MonteZuma Posted September 9, 2004 Report Posted September 9, 2004 Getting a bit personal, but nothing unusual for this group it appears. Mostly kids, so take it easy.Thanks for being the group's responsible adult. Yet, some here call the coalition an imperialist movement. Who? Cultural imperialism is real. Anyone who has ever been outside of the US knows this. All in the name of what? Hate. Nothing more.To explain away Bin Laden's actions with one word is naive. As for terrorism. If you feel that you need to try an justify their actions, shamefully you are on the side of the lost. You can't reasonably justify terrorist acts. You can understand why they happen. Knowledge is power as they say. People want to live in peace. If your sole struggle in life is to avenge a personal vandetta, may God have mercy on your soul.Oh the irony.
Guest Recombo Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Would you prefer that millions of innocent people die because the US was too stubborn to provide billions in aid to hundreds of foreign countries? When that happens, you'll be IRONICALLY standing beside yourself saying 'why doesn't the US help these nations?' You don't agree with the US military actions, but you'll surely condemn us for not being there otherwise. Montezuma, are you sure you understand the word naive? After !@#$%^&*isting Binladen in the Russia/Afghan war, this man finds reason to attack the US. Surely a man of your impeccable knowledge and understanding of his viewpoint can explain BinLaden's justification to our 'naive' audience?
MonteZuma Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Would you prefer that millions of innocent people die because the US was too stubborn to provide billions in aid to hundreds of foreign countries? When that happens, you'll be IRONICALLY standing beside yourself saying 'why doesn't the US help these nations?'Every wealthy nation should support poorer nations. In fact I think that this is one of the best and most cost-effective ways of fighting terrorism. You don't agree with the US military actions, but you'll surely condemn us for not being there otherwise.I agreed with US action in Afghanistan. I agreed with action to liberate Kuwait. I agreed with the 30,000 troops that Clinton had in the region to keep Saddam Hussain in check. I don't agree with wholesale invasion of Iraq. I think the US has an important role to play militarily and politically in most parts of the world. Montezuma, are you sure you understand the word naive? Yes. Do you want me to paste a definition? After !@#$%^&*isting Binladen in the Russia/Afghan war, this man finds reason to attack the US. Surely a man of your impeccable knowledge and understanding of his viewpoint can explain BinLaden's justification to our 'naive' audience?If you really want to know my views, search through my last 10 or so posts. To add to what I've already said though, in relation to Russia and Afghanistan, Bin Laden always hated the US. He used your government to achieve his own ends.
»Ducky Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Today, 4 children were killed among others of a militant stronghold in Falujah.Yep, and the shooting 10 blocks from here took 3. I guess they one up me. Life sucks, and people die everyday.You raise the quality and length of natural life and move on. It's just too silly to believe we can help someone else before we fix our own problems. The upper and middle class may not realize it, but down here on the bottom is terrible.What's done is done, and Bush did well enough.... let's just pull out of there and let new leaders take action and fix things here now.... I was comparing my recent surgery bill with that of a friends 5 years ago. (Same area, social class, general income..etc) I paid 2.5* what he did for the same operation.Malpractice is to blame for a good part, along with the lack of public care... But -*BAD WORD*- is everything out of whack.
Dr.Worthless Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 If I was an idealistic muslim kid in Iraq watching my neighbours and maybe even my parents getting killed by US 'smart' bombs I'd be pretty pissed. I might even want to retaliate when GI Joe comes walking down the street with a megaphone telling me how lucky I am to be free from tyranny. Under the same token, the same idealistic muslim kid would have grown up hating the US for sanctions put against his country, and if there were no sanctions would have grown up hating the US for not removing the viscious dictator who's imprisoning his parents and raping his sisters.. Quite the Win/Win situation!!! BTW I still find it absolutly HILARIOUS that no mention of the Saddam Regime is included in your statement monte. The evil US Invasion has got to be 100000000 times worse than Saddam, eh?
Dr.Worthless Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 I was comparing my recent surgery bill with that of a friends 5 years ago. (Same area, social class, general income..etc) I paid 2.5* what he did for the same operation.Malpractice is to blame for a good part, along with the lack of public care... But -*BAD WORD*- is everything out of whack.I seriously do believe that Bush's pushing for Tort law reform will curb some of the insurance hikes, and in return consumer price hikes. It's just too silly to believe we can help someone else before we fix our own problems.The upper and middle class may not realize it, but down here on the bottom is terrible.What's done is done, and Bush did well enough.... let's just pull out of there and let new leaders take action and fix things here now.... While your life may be terrible ducky, I promise you that in comparison to probably 70-% of the world population, your life is heaven.
