

And I would bet that I've lived in America longer than you've been alive, and that I know more of it than you do as well.

Look, I know iraq was a big mistake but im talking about Afganistan and that whole war. I think the iraqi people are the victims but in Afganistan all we did was free the people, kick some al quieda ass, and get our revenge. So when said kill 'em all I meant kill all those taliban and al quieda members. Secondly it did wreck our economy(at least in New York State it did) and i also don't care about the buissnes people but the world trade center was very awsome. Also the people on the plane that crashed in pennsylvannia, what about them. Not to mention the innocent in the pentagon(not the sleezey politicains).

Oh and excuse me 4 being pissed at them, after all they only killed many people i knew personally just because they were happy innocent americans.













Bitch

wheelchairman
01-07-2005, 02:01 PM
Look, I know iraq was a big mistake but im talking about Afganistan and that whole war. I think the iraqi people are the victims but in Afganistan all we did was free the people, kick some al quieda ass, and get our revenge. So when said kill 'em all I meant kill all those taliban and al quieda members. Secondly it did wreck our economy(at least in New York State it did) and i also don't care about the buissnes people but the world trade center was very awsome. Also the people on the plane that crashed in pennsylvannia, what about them. Not to mention the innocent in the pentagon(not the sleezey politicains).

Oh and excuse me 4 being pissed at them, after all they only killed many people i knew personally just because they were happy innocent americans.

Bitch
Yeah call me bitch, that's mature.

What kind of an idiot thinks that the Taliban attacked America?

It was Al-Qa'ida that supposedly bombed the World Trade Center. They were all Arabs, the men who flew the planes. Al- Qa'ida is an Arab organization, founded under an Arab muslim sect (Wahhabism) supported by the Saudi Arabian royalty.

Al-Qa'ida had one training camp in Afghanistan or something, and we did a pretty sloppy job there. (last time I checked, the Taliban still administered 30% of the country.)

Going to war for revenge, is what dumbasses with dick-size issues do.

Going to war to kill innocent people because they killed innocent people, is stupid.

The economy wasn't wrecked particularly much, war is generally thought to fix economies, it turns out Bush's stupid economic policies were terribly inefficient, the economy was suffering before 9/11.

Knowing victims personally doesn't justify the war. Don't be stupid.

PunkRockIbanezer
01-07-2005, 05:17 PM
Since our religious leaders will not speak out against the war in Iraq, since our political leaders don't have the moral courage to oppose it, Inauguration Day, Thursday, January 20th, 2005 is "Not One Damn Dime Day" in America.

On "Not One Damn Dime Day" those who oppose what is happening in our name in Iraq can speak up with a 24-hour national boycott of all forms of consumer spending.

During "Not One Damn Dime Day" please don't spend money.

Not one damn dime for gasoline.

Not one damn dime for necessities or for impulse purchases.

Not one damn dime for nothing for 24 hours.

On "Not One Damn Dime Day," please boycott Walmart, KMart and Target.
Please don't go to the mall or the local convenience store.
Please don't buy any fast food (or any groceries at all for that matter).
For 24 hours, please do what you can to shut the retail economy down.

The object is simple. Remind the people in power that the war in Iraq is immoral and illegal; that they are responsible for starting it and that it is their responsibility to stop it. "Not One Damn Dime Day" is to remind them, too, that they work for the people of the United States of America, not for the international corporations and K Street lobbyists who represent the corporations and funnel cash into American politics.

"Not One Damn Dime Day" is about supporting the troops. The politicians put the troops in harm's way. Now 1,200 brave young Americans and (some estimate) 100,000 Iraqis have died. The politicians owe our troops a plan - a way to come home.

There's no rally to attend. No marching to do. No left or right wing agenda to rant about. On "Not One Damn Dime Day" you take action by doing nothing. You open your mouth by keeping your wallet closed.

For 24 hours, nothing gets spent, not one damn dime, to remind our religious leaders and our politicians of their moral responsibility to end the war in Iraq and give America back to the people.

pOpe
01-07-2005, 05:34 PM
happy birthday wheelchairman :D
________
Honda SL90 (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_SL90)

Skate Rat 19
01-07-2005, 06:32 PM
Yeah call me bitch, that's mature.

What kind of an idiot thinks that the Taliban attacked America?

It was Al-Qa'ida that supposedly bombed the World Trade Center. They were all Arabs, the men who flew the planes. Al- Qa'ida is an Arab organization, founded under an Arab muslim sect (Wahhabism) supported by the Saudi Arabian royalty.

Al-Qa'ida had one training camp in Afghanistan or something, and we did a pretty sloppy job there. (last time I checked, the Taliban still administered 30% of the country.)

