SilentScope Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 I guess Arnies wiped the digital slate clean, gave everyone a fresh start... why oh why <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dont act sad, you know this *beep* is better than TV lets give dafool more attention so he does dumb *beep* and gets banned again Link to post Share on other sites
HaVoC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 And before some of you go touting this patriotic ###### and waving your flags all about think about this Ok... How many soldiers last dying thoughts were about freedom, liberty, and democracy? Ditto WW2. If you're dying in ANY conflict you're unlikely to think of that sort of thing... How many thought about their family, friends, and the life they'd never have? And that has precisely what to do with this...? How does a grieving widow explain to her 4 year old child that daddy is never going to come home? Why is daddy never coming back? where did daddy go? For those that believe the war was just, maybe you should answer those questions "He died to free a country if people held under the rule of an oppressive dictator, who gassed thousands of his own people every year, attempted to invade a neighbouring country through pure greed, and who even tried to assassinate one of his own sons, in a country where everyone lived in fear... Hang on, that sounds vaguely like WW2 again... I grew up without a father and it was a living hell, but how many more children must also go through that before this war is over? too many I'm sympathetic, believe me, but the sympathy vote doesn't work on me. Equally, many people died in WW2. You're recycling points now... Link to post Share on other sites
Phoenix Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 "He died to free a country if people held under the rule of an oppressive dictator, who gassed thousands of his own people every year <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Gee I wonder who sold them those gas weapons. And I didnt know Saddam was a Kurd. Interesting Fact. Link to post Share on other sites
HaVoC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 By 'own people' I mean Iraqis. They all live in the same country, just different parts... Link to post Share on other sites
Phoenix Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 So, Saddam isnt a Kurd, therefor, they are not his people. Link to post Share on other sites
HaVoC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Tony Blair has control over the United Kingdom, which contains Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Saddam Hussein had control over Iraq, which contained different states with different religious groups (Kurds, Shi-ites, etc). You wouldn't say that if Tony Blair gassed people in Scotland, he hadn't gassed his own people... Link to post Share on other sites
Phoenix Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Tony Blair has control over the United Kingdom, which contains Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Saddam Hussein had control over Iraq, which contained different states with different religious groups (Kurds, Shi-ites, etc). You wouldn't say that if Tony Blair gassed people in Scotland, he hadn't gassed his own people... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not entirely the same thing there. Link to post Share on other sites
GaMeFrEAK1018 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 ok...i am REALLY...REALLY sick and tired of people saying ###### like if you want your guns vote bush or the democrats will take them away. Democrats arent pansies god damnit, theyre just more peaceful and people-oriented but can defend the country when needed while Republicans are more gung-ho and money-oriented and like to jump into war faster. its not a bad thing to THINK and get your facts STRAIGHT before invading a foreign land. because this is not a war, its an invasion, congress hasnt declared war since WW2, which is why its never called the Iraqi War but usually Operation Iraq or the Iraqi Conflict, simply because, THIS ISNT A WAR. i'm not a pansy, i supported the invasion solely to take out saddam after that, i see no reason to be there and neither do most of the troops. yes, i understand we cant just RUN out but i've heard it said many times that we'll be in there for years....years for WHAT? are they trying to break vietnam's casualty count? we cant let this administration keep letting our young men and women die. Kerry for '04 Link to post Share on other sites
GaMeFrEAK1018 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 and also, we had a HUGE surplus of money and our economy was at a good level....then comes along "good ol' bush" and now we're in a record high defecit and the economy is ######. my teacher was telling us how when she went to europe a little after the euro came out, it was $.89 for 1 euro, now its like $1.29 for 1 euro the value of the dollar decreases each day as does the leadership of the bush administration. P.S.: i feel a thread lock coming very soon Link to post Share on other sites
