Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3]


BS: Why I support Disarming America

Teribus 06 Mar 03 - 03:11 AM
Forum Lurker 06 Mar 03 - 01:58 AM
DougR 06 Mar 03 - 01:44 AM
Bobert 05 Mar 03 - 10:50 PM
Forum Lurker 05 Mar 03 - 07:35 PM
GUEST,Oldguy 05 Mar 03 - 01:54 PM
GUEST,Forum Lurker 05 Mar 03 - 01:11 PM
DougR 05 Mar 03 - 12:13 PM
Forum Lurker 05 Mar 03 - 09:11 AM
ard mhacha 05 Mar 03 - 06:39 AM
Teribus 05 Mar 03 - 04:19 AM
GUEST,Oldguy 05 Mar 03 - 12:08 AM
Forum Lurker 04 Mar 03 - 11:21 PM
GUEST,Oldguy 04 Mar 03 - 11:04 PM
Mark Clark 04 Mar 03 - 01:02 PM
Bobert 04 Mar 03 - 08:18 AM
DougR 04 Mar 03 - 12:22 AM
GUEST,Ewan McVicar 03 Mar 03 - 03:54 PM
Teribus 03 Mar 03 - 06:32 AM
Teribus 03 Mar 03 - 01:58 AM
Bobert 02 Mar 03 - 09:36 PM
Forum Lurker 02 Mar 03 - 06:28 PM
GUEST,Oldguy 02 Mar 03 - 03:18 PM
Forum Lurker 02 Mar 03 - 12:32 PM
DougR 02 Mar 03 - 03:00 AM
Forum Lurker 02 Mar 03 - 02:40 AM
DougR 02 Mar 03 - 02:35 AM
GUEST,Oldguy 02 Mar 03 - 02:02 AM
Forum Lurker 01 Mar 03 - 11:51 AM
ard mhacha 01 Mar 03 - 09:36 AM
GUEST,Oldguy 01 Mar 03 - 09:05 AM
Bobert 01 Mar 03 - 08:48 AM
Teribus 01 Mar 03 - 05:35 AM
GUEST,Ewan McVicar 28 Feb 03 - 01:15 PM
GUEST,Useful Idiot 28 Feb 03 - 12:29 PM
Bobert 28 Feb 03 - 12:20 PM
Teribus 28 Feb 03 - 12:11 PM
Ebbie 27 Feb 03 - 10:38 PM
Forum Lurker 27 Feb 03 - 09:20 PM
Troll 27 Feb 03 - 08:22 PM
Bobert 27 Feb 03 - 08:01 PM
Forum Lurker 27 Feb 03 - 07:35 PM
Bobert 27 Feb 03 - 04:40 PM
GUEST 27 Feb 03 - 04:03 PM
GUEST,Forum Lurker 27 Feb 03 - 02:16 PM
ard mhacha 27 Feb 03 - 01:26 PM
Teribus 27 Feb 03 - 01:33 AM
DougR 27 Feb 03 - 01:28 AM
Forum Lurker 27 Feb 03 - 12:15 AM
wooddog 26 Feb 03 - 04:26 PM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum Child
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Mar 03 - 03:11 AM

OK Bobert:

"Like Claymore says, "Facts are a bitch." - So lets take a look at some of the "facts" you mention:

"This was more about the US using Iraq as our little *Iranian-butt-kickers*."

Not so much a fact as your opinion - poorly informed at that - Because at the time Iraq was losing the war they started - that IS a fact. At the time Iraq was firmly on the defensive - both sides using chemical weapons to break up "human wave" attack tactics introduced due to loss of equipment, spare parts and adequately trained personnel.

"Then, there was "Ronald McDonald" Dumsfeld over there bringing *gifts* to Saddam and providing *intellegence* so that Saddam could gass Iranians..."

One observation, the name calling is infantile and tends to detract from the importance of points you may wish to put across - its the sort of thing that five year olds indulge in when they know they are losing an arguement. Now back to the "facts" - what position did Donald Rumsfeld hold in the US Administration at the time he was asked to meet Saddam Hussein? Please provide some form of documentary evidence to support your contention that Donald Rumsfeld was arranging for the transfer of intelligence information in order that Saddam Hussein could gas Iranians. By what authority was he actually empowered to do that?

