Are "Peace-nicks" USEFUL IDIOTS?

[j.m@talk]

Originally posted by Billforce


There will be plenty of time for countin when the dealins done.
Kenny Rogers

As my posting buddy J.M says, NUKE 'EM.

Pardon me for being so rude "BUT" what all this stalling about?

OK I'not pollitically corect "BUT" once the complete area of "*******-Stan" is corrected................ Then he world can play once more!

Me I say "NUKE EM" with a smile on my face

& I say (expletive you!)

Does that work?

[Billforce]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wallie_x
[B]Koen sez:

Yes, and I approve of the action. Saddam helped to stop a tide of religious fanaticism from sweeping the Middle East. Iran committed an act of war against the US when the Iranian 'student's seized the US embassy and took the US personnel hostage inTehran. The personified essence of this Islamic fundementalism was shown in the disciple of hate himself: the Ayatollah Khomenii.

Get your facts straight. The US was NOT buddies with Iraq during those years 1988.

FACT:
In 1986 I personally sold night vision binoculars and Air Spatiel Ambulance helicopter to Iraq with the BLESSINGS of the US govt.
The permit stated there was no objection to selling this equipment to Iraq.

BUT:
Times and conditions change with the vacillation of world conditions. In 1986 we were at odds with Iran and one of our avenues of attacking that immediate problem was through Iraq.
If we could have predicted the future, I am sure we may have chosen a different avenue. We haven´t always made wise choices, we backed Noriega, Papa Doc DuValle even Fujimori. BCAT....Best current available technology. Sometimes they bite the hand that feed them. This is current and BCAT......in regards to Iraq. It makes NO difference what we did in the past, we cannot change history, just try to do the right thing in the future.

[DS888]

I know most of you praise democracy. But let me please remind ya all: not even one single advance in mankind's history, whether in science, politics, economy or any other subject of human lives - not even single advance had been done through democratic process. Had manking always followed voice and opinion of "majority" we all would still believe Earth is flat, wouldn't we?
As our (meaning all mankind) history proves - majority was *always* wrong. It always took some extreme personality going against the current mainstreams (of science, of politics, and so on and on) to move the rest of us forward, otherwise we fall into stagnation and dark ages quickly.

Current world public opinions about so-called "war" against Iraq should not cloud anyone's mind.
I hope no one really believe that such country like Iraq may pose any real threat to countries like UK, not mentioning mighty USA. Yes, a mouse may in real life scare away mighty elephant, but we all know its just elephant's imagination and in reality elephant could just squash the mouse anytime.

First of all we need some updated definition of term "war". Any possible American actions taken against Iraq will not resemble anything we think or imagine war is. "Gulf War" anybody? Just check out and compare casualties on US-led Allied and Iraq sides. I'd say it wasn't something one could describe using the word "war". It was closer to a "justified" or "widly supported" manslaughter" rather :-)
Thus this new "war" would be another manslaughter of Iraq men, either "sanctioned and publicly not supported" or not.

The facts we all know are: US of A is the #1 power in the world. Thanks to it (US in the world leader's position, not some communist Russia or China) those millions of people oposing US actions against Iraq *CAN* and do show their opinion. Otherwise we either would have never heard of their protests, or they will be in prisons ;-) It is actually very first time in mankind history that "ruling country" does let other countries live on their own and it doesn't enforce its own rule everywhere it's power reach. For that we should already *love* USA and wish her "long live the Queen" :-)
Anyway - US claims it is in their interest to de-arm Iraq. Probably it is. Whatever other unofficial hidden reason are there (yeah, like we all dont know its about oil and influence in the entire region) the simplest course of action to avoid any US-Iraq "war" would be to get rid of Saddam. We know for 10+ years he is *bad*. Why it never happened? Because Saddam-ruled Iraq is not a country where such change of government could happened without huge bloodshed. Such revolution in Iraq would have had far more casualties than we will see in days to come soon. Anyway. Thats where UN resolutions and common wisdom fails. They don't address this at all. And all those anti-war protesters I'm certain officially are against any dirty regimes, fascism, dictatorship etc etc - yet they show their support to Saddam's one of the most brutal and bloody dictatorships still left on this planet. Why is that? Failure of information? Intentional underinformation of public in western european countries?
Anyway here we go back to what I stated earlier. We need to redefine terms like "war". Most of people reading news topics about possible "war" against Iraq unconciously gets hairy on that. We immediately see those old WWII or Vietnam war images in our minds. It doesn't matter we know them only from movies. The pictures are bad enough. And here is a thought: why do all medias does not show what Saddam's regime is doing to its own people in past 20 years? He is just shy of mass concentration camps, otherwise we would have Hitler-alike image of him. Yet 90% of polled protesters against "war" never heard of gassing hundreds of thousand of Kurds in 80's by Saddam's army (just in example). And in the same time they believe Iraq doesn't have any mass-destruction weapons! They gassed them Kurds by farting alot?