»Ducky Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Perhaps more terrible than the past decade would be more appropriate, or the average standards of our own country.
MonteZuma Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Under the same token, the same idealistic muslim kid would have grown up hating the US for sanctions put against his country, and if there were no sanctions would have grown up hating the US for not removing the viscious dictator who's imprisoning his parents and raping his sisters.. Quite the Win/Win situation!!! BTW I still find it absolutly HILARIOUS that no mention of the Saddam Regime is included in your statement monte. The evil US Invasion has got to be 100000000 times worse than Saddam, eh?Iraq wasn't a significant source of International terrorism before the invasion. Despite what you read about Hussein and his evil ways (and he was evil - no doubt about it), the average Iraqi was probably better off under Hussein than he/she is now. Lets hope things improve in Iraq soon. Iraq and terrorism are both intractable problems. The best option for the US and the world would have been to work with the UN. Bush blew it.
Petrajs_Killer Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Iraq better with Saddam than now? Now you're losing it. Only a little summary: Before: You speak out, you're either dead, improsened to be tortured, or have some appendage removed. If you don't swear loyalty to Saddam, well pretty much the same thing mentioned previously. If you were a representative of Iraq in a sports team (lets take soccer for example), negative results would result in your death or torturement. No gas, water and electricity in certain areas of Iraq. Now: Terrorists and guerrillas trying to kill of the Coalition and oil fields. Rebuild schools, hospitals, and paved roads. Freedom of expression and tought. I have a friend from Iraq. I think he'll most probably be flabergasted at your ignorant comment.
Dr.Worthless Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Iraq wasn't a significant source of International terrorism before the invasion.I still would love to see where people get this from, mabye I'm just misinformed, but I'm really not buying that. Despite what you read about Hussein and his evil ways (and he was evil - no doubt about it), the average Iraqi was probably better off under Hussein than he/she is now. Lets hope things improve in Iraq soon. Can you atleast agree that if things work out how intended, the average Iraqi citizens life will be 100000% better? Sure, US colonists had an "ok" life under british rule, and im sure as -*BAD WORD*- they endured some hardships fighting for freedom, but I believe its pretty safe to say that I'm living a better life right now than I would have been if we stayed under british rule. You're wanting a quick fix, and the situation over in iraq and the middle east isn't a quick-fix situation. Let me just say that I believe EVEN the life Iraqi's have no is better than before. Freedom of press, Freedom of !@#$%^&*embly, the Right to VOTE, womens rights making strides.. yeah all of that is ok. When I see the TV covering Iraqi's gathering in public protesting, I think "Man, if that happened 2 years ago all of those folks would be dead or in prison" not "Jesus those US occupiers must be TYRANTS!" Iraq and terrorism are both intractable problems. The best option for the US and the world would have been to work with the UN. Bush blew it. I seriously disagree, if you can show me any instance where the UN has been effective in solving any terrorist related activities, I might consider the position. Last I checked Europe has been dealing with terrorism for centuries, and still deal with it today. It was only 2 days ago that Australias embasy in Indonesia got car-bombed by a terrorist organization. Coincidence that Australia has an election coming up? I seriously doubt it. Where's the UN in this instance? How about when Spain's railways were attacked (hhmm, another election, pattern anyone?), where was the UN intervention there? Ireland? Israel? (Last I heard the UN was trying to stop Israel from defending itself against Palestinian terrorists. While I agree Israel is pro-active in some instances, they should atleast have the right to fight the folks sending suicide bombers onto their busses and into their malls, or I guess Israel has that coming too? ) Russia? Canada? (Need I continue on with the list?)
MonteZuma Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Before: You speak out, you're either dead, improsened to be tortured, or have some appendage removed. If you don't swear loyalty to Saddam, well pretty much the same thing mentioned previously. If you were a representative of Iraq in a sports team (lets take soccer for example), negative results would result in your death or torturement. No gas, water and electricity in certain areas of Iraq. Now: Terrorists and guerrillas trying to kill of the Coalition and oil fields. Rebuild schools, hospitals, and paved roads. Freedom of expression and tought. I have a friend from Iraq. I think he'll most probably be flabergasted at your ignorant comment.I stand by my statement. If your friend thinks that Iraq is now a bed of roses filled with lightness and goodness then I suggest that he go back and help rebuild the place. Freedom of expression and thought means nothing when your dad gets blown to pieces by a truck bomb. My view is that life for the average Iraqi sucks as much now as it ever did. If you disgree, show me some evidence that proves otherwise. As I said, lets hope things improve in Iraq soon. They could get worse.