"And, like I have pointed out on many occasions, Dumsey didn't say a danged thing to Saddam about gassin' the Kurds. Hmmmmm? Now it a big issue! Hmmmmmm? But back then Dumsy didn't give a tibnker's dam about it! Hmmmmmm?"

The fact Bobert was the news about the gas attack against the Kurds broke the day Rumsfeld met Saddam Hussein.

"Like what gives here, T?

The Saddam tells Dumsey that he's gonna take back a renigade providence, Kuwait, and Dumsey don't say nuthin' bad about it, so Saddam figgures everything is cool."

This myth about the US "giving-Saddam-the green-light" over Saddam's planned invasion of Kuwait was competently exploded in this forum by Wolfgang, who supplied information with regard to dates, personalities and text relating to what was said. So, again Bobert, give us some documentary evidence to support your contention - you'll have a damn hard job doing it.

"Just like when Dumsey provided Saddam with not only the gas but the *intellegence* on where to drop it. But this time, Dumsey weren't so Dumb. Imoral? YeaH. Liar? Yes! Bach satbber? Well, sure.

The rest is history."

In fact, this is a re-hash of a point you made previously in your post - just because you repeat it often enough doesn't make it the truth, or any more factual. So again I will ask you - "What position did Donald Rumsfeld hold in the US Administration at that time?". In addition I will ask you, "What gas did Donald Rumsfeld supply to Iraq?"

"Hey, I'm no Saddam apologist!" - Well Bobert, you could've fooled me - you take absolutely everything the man says at face value as gospel truth - even after it has been proven that he has been lying - while denigrating and childishly insulting those who have been vindicated in taking the stance they have. I'll give you a couple of examples:

1. You steadfastly refuse to accept or acknowledge the fact that without the current US Administration taking the stance they did - There would be no UN weapons inspection teams in Iraq - Pity you can't bring yourself to do that, because everybody in the UN realises this as the truth (and a FACT).

2. Saddam has always said that he did not possess any WMD, no stocks of chemical/biological agents, no weapons delivery systems - You have clearly stated that you believed him - even after the weapons inspectors started turning up the hard-wear that proven that Saddam was lying. You then apologise for Saddam's lies by stating that he needs them because the US is bullying him.

"But Donald Rumsfeld is a liein', back stabbin', dangerous man. The kind of guy that Adolf would have loved to have around. And look at the man! He even looks the part of a Hitler right hand man!

These are the facts. Yeah. try to mofve the debate into the center of *your* magnifying glass but these are the facts. You can explain them, rationize them any way you want. Yeah, you can balme Clinton for all this. I don't care, These are the facts.

No Bobert, these are not the facts - They are simply your own highly biased, ill-informed, inaccurate, totally subjective opinions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 06 Mar 03 - 01:58 AM

But we mean different things when we say that, DougR. You mean that it is more praiseworthy to fight it than sit idly by and object; I mean that is is easier on those involved to prevent the war through opposition than to kill a lot of people needlessly. I would agree taht a larger and more intense skill set is necessary to be an effective soldier than an effective protestor, but that doesn't mean that they're in the right.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: DougR
Date: 06 Mar 03 - 01:44 AM

Forum Lurker: well we are in agreement on one thing at least. It is much easier to oppose a war than to fight one.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 10:50 PM

No, T-eeser. This was more about the US using Iraq as our little *Iranian-butt-kickers*.

Then, there was "Ronald McDonald" Dumsfeld over there bringing *gifts* to Saddam and providing *intellegence* so that Saddam could gass Iranians... And, like I have pointed out on many occasions, Dumsey didn't say a danged thing to Saddam about gassin' the Kurds. Hmmmmm? Now it a big issue! Hmmmmmm? But back then Dumsy didn't give a tibnker's dam about it! Hmmmmmm?

Like what gives here, T?

