Qbasicnews.com

General => General/Misc => Topic started by: wizardlife on March 18, 2003, 08:01:29 PM



Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 18, 2003, 08:01:29 PM
How does everyone feel? I've heard enough of 'Bush is a retard' at school, and I'm just curious what everyone's opinion is...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 18, 2003, 08:08:25 PM
Bush is a retard. Was is uncalled for. My president, Mr. Aznar, who is supporting bush, is a stupid a ss-sucker. Almost 90% of spanish people are against war, but he and his government look deaf. Mr Aznar just follows Bush 'cause Bush has promised nice stuff after the war.

Bush only wants petrol. And he's gonna kill a lot of men, women and children for it. Sadam is just an excuse.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 18, 2003, 09:25:53 PM
I don't think we need this war.  I mean sure, Saddam Hussein is a bad apple, but there are better ways of dealing with that, such as containment.  And frankly, I think that Saddam is just an excuse anyway.

Plus, he's COMPLETLY ignoring N. Korea, which has an active nuclear weapons program and has been testing their missles.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 18, 2003, 10:13:38 PM
I know, North Korea's the only one of the bunch with an actual bomb.  

This war is a distraction from the continually crapificating economy.  It also serves as an excuse for deficit spending and tapping into alaska.  

Saddam's an evil man, guilty of war crimes to boot, but this war has nothing to do with that.  we dont need it.  we dont need the propaganda or the war rhetoric.  in 1998 we destroyed 90% of their missile factories in the largest military strike against iraq since 1998.   The only time Iraq came close to building an actual nuclear (not nucular) bomb was in 1985 and israel bombed the living bejesus out of it, so far into oblivion (in israel's ever so subtle style) they've never come close or tried since.  All they have are some vats of anthrax which isnt exactly hard to find and less effective than other poisenous substances which can be put in a water supply.

I have nothing against bush or republicans, if the current administration did warp politics, law, environment and people's lives to suit their needs.  Any and all sincere speech in the past year has been a joke.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 18, 2003, 10:24:33 PM
lol... crapificating.... what a word...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Lachie Dazdarian on March 19, 2003, 07:57:38 AM
I'm a fatalist.What will be,it will be.I know this is kinda supporting the Bush,but heck,nobody can't stop him.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 19, 2003, 09:03:43 AM
I used to think Bush was an idiot(a retard), but that was because I, myself, didn't know much about him. He isn't stupid/retarded, people who call him stupid do not know enough about him.

I don't think war is ever good, its never has been. But the world/society that we live in has become too soft; that is bad. I'm very glad to see leaders(Bush/Blair/etc) taking a tough stance, it shows that they are excellent leaders that they are willing to take unpopular decisions and stances. It is a bad leader who only takes popular choices. I don't want to see a war, but to just threaten Saddam and not stop him(he's been not dealt 100% for over a decade). Saddam needs to be removed, you don't need to know much to know that; and you need to know even less to know that he will only be removed by force.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 19, 2003, 01:28:13 PM
wildcard, you make an interesting point... neither of them have shown any signs of backing down, and he did do quite well handling sept 11, columbia, etc... but he seems to be ignoring everything else.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 19, 2003, 03:04:56 PM
Quote from: "wildcard"
I used to think Bush was an idiot(a retard), but that was because I, myself, didn't know much about him. He isn't stupid/retarded, people who call him stupid do not know enough about him.

I don't think war is ever good, its never has been. But the world/society that we live in has become too soft; that is bad. I'm very glad to see leaders(Bush/Blair/etc) taking a tough stance, it shows that they are excellent leaders that they are willing to take unpopular decisions and stances. It is a bad leader who only takes popular choices. I don't want to see a war, but to just threaten Saddam and not stop him(he's been not dealt 100% for over a decade). Saddam needs to be removed, you don't need to know much to know that; and you need to know even less to know that he will only be removed by force.


Agree. Peace isn't always the only option.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 19, 2003, 03:28:26 PM
Quote from: "wizardlife"
Agree. Peace isn't always the only option.


Yeah, when you are quiet and calm in your home while people is dying 5000 miles away, peace isn't the only option.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: red_Marvin on March 19, 2003, 05:16:06 PM
MAKE LOVE NOT WAR PERIOD

I like violent games, but war NO.


edit: 21.21 WE19 03 03 heard on news USA has atacked


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 19, 2003, 08:07:37 PM
Quote from: "na_th_an"

Yeah, when you are quiet and calm in your home while people is dying 5000 miles away, peace isn't the only option.