Well, I'm on the US side in this conflict. I'm not American. And not that I support anything mighty US does, but one I know for sure - thanks to US millions of us (including them anti-US protesters) can live and express freely our opinions on such vital subjects.
I also know this: Saddam's regime, with or without mass-destruction weapons, is just plain bad. It is good for all of us to get rid of him. Just for this reason UN should have sanction any "war" against Hussein-led Iraq. Yes, Oil is important to USA as well as to any other civilized country. If US gets hands on Iraq's oil resources in the process of getting rid of Saddam - I say SO WHAT? It only makes USA stronger. And as I said before - I rather see USA in power, than countries like Russia, China or our new pretendent to world ruling - Germany. All I can really see underneath all these protests against US "attack on Iraq" is just some european countries' tries to keep current status quo, where they have access to Iraq's oil in exchange for not supporting any actions against Saddam's regime. It is not mistake nor it doesnt happen by chance that loudest protest are in France, Germany and Russia - these are the countries who might *loose* alot in oil contracts signed with Iraq if US takes over that country. And at this moment I agree with them: soon-to-happen American "war" against Saddam's regime in Iraq is about OIL, but opposite to what those european countries' did and do in their interest, US may (and will) in the process of gaining access to Iraq's oil get rid of Saddam. Its about same oil, but not exactly same thing, isn't it? ;-)

[Koen]

Originally posted by wallie_x

Get your facts straight. The US was NOT buddies with Iraq during those years 1988.

I have my facts straight. Maybe you should take a look at

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/U...arfare1988.htm

Don't get me wrong...yes, he's evil and the sooner he's gone, the better. But it's laughable that US and UK are now trying to make a 'moral' case for war.

[wallie_x]

Koen sez:

"But it's laughable that US and UK are now trying to make a 'moral' case for war."

I do not ascribe to fringe web sites to validate or promote my arguments.
The US has a deep inherent flaw in its constitution that limits presidents to two terms in office. While wise in some senses it can also be our undoing because of the dichotomy with its structure. We only have two parties in the US government, Republican and Democrat. Since power is a zero sum game, the two above mentioned parties gang up on any upstart party to ensure their strangle hold on the power to legislate. Unfortunately, this two presidential term clause also leads to radical and temporary shifts in policy depending on the political affiliation the incumbent, and thus our vacillation in policy.

[ukulele]

I am sure that many countries have some very nasty chem and bio weapons. I certainly hope the US has them, how else could we respond to the use of them in battle? The problem in Iraq is that they signed an agreement with the UN to get rid of them as a condition to preserve Saddam as their ruler and prevent the UN from annexing Iraq in 1992. Why else was Saddam not tried for war crimes after invading Kuwait, ransacking the country and in a deliberate act of world defiance destroy and ignite all the oil wells in Kuwait? The people of Irag are not worthy of serious consideration either. What have they done to better the world. They are for the most part illiterate and brainwashed spinless fools who would wrather herd camels then run their country. Do you think Saddam himself lit every well on fire? Would any nation on earth really want Saddam to have a power he is not smart enough to control? None do, to my knowledge, yet no other country but America has the ability to battle terrorism and aggression like that, and the same countries that are opposed to the US fighting this battle will expect America to defend them and offer support if they get nuked first. Funny how the countries that are all closest to Iraq are in support of the US or staying out of it all together.

[wallie_x]

ukulele sez:

The people of Irag are not worthy of serious consideration either. What have they done to better the world. They are for the most part illiterate and brainwashed spinless fools who would wrather herd camels then run their country.