The Saddam tells Dumsey that he's gonna take back a renigade providence, Kuwait, and Dumsey don't say nuthin' bad about it, so Saddam figgures everything is cool. Just like when Dumsey provided Saddam with not only the gas but the *intellegence* on where to drop it. But this time, Dumsey weren't so Dumb. Imoral? YeaH. Liar? Yes! Bach satbber? Well, sure.

The rest is history.

Hey, I'm no Saddam apologist!

But Donald Rumsfeld is a liein', back stabbin', dangerous man. The kind of guy that Adolf would have loved to have around. And look at the man! He even looks the part of a Hitler right hand man!

These are the facts. Yeah. try to mofve the debate into the center of *your* magnifying glass but these are the facts. You can explain them, rationize them any way you want. Yeah, you can balme Clinton for all this. I don't care, These are the facts.

Like Claymore says, "Facts are a bitch."

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 07:35 PM

It might be another Vietnam, Oldguy. That's what I'm worried about. And I find it rather insulting that you think people protesting the war are being irresponsible. I think it's more irresponsible to promote a war that you'll never fight in than to protest it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Oldguy
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 01:54 PM

The way I picture the NK war was NK invaded and over ran SK. The SK army had been beaten back to the tip of the peninsula when the US forces arrived. They drove the NKs back beyond their border and had them whipped. Ike told Macarthur to quit. He did not quit because he wanted to engage the Red Chinese. The drove the NKs to the border with China where upon China fought back and there was a bloody mess after that.

Nevertheless, the US liberated SK and if they hadn't the whole peninsula would be starving while the Military imposed nuclear blackmail on the rest of the world on a much larger scale than the NKs do now.

Iraq is a future NK if we don't deal with it now while we are able.
It could not be more obvious. The UN is not going to do it even while being prodded by the US. It is a ridiculous situation that is perpetuated by peaceniks.

As for the futility and failures of some wars, what is the total summation of them all? Communism is not the threat it once was and Americans are free to march around with signs and spout self defeating drivel if they wan to.

Go ahead and get it out of your system while the responsible people take care of the important things.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 01:11 PM

As I recall from AP American History, the balance of forces between North and South Korea were about even, and the Chinese didn't start helping the North Koreans until we started assissting the South Koreans. I also seem to recall that the support in North Vietnam was for a communist government. I don't see how forcing representative democracy and capitalism on them would be any better than the Communists imposing communism on Douth Vietnam.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: DougR
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 12:13 PM

Forum Lurker: had there been no Korean war, that madman in North Korea today would be lord and master over all Korea. You think that would be good?

Had Lyndon Johnson allowed the military to win the war (as Barry Goldwater proposed in the 1960's)there would be a free government in Viet Nam as well as a free people.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 09:11 AM

Oldguy-I have never seen any evidence that the Vietnam or Korean wars stood between America and Russian dominion. In fact, I have never seen any evidence that those wars accomplished anything poitive at all. If you have such proof, I'm sure we'd all be glad to know that the lives of American servicemen and Vietnamese civilians weren't thrown away for nothing. Saddam still hasn't been linked to any terrorists, and it's still considered acceptable to oust someone who has RECENTLY launched an attack against you or an allied nation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: ard mhacha
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 06:39 AM

And another letter from the BBC`s Ceefax,
"The real reason for the Bush administrations drive to war against Iraq can be found in an organization based in Washington DC, called The Project for the New American Century.

Its aims are,"full spectrum dominance" and eventual "Liberation" of the Peoples Republic of China.

Who were the founding fathers of this project launched in 1997?,
None other than, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle".

Only the mind of a Poe could have conjured up this lot, they would be much more suited to the bottom of a Po. Ard Mhacha.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 04:19 AM

From Bobert,

"Yo T:

You're correct, the Iraqis probably never were our friends. Just allies, when we *needed* them."

Yo B:

I think the need was very much on the part of Iraq at that time - And the US were not the only ones to come in and help (French aircraft/ French pilots - we used to listen to them on the radio as they attacked the Iranian oil terminal on Kharg Island)

To illustrate the above:

"Despite the proximity of these ports to Iraq, the Iraqi navy did not play an important role in the operations. Instead, Baghdad used SUPER FRELON helicopters equipped with EXOCET missiles or MIRAGE F-1s and MiG-23s to hit its targets. Naval operations came to a halt, presumably because Iraq and Iran had lost many of their ships, by early 1981; the lull in the fighting lasted for two years.