Zeropositive Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Bush, as Kerry is going to be like Clinton, make us think he isn't doing anything when he booms some nation to death or creates another BHD well we do have to thank Clinton for that one... At least with Bush we can pretty much tell what he is up to... Kerry keeps saying one thing and goes back on it but saying that everyone politician does that I dunno lesser of 2 evils and Bush heck I really don't mind him... Kerry just makes me sick. Link to post Share on other sites
Phoenix Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Bush, as Kerry is going to be like Clinton, make us think he isn't doing anything when he booms some nation to death or creates another BHD well we do have to thank Clinton for that one...At least with Bush we can pretty much tell what he is up to... Kerry keeps saying one thing and goes back on it but saying that everyone politician does that I dunno lesser of 2 evils and Bush heck I really don't mind him... Kerry just makes me sick. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Your seeing the Righwing controlled media spin. Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Phoenix, Saddam gassed and prosecuted the Kurds. They lived in the same country. Therfore they are his people. So British Muslims, British Catholics and British athiests aren't 'Blair's People' because they practice a different faith!? Link to post Share on other sites
Banzai Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Oy! its getting hot in here Link to post Share on other sites
Phoenix Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Phoenix, Saddam gassed and prosecuted the Kurds. They lived in the same country. Therfore they are his people. So British Muslims, British Catholics and British athiests aren't 'Blair's People' because they practice a different faith!? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now your taking it way out of context. I'm talkin about ethnic groups, not religious groups. And the only reason Kurdistan is part of Iraq is cause they drew the lines that way after WWII. And really, the only Saddam people in Iraqi are Sunni, specificly people from his own family/tribe/clan thing. I am NOT saying he wasnt a badguy either. You just gotta remeber, the US sold him chemical weapons to use on Iran, just like we had our CIA fund Bin Laden and the Mujahadeen, which later formed Al Qaeda, in Afghanistan. Link to post Share on other sites
Dafool Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 But on the plus side it is good that Saddam got kicked. I mean if you think about it i would be more dead from saddam over the years than soldiers that have participated in the war right now. And Irak will be a better place in the future. And less terrorism thanks to Saddams capture. Imagine the future were terrorists launch more attacks like the 11 sep.There would be Loads more dead right. Just think carfully when you choose your bullets. Link to post Share on other sites
sp00n Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 But on the plus side it is good that Saddam got kicked. I mean if you think about it i would be more dead from saddam over the years than soldiers that have participated in the war right now. And Irak will be a better place in the future. And less terrorism thanks to Saddams capture. Imagine the future were terrorists launch more attacks like the 11 sep.There would be Loads more dead right. Just think carfully when you choose your bullets. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Saddam really didnt have anything to do with the terrorist attacks. He was just over there screwing around in his own country. But Ill agree we should of taken him down a long time ago, but I think a more Somolia type takedown (without the whole blackhawk ######) would of been better than a whole ground war. Link to post Share on other sites
BadAssTronaut Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Phoenix, Saddam gassed and prosecuted the Kurds. They lived in the same country. Therfore they are his people. So British Muslims, British Catholics and British athiests aren't 'Blair's People' because they practice a different faith!? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nope they aren't Blairs people, they're my people, mwuhaahaahaa!!1 ALL YOUR PEOPLE ARE BELONG TO ME!!1 Dafool for president Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Bush Sr. should've taken Saddam out of power back in Desert Storm. Especially after giving hope to the Iraqi rebels which launched failed uprisings thinking they'd get US support. That was the best time to take out Saddam. He had just invaded a country as an aggressor and we had the support of a multinational coalition. I don't think Saddam is a good guy, but I don't believe his removal was necessary for the safety of our countries. Now that we're their though, we kinda screwed over their infrastructure, so we have to stay to fix it. Saddam's army is not comparable to the militias and gangsters of Aidid. We couldn't really go in there and capture him with a quick strike force and then leave, as someone else would just take power and screw over the Iraqi people again. The only way to take him out was through a ground war, but Bush forgot how to win the peace. Off topic, I heard an odd story. Some Brits were driving in a convoy past some Iraqi children and they were cheering and waving. Then as they were leaving, an American convoy drives past and the children immediately start booing and throwing stones at the Americans. Brits just have the charm now don't they? Link to post Share on other sites