Going to war for revenge, is what dumbasses with dick-size issues do.

Going to war to kill innocent people because they killed innocent people, is stupid.

The economy wasn't wrecked particularly much, war is generally thought to fix economies, it turns out Bush's stupid economic policies were terribly inefficient, the economy was suffering before 9/11.

Knowing victims personally doesn't justify the war. Don't be stupid.




Know what; if u don't like my ideas, fine. But dont be pissed at me for having my own opinions, oh yeah and knowing the victims who were also my friends who were killed that day does give me every right to hate those buttfucking douche bags. I'm sure u would be pissed indescriminantly at the group who was responsible for murdering people u knew and were good friends with.
Besides that, yes i guess bush did wreck the economy more than any terrorist ever could. Also we didn't go to war to kill the innocent went went there to turn Al-Quieda and the Tliban supporters into swiss cheese. Oh yeah and we freed those people, werent u watching how they rejoiced after the Taliban was gone?






Biznatch

wtf_mate?
01-08-2005, 12:02 AM
I've got a question that I can't answer, because it is very very.... (I don't have words to say this, it's incredible). Why you, people who live in USA, had voted bush??




Because there was no solid evidence that stated the liberal claim. That Bush was a liar, went to war for oil, made secret pacts, etc. Michael Moore attempted to provide this evidence, but, everything in his movie could be disputed. The whole Democratic backround was based on propaganda, rumors, and what Bush "might have done". If they put some solid facts in their deck of cards, they might have pulled it off.

wtf_mate?
01-08-2005, 12:09 AM
he has been in power for 4 years. and now another 4. then he is gone, he can only serve 2 terms. but ther is a loop. after he leaves for 4 years, he could come back, becuase it says 2 consecutive terms.


Actually, I'm pretty sure he isn't allowed to come back. Learned this in a PolSci class. Could be wrong though. But I'm pretty sure this is the case.

wheelchairman
01-08-2005, 04:50 AM
Know what; if u don't like my ideas, fine. But dont be pissed at me for having my own opinions, oh yeah and knowing the victims who were also my friends who were killed that day does give me every right to hate those buttfucking douche bags. I'm sure u would be pissed indescriminantly at the group who was responsible for murdering people u knew and were good friends with.
Besides that, yes i guess bush did wreck the economy more than any terrorist ever could. Also we didn't go to war to kill the innocent went went there to turn Al-Quieda and the Tliban supporters into swiss cheese. Oh yeah and we freed those people, werent u watching how they rejoiced after the Taliban was gone?

Biznatch
This is ridiculous. This isn't about liking your ideas. We're in the middle of an argument, if you can't defend your opinions with logic, then you are just an idiot.

wtf mate- you're an idiot too if you think Bush is an honest nice guy.

pOpe
01-08-2005, 06:28 AM
Because there was no solid evidence that stated the liberal claim. That Bush was a liar, went to war for oil, made secret pacts, etc. Michael Moore attempted to provide this evidence, but, everything in his movie could be disputed. The whole Democratic backround was based on propaganda, rumors, and what Bush "might have done". If they put some solid facts in their deck of cards, they might have pulled it off.

But Michael Moore is not a politic, he is a film-maker, and he only tries to manipulate people to vote against bush.... Michael Moore is not a god, people vote the president that they want, they didn't vote the president that Michael Moore wanted, and it's too sad that the only weapon who had kerry was Michael Moore, or Bruce Springteen.

People had to voted thinking in the wars (Afganistan, Irak... and I've got a feeling will be more wars soon), in the unemployment... no in Michael Moore... this is stupid
________
BHO HASH OIL (http://trichomes.org/hashish/bho-hash-oil)

wtf_mate?
01-08-2005, 11:55 AM
wtf mate- you're an idiot too if you think Bush is an honest nice guy.

I don't think that is what I said. Sorry if you misinterpreted that.

wtf_mate?
01-08-2005, 12:00 PM
But Michael Moore is not a politic, he is a film-maker, and he only tries to manipulate people to vote against bush.... Michael Moore is not a god, people vote the president that they want, they didn't vote the president that Michael Moore wanted, and it's too sad that the only weapon who had kerry was Michael Moore, or Bruce Springteen.

People had to voted thinking in the wars (Afganistan, Irak... and I've got a feeling will be more wars soon), in the unemployment... no in Michael Moore... this is stupid


I agree. But, believe it or not, Michael Moore was the best weapon John Kerry had against Bush. Michael Moore's claims were the only reasonings anyone would vote against Bush (unless of course, one believed stem cells, education, etc. to be more important then the war. Then they voted for Kerry.). You see what I mean? Michael Moore was the only one to jump out and actually show in visual footage his opinion and agenda. But...he failed, because his agenda could be rebutted over and over again. It just wasn't strong enough.

Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

Skate Rat 19
01-08-2005, 12:51 PM
This is ridiculous. This isn't about liking your ideas. We're in the middle of an argument, if you can't defend your opinions with logic, then you are just an idiot.

wtf mate- you're an idiot too if you think Bush is an honest nice guy.



Ok fine, tell me exactly how your side of the argument is right.

wheelchairman
01-08-2005, 01:16 PM
Ok fine, tell me exactly how your side of the argument is right.
That would be a different argument, you presented your ideas, and I showed you how you were wrong. Either take my rejections of your 'facts' and show how they are wrong, or else quit arguing.

pOpe
01-08-2005, 01:56 PM
I agree. But, believe it or not, Michael Moore was the best weapon John Kerry had against Bush. Michael Moore's claims were the only reasonings anyone would vote against Bush (unless of course, one believed stem cells, education, etc. to be more important then the war. Then they voted for Kerry.). You see what I mean? Michael Moore was the only one to jump out and actually show in visual footage his opinion and agenda. But...he failed, because his agenda could be rebutted over and over again. It just wasn't strong enough.

Sorry if I'm not making any sense.


I don't understand USA people... they are too complicated.... I want to tell you one thing... I think that the reason that people voted Bush was the arrogance, the feeling of superiority (the reason was that "I vote Bush, 'cause if one person of another country are stupid we kill him")... do you understand me? I think that american people would have to be more modest

but hey, that's only my opinion, I'm not a yanki
________
Honda Nsx Specifications (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_NSX)

Lithuanian Offspring
01-08-2005, 01:59 PM
Do any of you really believe in all of this conspiracy stuff? I'm kind of lost. To me it looks like an awfully planed out, medicore, Clancy- wanna be novel. The whole conspiracy is too weak for anything to matter. I fucking hate this crap. I think we should all resort to Aphroditism and fuck all day long.

Lithuanian Offspring
01-08-2005, 02:02 PM
I don't understand USA people... they are too complicated.... I want to tell you one thing... I think that the reason that people voted Bush was the arrogance, the feeling of superiority (the reason was that "I vote Bush, 'cause if one person of another country are stupid we kill him")... do you understand me? I think that american people would have to be more modest

but hey, that's only my opinion, I'm not a yanki
Nah. It might seem like it at times, but honestly do the Americans even know about anything that is going on outside of their country. Well maybe they have a faint glimmer of knowledge about Iraq, but thats it.

wtf_mate?
01-09-2005, 01:52 AM
I don't understand USA people... they are too complicated.... I want to tell you one thing... I think that the reason that people voted Bush was the arrogance, the feeling of superiority (the reason was that "I vote Bush, 'cause if one person of another country are stupid we kill him")... do you understand me? I think that american people would have to be more modest

but hey, that's only my opinion, I'm not a yanki


And I respect your opinion. Mine is currently secret...no need to blabber about my own agenda. But I don't think the reason Bush entered office was so Americans would be sure that anyone who didn't like this country would be killed. Not at all. The following is what I believe the top 3 reasons people in the U.S.A. voted for Bush:

1)Morals
2)Tax Cuts
3)He has a strong position (whether or not you agree with his position is another issue. The major edge Bush had over Kerry was that he didn't waiver around too much. Also known as a flip-flop.)

But don't get too carried away in thinking that EVERY American wants to just kill random people because they don't like our country. In fact, I don't know of anyone who thinks that way. Try not to turn your opinion into a stereotype. What you have to keep in mind, is that 49 out of 100 citizens of the United States voted AGAINST Bush. That's almost half. Don't think this is a completely "red" nation.

wheelchairman
01-09-2005, 05:27 AM
Am I the last person aware of the fact that the flip-flop crap was pure propaganda and unrealistic? I mean when I first heard the republicans say this, I thought they were just 'beta-testing' their propaganda machine, and would eventually find something more scandalous.

If you look over their records, you will find that Bush had quite a few major flipflops.

pOpe
01-09-2005, 06:22 AM
I know that 49 out of 100 citizens of the United States voted against Bush, but Bush has been the president who had more votes from people in the history of USA... that's really depressing....it's similar like hitler, he arrived at the power of legal form (then he did his illegal things of course)

I try to explain that Hitler started the II World War.... Bush will start III World War if he continues doing the same in another countries, and american people had to see this when the was voting Bush

Bush only makes bigger the feeling of anti-americanism in the world
________
ZOROASTRIANISM FORUM (http://www.religionboard.org/zoroastrianism/)