In March 1984, the tanker war entered its second phase when Iraq initiated sustained naval operations in its self-declared 1,126-kilometer maritime exclusion zone, extending from the mouth of the Shatt al Arab to Iran's port of Bushehr. In 1981 Baghdad had attacked Iranian ports and oil complexes as well as neutral tankers and ships sailing to and from Iran; in 1984 Iraq expanded the so-called tanker war by using FRENCH SUPER-ETANDARD combat aircraft armed with EXOCET missiles.

In March 1984 an Iraqi SUPER ETENDARD fired an EXOCET missile at a Greek tanker south of Khark Island. Until the March assault, Iran had not intentionally attacked civilian ships in the Gulf. Neutral merchant ships became favorite targets, and the long-range SUPER-ETENDARDS flew sorties farther south. Seventy-one merchant ships were attacked in 1984 alone, compared with forty-eight in the first three years of the war. Iraq's motives in increasing the tempo included a desire to break the stalemate, presumably by cutting off Iran's oil exports and by thus forcing Tehran to the negotiating table. Repeated Iraqi efforts failed to put Iran's main oil exporting terminal at Khark Island out of commission, however."

The reason they failed to put Iran's main oil exporting terminal out of commission - came, quite cynically, down to job protection - the Mercenary pilots flying combat missions against Kharg knew that if they put Kharg out of business - they would be out of a job - the same bunch of jokers hit the Offshore Construction/Dive Support Vessel Pacific Constructor.

So please, if you are going to refer to aid given to the Iraqi's at that time - be factual - be accurate. Please don't attempt to portray American involvement as being on an equivalent scale as a second-coming-lend-lease programme, it wasn't - others did far more - that might not suit your arguement - but you can't have everything. Aid was given to Iraq by many countries - because that was perceived by many, both within the region and internationally, as being in everyone's best interest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Oldguy
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 12:08 AM

Tell me what the current status would be if we did not engage in any of those wars you mentioned?

We would be calling each other comerade.

In 1991 the goal of the Alliance was to liberate Kuwait not get rid of Saddam Hussein and he was not linked to the terrorists that attacked our country.

If you have a solution, spit it out.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 11:21 PM

Actually, Oldguy, we hesitated to go to war in both World Wars until we were directly threatened. In WWI, Wilhelm offered to pay the Mexicans to invade us, and we didn't actually get into the fighting in WWII until the "day that will live in infamy." In Korea and Vietnam, we got involved before we were threatened. Korea was a stalemate and Vietnam was a godawful mess. This war has nothing to do with us being "hit on our own soil." They're not even the same people. If we were going to oust Saddam, we should have done it in 1991, when it made sense, instead of manufacturing a crisis to clean up Daddy's mess.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Oldguy
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 11:04 PM

For every body that thinks this country is great but it is turning bad:

This country is great now because we have not hesitated to go to war. Now we need to go to war again, Somehow war, this time, for the first time is bad. I don't get it. I have really tried to understand other peoples view points but I really don't get it.

Msybe it is beacuse I was sucking on a baby bottle during WW2 and I lived thru NK1 and dozens of other actions. This is another bump in the road of peace. The only thing that make this bump bigger is the fact that we got hit on our own soil.

We should have done it when the inspectors got thrown out of Iraq in 98.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Mark Clark
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 01:02 PM

For some insight on how our country is viewed, check the link I posted over on the “is war legit?” thread.

      - Mark


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 08:18 AM

Dougie says "Nothing about this country seems right, as far as you're concerned..."

No, my friend, everything seems "right". But not correct.

Iz staying put fir now but have my good eye on the horizon just in case your guys call off democracy in '04.

Yo T:

You're correct, the Iraqis probably never were our friends. Just allies, when we *needed* them. Looking around the world today, other than Tony Balony Blair, we're seeing that we don't have many real friends.

But we did arm Iraq, and we did furnish them *intellegence*, and we did know of the gassing of the Kurds and still continued to do business with them with out so much as a peep, ahhh, when we *needed them*.