destrukto Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 A bunch of drugged up street thugs compared to a semi-professional army with advanced weapons... that would've been nothing but a cheap massacre, a couple of Anti-aircraft batteries would've put an end to that... You also have to consider that Saddam was extremely paranoid and that finding him would've been extremely difficult, and given America's intelligence sources... well... you get the picture... As for the kiddies cheering on the Brits and throwing rocks at the Americans... Well... they obviously have their priorities set... Link to post Share on other sites
Dafool Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Nope they aren't Blairs people, they're my people, mwuhaahaahaa!!1 ALL YOUR PEOPLE ARE BELONG TO ME!!1 Dafool for president <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks loads BadAssTronaut if i become President i would clean the land up. Id lower the taxes More jobs etc. Really i would. And you can have hawii for your self if i become president. Ever thought about the fact that George Bush might be considered a hero in about 200 years. You might read about him in the history books. Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 QUOTE(rizzo @ Oct 9 2004, 03:36 AM)Phoenix, Saddam gassed and prosecuted the Kurds. They lived in the same country. Therfore they are his people. So British Muslims, British Catholics and British athiests aren't 'Blair's People' because they practice a different faith!? Now your taking it way out of context. I'm talkin about ethnic groups, not religious groups. And the only reason Kurdistan is part of Iraq is cause they drew the lines that way after WWII. And really, the only Saddam people in Iraqi are Sunni, specificly people from his own family/tribe/clan thing. I am NOT saying he wasnt a badguy either. You just gotta remeber, the US sold him chemical weapons to use on Iran, just like we had our CIA fund Bin Laden and the Mujahadeen, which later formed Al Qaeda, in Afghanistan. Well put Phoenix, I understand now. Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 You know, I believe Iraq has never been freely united under it's own will. It was colonized and borders were drawn forcing different ethnic groups together. Then it was taken over by a dictatorship. I wonder how a united Iraq will fare under a democracy? Link to post Share on other sites
destrukto Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Democracy at the barrel of a Kalashnikov? I suppose we'll find out if it works in the next few years... I'm thinking that once/if the US pulls out there's going to be a power vacuum and there'll be another dictatorship and the process will repeat itself.. We'll get another Bush 10-15 years down the road, he'll start spreading all sorts of patriotic ###### and try to link the new regime to 9-11 and accuse them of having WMD and we'll have another invasion Link to post Share on other sites
tex Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 A bunch of drugged up street thugs compared to a semi-professional army with advanced weapons... that would've been nothing but a cheap massacre, a couple of Anti-aircraft batteries would've put an end to that... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> A bunch of drugged up street thugs... (vs.) a ...professional army with advanced weapons...that would've been nothing but a cheap massacre... Like, perhaps, Samlia 1993? Do not underestimate the power of individuals with motive and determination. Also, far be it for me to bring up this subject on a UK hobbyist site, but The U.S. fought a most-professional army during the Revolutionary War. Today, much of our Foreign Policy is based on the fact that people determined to be free, can make a difference. Let's get down to the heart of the matter, here. I voted for GW in 2000. He made alot of promises and didn't keep any of them. He didn't do his job or what he set out to do. It's not unpatriotic to have an opposing viewpoint, especially if the person you voted for does not represent your values or ideals or even seem to care about how his decisions will affect you. I do not believe Bush represents anything that I feel is important. Like most politicians, it only seems like he is working to better serve his own private interests. So, who to vote for? I honestly don't know. But I will say that a person who has done a poor job does not deserve to continue doing that poor job. I am smart enough to see that politicians are full of ######, but Kerry seems to be the lesser of two evils. At least Kerry brings with him the hope of fixing the mistakes made by Bush. I'm sure he will screw up in his own way, but at least we're not in for the same Bush. I'm sure Kerry's will have his own problems. Finally, I really admire Mr. Blair for doing the right thing and admitting that he had made a mistake. I sure wish some of that would rub off on Bush. Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Ok, my friend just directed me to this site. I find it hilarious just for the name. I didn't really bother to read through it. JohnKerryIsADouchebagButImVotingForHimAnyway.com Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.