MonteZuma Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Dr...I agree with the sentiment in your second paragraph. For the sake of Iraqis and everyone else, lets hope that you are right. My view though is that it is difficult or impossible to impose democracy on a country that isn't - for whatever reason - ready to embrace it. I think that it is even more difficult in the middle east than elsewhere. I don't really have time to address the third paragraph. We still need to find out what happened with the Australian emb!@#$%^&*y bombing. Some experts believe that bombing is unrelated to the Australian election. I'm undecided. Btw...A suggestion to Petrajs_Killer - Why don't you get your Iraqi friend to post something here - or type something up so that you can post it for him. Maybe we all need some enlightment from someone who lived under Saddam. Seriously. Anyway. Its Friday afternoon and I still got work to do. Have a good weekend people.
Petrajs_Killer Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 I stand by my statement. If your friend thinks that Iraq is now a bed of roses filled with lightness and goodness then I suggest that he go back and help rebuild the place. Freedom of expression and thought means nothing when your dad gets blown to pieces by a truck bomb. My view is that life for the average Iraqi sucks as much now as it ever did. If you disgree, show me some evidence that proves otherwise. As I said, lets hope things improve in Iraq soon. They could get worse.I think I see what the difference is. I was stating some facts to prove my point, while you just stated your opinion. And to say "If your friend thinks that Iraq is now a bed of roses filled with lightness and goodness" really is a low-point. I'd expect more, instead of this ad hominum.
A Soldier Posted September 10, 2004 Report Posted September 10, 2004 Before: You speak out, you're either dead, improsened to be tortured, or have some appendage removed. If you don't swear loyalty to Saddam, well pretty much the same thing mentioned previously. No gas, water and electricity in certain areas of Iraq. Now: Terrorists and guerrillas trying to kill of the Coalition and oil fields. Rebuild schools, hospitals, and paved roads. Freedom of expression and tought.Ironically, I've seen some reports on TV a few months ago of people giving their opinion about the occupation. One of them said something like this (refering to arrests made by the army - and which you won't see on CNN): Guy: "With Saddam, at least he knocked on the door before taking away our family members. Now with the Americans, they don't even knock. They storm our houses at night and take them out to places we don't even know. I think that's a complete lack of respect." (saw @ Radio-Canada) That last sentence kind of made me smile, although the situation isn't funny at all. Ever since the coalition stepped in Iraq, they arrested whoever they want for any reason. Of course, they would say they're linked to either Saddam or terrorists, but late reports show us most of them had nothing to do with it. My question is this: how are they more free now? I might even add the tortures US military used on prisonners in prisons like Abu Ghraib. Please don't say they only individuals were the problem, as people like Rumsfeld or chiefs at the US defense department were linked to the scandal.http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/08/1702022.php If you were a representative of Iraq in a sports team (lets take soccer for example)' date=' negative results would result in your death or torturement.[/quote']I would like to see some sources, if you have any. I think you're pushing it a little too far, but hey, I wouldn't be very surprised if it was true. As for why terrorists are setting oil fields on fire and killing coalition members, I believe one of their goal is to bring world's attention on what is happening right now in Iraq. Or take people blowing themselves trying to kill the government there. Why? Could there be something wrong with them? Is it corrupted? Is it representing what the population wants? Off topic: how many political parties are they in Iraq?
Aileron Posted September 10, 2004 Author Report Posted September 10, 2004 The US simply cannot be worse than Hussein and you can't deny that. Therefore any change that occurred in Iraq was a step up. Terrorists blow themselves up there because they know that there are tons of journalists who would love to report such stories to appease their anti-American audience. Foreigners buy anti-Americanism from journalists who destribute it from the terrorists, who manufacture anti-Americanism out of blood and death. They blow themselves up because it sells, though not necessarilly in terms of money.