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: DougR
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 12:22 AM

Bobert: I can't speak for the Old Guy, of course, but I just hate to see you so unhappy! Nothing about this country seems right, as far as you're concerned, so I just thougth you might find someplace like Iraq more to your liking! Heck, I'd miss you if you left, but I do think you deserve to be happy.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Ewan McVicar
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 03:54 PM

To answer the specific question from Teribus, there is a word 'disarm' and another word 're-arm'. One does not preclude the other, in my definition. You will define each as suits you.
By the way, does the name Teribus indicate you are from Hawick?
In general, I will be out of reach of my computer for several days, telling traditional stories to kids in small rural schools in the Scottish West Highlands. Thank providence for such oportunities to renew my faith that humanity can improve as well as sink down. I'm sure this thread will not miss me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 06:32 AM

Hi Old Guy,

With regard to your question. Very busy at the moment, but hope to be able to respond later in the day.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 01:58 AM

am: "German men won the vote as far back as 1849"

Not strictly correct, Germany as a country did not exist until 1871 after the Franco-Prussian War. With the establishment of "Bismark's Reich" men in Germany got the vote. Had Germany existed as a country it would have been the Franco-German War.

Bobert:

"countries like Iraq and Afganistan that one day they are our friends ands the next day we're bombing them?"

The grounds for stating that "countries like Iraq and Afghanistan" are friends is pretty thin.

If I remember correctly:

Afghanistan - At the time, during the "cold war" years was occupied by Soviet Russia. It became Russia's Vietnam, America provided support for those in rebellion against the Soviet occupation, that was done more to embarass Russia than anything else. To say that America and Afghanistan were friendly states oversteps the mark by some considerable margin.

Iraq - Saddam Hussein initiated the Iran-Iraq war in the hope of gaining his objectives quickly. He hoped to take advantage of internal turmoil inside Iran. As it turned out the Iranians were more of a handful than Saddam bargained for. At one point it looked as though the Iraqi's might actually lose the war they started. At that point many countries, anxious about the spread of fundamentalist Islamic states, came to assist in supporting Iraq's war effort. They were not Iraq's friends, they were merely protecting their own interests within that region.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 09:36 PM

You know, FL, when we got Doug and Old Guy tellin' us that we got to "love it or leave it" they're running out of steam. That is
the equivalent to them just throwing up the "white flag" in total surrender.

Good work.

How pathetic. I expected more from them both.

Hey, Doug and OG, hit the treadmill and lay off the danged bad fats, will ya?

This ain't no hundred yard limp but a marathon....

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 06:28 PM

Just because I disapprove of the way the country is headed doesn't mean I don't want to live here. Despite the sour turns it's taken, this is still one of the best countries in the world to live in. I just want it to STAY that way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Oldguy
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 03:18 PM

FL: You need to find a safe haven like the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 12:32 PM

DougR- Ard Mhacha is referring to the amendment which guaranteed the right to vote for all persons above the age of 18.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: DougR
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 03:00 AM

Not to worry, FL, I'll bet the FBI doesn't even know you exist!

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 02:40 AM

I too am concerned with results, which may include the violation of MY personal rights. I don't want my government to be able to search me or my property without probable cause, not because I'm worried that they'll pin something on me, but because it's an invasion of my privacy. I don't want them to be able to hold me without charges or evidence, because that very well may let them imprison me for something that I didn't do and no evidence suggests I did, simply because I'm inconvenient.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: DougR
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 02:35 AM

am: 1965? Uh, 'splain please. I remember 1965 very well but I don't recall the United States becoming a Democracy that year.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Oldguy
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 02:02 AM

Forum Lurker:

Ashcroft's actions were approved by Congress. Bitch at them or their constituents.

Terrorist cells are being exposed while people are complaining that
A: The government not doing enough to protact them.
B: The government is violating on personal rights.

I am personally concerned with the results, not the esoteric whimperings of insecure people about what might happen.

Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 01 Mar 03 - 11:51 AM

Oldguy-the purpose of said "vicious attacks on the powers that be" is so that we realize and remember that, even should one support the war, Bush is going about it in illegal and unconstitutional ways, while Ashcroft is running the Bill of Rights through a paper shredder. Even if you support his political goals, I think that everyone needs to see that this is not the way to achieve them.

Teribus-I understand your frustration with Saddam's extremely limited compliance. I don't like it either. However, if Saddam makes concessions every time the inspectors are about to report, eventually he'll have conceded everything. If you think it'll take too long, the report frequency can always be increased.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: ard mhacha
Date: 01 Mar 03 - 09:36 AM

Guardian Newspaper London,
" When America defeats its enemies,George Bush said in his speech on Iraq this week, it leaves not occupying armies but democracy and liberty, " There was a time" he went on," when many said that the cultures of Japan and Germany were incapable of sustaining democratic values. Well they were wrong".
In fact it is Mr Bush who is wrong, Japanese men got the vote in 1925,not in 1945 as the President implied.
And German men won the vote as far back as 1849, albeit subject to a property qualification,at a time when Mr Bush`s country praticised legalised slavery.
Bearing in mind that the US only became a full democracy in 1965,, and Germany in 1946, there is a case for saying that Germans have at least as strong a democratic tradition as the US.
Whats more, there is no dispute who won the last German election, which is more than can be said about the means by which Mr Bush came to office.
A little historical humility would do the president no harm".

And world opinion is still against the Bush and Blair government. Ard Mhacha.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Oldguy
Date: 01 Mar 03 - 09:05 AM

Teribus:

You sound like an intelligent, factual person. Can you state your opinions on the terrorist situation in the world and state what you think should be done about them? You might have some useful Ideas.

To others here: I don't see where vicious attacks on the powers that be and even each other serve any purpose except to escalate the animus between the prowar and antiwar camps.

Eventually this sort of thing leads to a war between the two factions and we all know we can't have a war.


Old Guy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 03 - 08:48 AM

Yo T:

I am delighted to have my ETTBS (Estimated Time THe Bombing Starts) miscalculated. Might of fact, I'm not even going to throw another dart at the ETTBS dart board.

But you can bet that Bush is absolutely besides himself. I hear they're having to medicate the boy and give him *quiet time* evry day just to keep him at a low boil the rest of the time. Man, now I'm beginning to understand what his mother has said about him about how he was when he was a kid. Most adults outgrow the hissy fits and temper tantrums but not this spoiled frat boy...

Oh well...

Now, T, speaking of hissy fits and temper tantrums, I thing the US does not put itself in the best position for dialogue. No, when things don't go right forus we grab our guns and go huffin' n puffin' and then wonder why bad things happen. Like what happens to countries like Iraq and Afganistan that one day they are our friends ands the next day we're bombing them? Somewhere along the way we must be failing in our dialogue. Like maybe we're too buzy playing "critical parent" (transactional anaylsis) and not taking enought time playing "adult".

The adult *listens* and thereby keeps the communication open. The critical parent doesn't and the communication breaks down. The US is guilty of this. This has been the failings of one administartion after another in failed foriegn policies. Until the US can become a better listener, it will reap what it sows.

As I have pointed out many times, the US never gave the Saudi Proposal a chance. You think they did but, in reality, they very much didn't want any part of a plan that: 1. Was not in the interests of the military/industrialist complex and 2.was not *their idea*. If they had embraced the framework, we wouldn't be looking a using the ultimate failed foriegn policy today: War!

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Mar 03 - 05:35 AM

Monthly Status Check:

1. There is no war.

2. The fourth (I think) of Bobert's deadlines for the kick-off has passed and gone.

3. The regime in Iraq continues to play games with the inspection process, completely ignoring the obligations it has agreed to under the terms of Resolution 1441 - No surprise there, they ignored all the others, so why should this one be any different.

4. No UNOHCHR representative presence in Iraq


With regard to point 3. above - Notice the timing of "major" concessions by Iraq, all have come within a forty-eight hour period prior to the inspectors reporting to the UN Security Council. Funny thing is that Hans Blix has cottoned on to it - previously, the concessions by the Iraqi regime were announced to forestall any possible political mileage the US & UK could make out of an adverse report. This time Hans Blix, leaked a draft report that was highly critical of the degree of co-operation he was receiving - result immediate Iraq concession - Well done Doctor you're learning.