That statement is unequivocally heartless. I would never think that another human being is less than I am.
Is Nazism well and alive in Hawaii?
I just watched on the 'History Channel' a clip about Desert Storm. One of the photos showed a dead Iraqi face down lying in the sand with arms stretched out in front of him. On his left ring finger was a gold band. This was most likely a father with children left orphaned. Your response is disgusting. What makes you more superior when compared to everyone else? Birthright, intelligence, names me one thing.

[ukulele]

Originally posted by wallie_x
ukulele sez:


That statement is unequivocally heartless. I would never think that another human being is less than I am.
Is Nazism well and alive in Hawaii?
I just watched on the 'History Channel' a clip about Desert Storm. One of the photos showed a dead Iraqi face down lying in the sand with arms stretched out in front of him. On his left ring finger was a gold band. This was most likely a father with children left orphaned. Your response is disgusting. What makes you more superior when compared to everyone else? Birthright, intelligence, names me one thing.

Spare me the bleeding heart ****. What I said is heartless, but the fact is that many muslims show nothing but contempt for the rest of the worlds religious beliefs. Where is their heart? Now someone who says something that isn't politically correct is a Nazi? Hawaii is nothing at all like that. This is one of the most tolerant places on the planet and Hawaii has never waged war on another nation throughout it's history, nor do they gas their own people or treat outsiders like infidels to be exploited for cheap labor or technology they cannot develop themselves. I am not a Nazi and to suggest that is nothing more then an attempt to evade the real truth. When the people of Iraq use their great wealth to advance science, help other poor nations and fight the dictators in their own country then they gain my respect. I believe that Nazism is alive and well in Iraq. I do not consider my self to be superior in any way to everyone else, but is quite obvious to me that the same cannot be said for the people of Iraq. They have been waging war against their neighbors for as long as I can remember. Now I suppose you will say it is not the people of Iraq who invaded Kuwait, but a handfull of evil men. That handful is a million man army of Iraqi citizens.

[strat1]

Originally posted by tony_j15
What can I say that you haven't? Excellent post wally!

Ditto

[strat1]

Originally posted by ukulele
Spare me the bleeding heart ****. What I said is heartless, but the fact is that many muslims show nothing but contempt for the rest of the worlds religious beliefs. Where is their heart?

Hey- you need to be a bit more PC! How does this sound?

Not All Muslims are Terrorists- it just so happens to be that all the Terrorists are Muslim.

[DS888]

Not all terrorists are Muslims, true. And it is according to us, OUR point of view, that we call them "terrorists", to many muslims they are heroes, "freedom fighters" etc.

Some folks discussing it here don't understand that there is no such thing as "universal truth", good or bad etc. It is always judged according to what you believe, and on what side of the conflict you stand. And there is no way of choosing "neutral" side, everything is too interconnected nowaday. Person living in any western country and not supporting their government's action to increase security of their country is just a fool.

Anyone standing on the side of Iraq's regime should just move and live there.


BTW, few cruel examples:
1
One of my friends from NYC most of his live used to be what I call "pinky", he'd blame his govt for such actions like Gulf War, Vietnam, helping Israel instead of Palestinians etc etc
Guess what is his stance on such matters now, after he lost 2 friends on 9/11? Had he had a chance, he'd drop nukes on all muslim countries himself ;-)
2
My old girlfriend from HS used to be totally against drug testing on animals etc, she was really very active member of one of the 'greenpeace' movement groups. I even recall her saying once "It is God's choice if they (sick people) have to die, it still doesnt justify cruel tests done on animals", altough she deny it currently. Anyway - she got cancer about year ago, and now she curses US govt, greenpeace, animal rights groups etc. for not letting medical companies do *any* research they want to do. Heck, she even says that China is totally right with their way of obtaining "spare human parts" from prisoners sentenced to death - "why waste their bodies when so many ppl may need them?" ;-)

Yeah, its always nice to try make "objective" opinions on things that don't really touch/regard/concern us directly. But unfortunately it is never that simple and easy as it looks.
Dead Iraq soldier with ring on his finger probably left wife and children. It is sad. Yet he was dead because he invaded Kuwait. I understand he could not simply not follow Saddam's orders, because he would be executed for it. Thus person who wrote here about this example should have know that removing such regime as Saddam Hussein's in Iraq is *GOOD* not only for USA, western countries, but also for ordinary people in Iraq, whom I believe majority of them never agreed on attacking Iraq nor having such bloody regime ruling their country.


d

[wallie_x]

DS888 sez:

"there is no such thing as "universal truth"

Really? The fact that we exist is a universal truth. As Descartes said, " I think, therefore I ‘am."
Perhaps we are not agreeing on the term 'universal'
If humans drink too much alcohol, they get drunk. Is that not a universal standard when it comes to human beings?