A Soldier Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 The US simply cannot be worse than Hussein and you can't deny that. Therefore any change that occurred in Iraq was a step up.I agree that Saddam was an evil man and had to be taken out of power. Although, when I turn on the TV and see that innocent Iraqis have been tortured by US soldiers, who are here to liberate the people, there is a problem. If that's what you call a step up, I totally disagree. Tortures are violations of human rights. Terrorists blow themselves up there because they know that there are tons of journalists who would love to report such stories to appease their anti-American audience. Foreigners buy anti-Americanism from journalists who destribute it from the terrorists' date=' who manufacture anti-Americanism out of blood and death.[/quote']I don't think people living outside of the US are driven by hate as you describe it. The way you put it sounds like were a bunch of psychos waiting for our daily american killings. Terrorists believe they fight for a worthy cause. Ask yourself for two seconds why they hate America so much. Why do you think? (please, no religious arguments)
Bacchus Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 Foreigners buy anti-Americanism from journalists who destribute it from the terrorists, who manufacture anti-Americanism out of blood and death.no. Do you think that everything i read in the medias (or watch, but i usually prefer written media) could be influenced by a terroristic "disinformation machine"? I saw more disinformation in USA than i saw in Mali, Burkina Faso, Bruxelle, etc. Even in some backwater countries i've seen there was somekind of independance, a result of the lack of "money" involved in the news making process. In USA, and most occidental/industrial countries, a media source needs to show/tell something that sells. Usually, when CNN as story, about anything...even if its trivia, other news source are practically "forced" by the market to buy CNN stuff. Same thing happened with Bush-Gore election, CNN sid something, other network followed, then it it said something else, etc. In Iraq, there was so much merged reporters that trivia news, with lack of sources, poor image/sound quality, etc. were flooding the media, like this reporter merged with the ground forces who entered Baghdad. He said "Coallition troops took the city". A week later fights were more fierced then ever. Bad news, flase news. It's called entropy. While your life may be terrible ducky, I promise you that in comparison to probably 70-% of the world population, your life is heaven. Bravo. You hold the key to understanding. Your life is heaven compared to % of the world. Why is it so? You're lucky enough to be in the 20% people who owns the world...why are you rich while % other are poor and lacks even the basics luxury of medical attention, schooling, etc?
Petrajs_Killer Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 That last sentence kind of made me smile, although the situation isn't funny at all. Ever since the coalition stepped in Iraq, they arrested whoever they want for any reason. Of course, they would say they're linked to either Saddam or terrorists, but late reports show us most of them had nothing to do with it. My question is this: how are they more free now? I might even add the tortures US military used on prisonners in prisons like Abu Ghraib. Please don't say they only individuals were the problem, as people like Rumsfeld or chiefs at the US defense department were linked to the scandal.http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/08/1702022.phpYou smiled? Then it's cute how you tried to cover yourself up by saying, "oh, but it's not funny, twedle-dum." It's like saying one saw one of the beheading videos, then smile at it. So, you smiled when this fellow comented the US raiding their homes, disrubted their peace, privacy, etc. Sounds like you were delighted to have found out something else to bash this Coalition. I would like to see some sources, if you have any. I think you're pushing it a little too far, but hey, I wouldn't be very surprised if it was true.Wishful thinking that this isn't true? It did happen, and was administered by Saddam's son, Odai. I found an article that vaguely mentioned Odai's treatment of the athletes. I heard this fact on a radio show last year, so it's been a while.
Aileron Posted September 11, 2004 Author Report Posted September 11, 2004 actually no, Bacchus. A Soldier was kinda closer to what I was getting at. Foreigners want to believe the that US was wrong in going into Iraq. It would help their cause if Iraq got turned into a bloodbath. Thus, they buy papers that say that Iraq is turning into a bloodbath. Thus, the papers look for stories that indicate the same, so they jump all over any story about terrorist acts. Thus, the terrorists have a big drive here. Because of this demand for terroristic acts to prove the US wrong, they know that any bombing, shooting, or beheading will make the front page of every newspaper around the world. Yes, I'm slowly beginning to come to the conclusion that you guys do want to see the entrails of American soldiers, civilians, and probably even children plastered accrossed your TV set. Look at how hostile you guys are on this relatively friendly forum! You hold no simpathy for us when terrorists attack our country. Rather, you side with Islamic Fundimentalists, trying to figure out some obscure way the COULD be partially justified. When the US replaces Hussein, you point out repeatedly every civilian causualty the US caused, and turn a blind eye to Hussein's actions - some of you have even come under belief that Hussein was BETTER than US occupation. There is a clear "US is wrong" at!@#$%^&*ude. There is no feeling of that our efforts would be better if the terrorists weren't being a problem in the first place. Why? Because you hate the US for economic reasons. You know that Bush could crush the world's economy with one word - embargo. Our businesses are driving your businesses out of business. For that you hate the US. You think the US is evil. Then, you want to PROVE the US is evil, and if in the path of proving the US is evil, a few people die, so be it.