Guest Ewan pleads;

"Please lay down your weapons, America and Great Britain, then we can talk."

About what exactly? Anything not covered in dialogue since the summer of 1991? There's been lots of talk Ewan - the only thing is that it hasn't got us anywhere with this particular regime - nor is it ever likely to.

"We know you will keep them within reach, ready to grab up whenever you choose - just like Saddam Hussein is doing to international condemnation. One rule for him, another for us."

This sentence of your post rather puzzled me - didn't you start this thread entitled "Why I support disarming America" ?? So, given that, where does the "We know you will keep them in easy reach, ready to grab up whenever you choose - " come from. You want America to disarm don't you? So there will be nothing close at hand, there will be nothing to grab up. According to the posts within this forum, the condemnation you speak of seems to be centred entirely on the US & UK entirely - The US & UK governments seem to be the only ones condeming the activities of the regime in Iraq.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Ewan McVicar
Date: 28 Feb 03 - 01:15 PM

It is of course correct to defend yourself.
But when you say that killing a few thousand people on the other side of the world is defending yourself, then your idea of how much of the world you own and have rights to is skewed, and in your own longer term interest the weapons should be taken away from you until you calm down and can analyse more clearly who you are and what your right to self defence can reasonably be considered to be, in this case by a jury of your international peers, acting not while under threat or in receipt of bribes from you.
Any police show will tell you that the first thing you do is disarm the suspect on your turf, then talk to them.
Please lay down your weapons, America and Great Britain, then we can talk. We know you will keep them within reach, ready to grab up whenever you choose - just like Saddam Hussein is doing to international condemnation. One rule for him, another for us.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Useful Idiot
Date: 28 Feb 03 - 12:29 PM

I believe in disarming America because when we are defenseless the terrorists will leave us along.

Any way I would rather be dead than live in a mean old country that protects itself.


Usefull Idiot


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Feb 03 - 12:20 PM

Ebbie:

Good point!

This one's like liquid mercury.

Outta here...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Feb 03 - 12:11 PM

Ard Mhacha:

"Often due to desperation suicide bombers sacrifice their lives for a cause they sincerely believe in, this for no financial gain."

The going rate - paid by, the people's darling - Saddam Hussein - is $25,000 - obviously no financial gain to the bomber himself, but as Troll pointed out his/her family will get the benefit, providing Hamas or who ever let them keep it, or even hand it over in the first place.

"Military personnel follow orders without question and if required are ready to use absolutely any weapon, on any target, for any purpose."

Massive generalisation, it depends on the circumstances - but normally rules of engagement are fairly strict.

"This is done partially or totally for financial reward.
Who is more morally repugnant"

Again as Troll says, they are paid to do a job, just like anybody else, with the exception that their job can at times mean that they must put themselves into danger so that the rest of us don't.

You ask, "Who is more morally repugnant?" - without a question of a doubt - the guy you failed to mention - the guy in Hamas, or whichever organisation, who sends the suicide bomber out.

In answer to Guest's,

"Why do Palestinians ......... send their youth to self-detonate and take as many people with them as they can?"

I would have thought that that was fairly obvious - because the Palestinians you are referring to are not daft enough to do it themselves.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 10:38 PM

Just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 09:20 PM

Bobert, you're changing the scenario again. If the guy's armed, then he's a threat to you and your family, and you kill him, rather than A)reasoning with him until he kills you all or B) running away and letting him rape and kill your daughter. If he's unarmed, he's not a threat to you, but he is a threat to your daughter, so you do what is necessary to eliminate that threat, which may include killing him. Pacifism is as much an emotional response as violence. The intellectual does what is necessary.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Troll
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 08:22 PM