[strat1]

Originally posted by DS888
Not all terrorists are Muslims, true. And it is according to us, OUR point of view, that we call them "terrorists", to many muslims they are heroes, "freedom fighters" etc.

You are 100% correct. It is my truth that if you set out to murder innocent people than you are a terrorist and should die. If you knowingly protect, provide shelter or $$, or aid in any way to a terrorist, than you should die too!

I have NEVER heard the outcry from the Muslims in this country denouncing 911. That is wrong, but does not mean that Muslims are evil.

I too lost friends in 911 and at times would like to see the Middle East destroyed, but that too is wrong. I believe that there are thousands of Iraqi people that love the free world and know that we will free them. I do not want another Normandy gravesite filled with 10, 000 US / Allied soldiers in the dessert, but I believe that the price of Freedom is not cheap and takes action, not UN Bull *****.

UN says in a feminine male voice ‘Stop ssaddamy, or we will say stop again, please’ What a Joke!


AND THAT is my truth.

[DS888]

wallie_x:
what proof you have for your existence? None! It is up to all of MY OWN senses to deliver me any possible proof of your existence (had I ever met you). What if youre a product of my own imagination, and I'll wake up tomorrow and there is no such board with wallie's posts? ;-)
OK, straying off the subject, I know. But don't give me any generic universal 'truths' like this ever, please.

strat1:

It is my truth that if you set out to murder innocent people than you are a terrorist and should die.

well, if you read it again and you set yourself on a side of average Muslim Joe in Baghdad right now, then you'll think it's a quote about US/Allied soldiers preparing attack on him ;-)

anyway, since I agree with most of you that Saddam ought to be kicked to the Moon, there is no point in discussion anymore.

It is just unfortunate that USA chose to secure its future oil supplies right now, and in this way. Had it happened earlier (IMHO it was moron Clinton's job to finish Gulf War) or perhaps in near future - but not now - I think most of the world would not stand against US on this.
Everyone knows Saddam pose no threat to mighty USA even had he had already nukes, chemicals etc (which I think he don't anyway - our satellites, spyplanes, millions of $$ spent on spying and we couldn't produce better proof than funny pictures of some trucks going somewhere as a proof of Iraq's threat? excuse me, but... I have no comment on this one, hahahahaha!).
Doesn't it seem funny to all of you that #1 Power in the known universe is officially affraid of some barbaric regime ? At this moment I can point to much bigger and more direct existing threat to US economy, political supremacy and internal stability as well - just have a closer look at whats going on in China. Arms buildup on higher scale than it happened in Russia during worst Cold War days, plus we already voluntarily fed them with almost every newest technology "west" could create. Yet no one is officially worry they are 'restructuring' their Military, arm their soldiers with gear matching ours, excel our troops in sophistication and length of their average soldier's training and so on and on and on... ya all wanna tell me China is slowly preparing its army for future UN peacekeeping missions? (hopefully theyre not planned on the North American soil LOL)
First they'll take Taiwan, with UN blessing. Then we maybe wake up, but as usual - too late.

ah ****

[wallie_x]

strat1 sez:

UN says in a feminine male voice ‘Stop ssaddamy, or we will say stop again, please’ What a Joke!

All too true, and now we have France, Germany and Russia, siding with the "USEFUL IDIOTS" Maybe the terrorists are using a new biological weapon that we do not know about. It destroys the part of the brain that controls logical and critical thought. They must of used it on Chirac because he definitely shows some type of brain damage [proof HERE] Also, Saddam may be shooting himself in the foot with by not destroying the missiles he was ordered to by Blix . Did anybody think he actually would?