A Soldier Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 (edited) So, you smiled when this fellow comented the US raiding their homes, disrubted their peace, privacy, etc. Sounds like you were delighted to have found out something else to bash this Coalition.I never thought you'd be dumb enough to say that. When the army crashes into your house, taking away your family members you don't say "it's a lack of respect" (even if it is); it's worse than that. Next time you want to make a personnal attack against me, keep it to yourself. Let me simply add this. You don't justify illegal actions by saying former ruler was a tyrant and did worse. Edited September 11, 2004 by A Soldier
A Soldier Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 Foreigners want to believe the that US was wrong in going into Iraq. It would help their cause if Iraq got turned into a bloodbath. Thus, they buy papers that say that Iraq is turning into a bloodbath. Thus, the papers look for stories that indicate the same, so they jump all over any story about terrorist acts.No... nobody wants to live in the illusion that everything is alright. People want to know why they are daily terrorists act on the coalition. Or why is there so much violence in Iraq caused by angry citizens? Yes' date=' I'm slowly beginning to come to the conclusion that you guys do want to see the entrails of American soldiers, civilians, and probably even children plastered accrossed your TV set. Look at how hostile you guys are on this relatively friendly forum! You hold no simpathy for us when terrorists attack our country. Rather, you side with Islamic Fundimentalists, trying to figure out some obscure way the COULD be partially justified.[/quote']Three years ago, the whole world felt sorry for what happened in New York; don't say we hold no sympathy :/ . I think that on that day, it could have been the beginning of world cooperation against terrorism. Afghanistan was a start. But going into an unilateralism war against Iraq was a mistake IMO. What prevents other countries attacking an other in the name of terrorism now? There is a clear "US is wrong" at!@#$%^&*ude.Why does the world believe you are wrong? You know that Bush could crush the world's economy with one word - embargo.heh. The world needs the US and the US needs the world. So nope
Hackysack Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 A Solider, new icon for you if you want it. I needed to post it somewhere where you would see it, since I left MG forums.
A Soldier Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 lol, thanks. I'll stick to my old one though
Aileron Posted September 11, 2004 Author Report Posted September 11, 2004 See, that's the thing, you'd think the US needs the world, but we really don't need all that much. Most of the goods we import are also made domestically. That isn't to say our economy wouldn't be hurt by such an action - it would. However, many nations of the world would be absolutely devastated. And, no one gives a flying frig about Hussein or Iraq. Hussein deserves whatever we can dish him and more, and Iraq is better off merely because they got rid of Hussein in the process. The only reason the rest of the world did not like us going into Iraq is because Bush broke the Clinton mold of doing exactly what the rest of the world wanted. Three years ago, you guys did a very good job of giving us lip-service, and you did help in Afghanistan. However, you felt you had a right to controll US policy, and when the US did not act as you thought she should have, it became a ridiculously overblown issue. Its not that WE WENT INTO IRAQ without UN approval, its that we went into Iraq WITHOUT UN APPROVAL. We shouldn't require approval for Hussein's Iraq. I think we have all heard the expression "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Well, the last two times someone declared war on the US was September 11th and Pearl Harbor. We can come to the conclusion by now that the next time will also be a sneak attack. Thus, if we continued to wait around for a politically nice reason to go into Iraq, someone would have gotten hurt over it. That justification is not good enough to attack a nation on a path of peace, but Iraq? Maybe its good and maybe it isn't. If it is good, it probably isn't the most heroic action ever, and if it isn't, it probably isn't anyware close to a crime against humanity.
PoLiX Posted September 11, 2004 Report Posted September 11, 2004 I suggest you all sometime maybe rent or buy the movie Uncle Suddam. Can probably find it at your local Sun Coast (not sure if they're beyond the west coast us) that's where my friend got it. We watched it, and it's rather amazing to watch. Saddam went from a loved and great leader to a evil dictator like over night during the end of the Reagon era. It was mostly the people he put in charge who started and did a lot of the evil things that were done. But when he later learned of them, it was about the time of the end of the reagon era, and Suddam changed greatly. This guy's family helped him run the country, and by the end of his ruling, he had eliminated, exiled, or put into lockdown almost his entire family. Really crazy movie, and gives you a whole new outlook on saddam and how he lived. He had a huge fear of germs and dirt, and wanted his people to be happy, and to see a clean happy leader.
Recommended Posts