Military personnel accepting money to defend their country is not morally repugnant in any sense. Instead of having a standing militia consisting of every ablebodied man in the nation as does Switzerland, we -and most other countries - have military forces that protect the nation as a full-time job.
Naturally, they are paid. Even the Swiss pay their soldiers when they go on active duty for training.
The claim that the suicide bombers are somehow more moral than the professional soldier is ludicrous. The bombers of Hamas and Islamic Jihad know that their families will be well taken care of by their respective organizations and by such people as Saddam Hussein and possibly others who sent large gifts of cash to the families of the bombers.
As I see it, this is a totally bogus argument, made solely to cast aspersions on the men and women who put their lives on the line for their country. The money they receive is a pittance. Only a few years ago, it was so bad that army privates could qualify for food stamps.
BTW, the bombers don't just blow up civilians because they are frustrated. If that is the case, why don't they blow up military targets like jeeps and check-points. No, they blow up civilians because that makes more of an impact on the rest of the population. Their motives are highly political in nature and not military at all.

troll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 08:01 PM

At the risk of your daughter's life, my friend? Come on, you are splitting hairs on the minimal force issue but if using lethal force against a rapist insures that your daughter will also die that's pretty danged hard to do.

I don't know what your background is but if you were to work where I used to work, the Richmond City Jail as the jailhouse teacher, I think yoy'd have a different perspective of using intellect over emotion to maximize not only your chances of survival but those around you.

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 07:35 PM

I disagree, Bobert. First, you should use the minimum amount of force that has a high probability of succeeding. It is acceptable to use overkill if the alternative has a high risk of failure. Secondly, I consider rape as reprehensible an act, if not more so, than many murders, and have no more qualms about stopping it with lethal force if necessary.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 04:40 PM

Furum Lurker:

Your original scenerio was one of a rapist, not a killer. Now, that being all that one has to go on it is conceivable that an intervention could lead to the daughter's death. *Self defense* and the *defense* of others is a tricky question that involves two important concepts:

1. Only the minimal amount of force should be used in defense, and

2. Are there no other options.

In your case of the rapist, your actions might have easily led the *would be* rapist to become a *would be* killer. It's a tough call.

Now if your senerion had the offender a *would be* killer then that changes the scenerio completely.

Like Little Hawk, I may be a peaceful person but I undersatnd the principles of self defense and have been in a couple unfortunate situations in my life where I have had to use it. But I have also internalized the art of awareness and avoidence of such situations as most of us have thru experience, thank God...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 04:03 PM

Because I want to control all of the Arab world and the US won't let me.

SH


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 02:16 PM

Because soldiers should not, and are required not to, follow illegal orders. A soldier ordered to bomb a marketplace with no military targets in it should refuse. Suicide bombers almost invariably target defenseless civilians who are in no way responsible for any of their problems. Someone who accepts money to defend his country is morally superior to someone who massacres civilians out of misdirected rage for free.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: ard mhacha
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 01:26 PM

A letter from BBC Ceefax,
" Often due to desperation suicide bombers sacrifice their lives for a cause they sincerely believe in, this for no financial gain.

Military personnel follow orders without question and if required are ready to use absolutely any weapon, on any target, for any purpose.

This is done partially or totally for financial reward.
Who is more morally repugnant?".

Another reason for disarming the US. Ard Mhacha.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 01:33 AM

Guest 26.02.03 - 04:24PM

"Really Forum Lurker? Less "per capita" violence since Pax Romana...I'd like to see your numbers and stats on that."

Presumably the Same as Guest 26.02.03 - 07:07, who asked:

"If violence and the threat of annihilation is so effective, why is there more violence in the world than at any time in history?"

I think Forum Lurker could actually come up with some figures to support his contention - I don't believe that you could considering that your statement covers the history of the entire planet.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: DougR
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 01:28 AM

Forum Lurker: I doubt you will ever get Bobert to agree with that!

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: Forum Lurker
Date: 27 Feb 03 - 12:15 AM

Bobert-I have no idea how you get from killing a rapist to killing the rapist's victim, but I'm sure you have an explanation somewhere. Wisdom is knowing when and how to use force, not just refraining from it entirely.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Why I support Disarming America
From: wooddog
Date: 26 Feb 03 - 04:26 PM

bottomline: Bush has not given any real reason why America should attack Iraq.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Next Page

 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 24 May 5:04 PM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 2022 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.