Yes it is very easy to comment about things far away. It is also easier to see things as all rosey and nice. Most of the world have very little information about the situation, I'd venture to say that most of us here are unqualified to give an opionion. One of top producing nations of refugees in the world is Iraq, and that is without a war. Saddam has declared war on his own people and family for far too long, he has killed his own family/relatives to stay in power.

I was part of Amnesty International, so I did learn a lot about many countries; I live in South Africa for the first 18 years of my life. I have seen and heard of many atrocities. There is no nice way of this mess; if there was a peaceful solution to the problem it would have been found.. but after a decade surely people realise he isn't going to suddenly leave or start being nice.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 19, 2003, 08:08:56 PM
negatory.  that's just some jackass spreading rumors.  usa is going on an airstrike tonight.

edit:  
on the topic of people dying, consider this:  while only 300 americans died in the gulf war, 300,000 iraqis were killed, and that's a conservative count.  Saddam's done some sick things, but i doubt very many of those iraqis deserved to die.  yeah, they're in the military, but do you think they want to be there or kill other people?

and on the same topic, cuba has killed thousands on live national television, right after the bay of pigs, and fidel's sat on his throne much longer than saddam, has.  hundreds of p.o.w.s have been gassed in chambers in afganistan by the new "liberated" government.  arial sharon has killed an estimated 20,000 non-military people in jorden and palestein in the 40 or so years he's had power, and he's our ally.  and communist china has killed millions of its own people.  these are only the a few of the people around the world we dont touch even though they have such things on their record.  so if we want to say we're attacking saddam because he's a ruthless dictator we'd have to acknowledge all the other horrible things that go on in the world.
 
 the sad, sad truth is, we just dont care.  out of sight, out of mind.  the reason the united states is attacking saddam is political, and political alone.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 19, 2003, 08:21:49 PM
Quote from: "toonski84"
negatory.  that's just some jackass spreading rumors.  usa is going on an airstrike tonight.


Not only but theres always been "something" for years now. They have been protecting the no fly zone for years..


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 19, 2003, 09:00:44 PM
We had this discussion before and I think it's a interesting and useful discussion.

I still support a war against Iraq.

I  think that a war against Iraq is the "only thing to do" and I still support USA,England and their coalition in this issue.
Sometimes it's un-avoidable to use "tough actions", in order to keep the world "safe".  I know we all have different views on this subject but in my opinion war isn't always a "evil" action.

Of course I hope that this war (which seems to start this night) will go quick and I hope that the number of casualties will be low.

Ps. I listened to President Bush "speach" (47 hours ago) and I must say I liked some of the things he said.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 19, 2003, 10:41:27 PM
I also listened to Bush's lectures, but he looked like he thought he was talking inside the silverscreen, in the middle of an epic movie where the good guys, with the help of God which always blesses America, are fighting the evil monsters. He talked about "durable freedom" "liberty shield" and "iraqui freedom", expressions in the "Bush style" that fit better in a pulp comic.

I guess if that there won't be such an interest on "freeing Iraq" if Texaco didn't belong in part to the Bushes.

Why does America want to save the world? Superman, and Captain America are just comics, but they depict Bush and his follower's illusion of life.

It happened with Corea, it happened with Vietnam, it happened in the former Yugoslavia, and it happens now in Iraq, Afghanistan... . First Cold War, now that evil terrorists... Nice TV-war serials to watch eating peanuts in a comfy sofa, hundred of millions of brand new dollars form a new set of war movies during the following years, new Van-Damme flicks and nice gas-masks for children with mickey mouse ears merchandising (I've seen that: completely terrorific).

America always says he's up to preserve democracy and freedom, but they only preserve it when there is a political or an economical/tactical/wathever matter involved in doing that. Also, a country with such a democratic fail as Mr. Bush raising with vote miscount in HIS state of Florida, and with and old and outdated democratic system with 228 years old should not be considered as the "democracy preservator".


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 20, 2003, 01:13:10 AM
Quote from: "Jocke The Beast"
We had this discussion before and I think it's a interesting and useful discussion.

I still support a war against Iraq.

I  think that a war against Iraq is the "only thing to do" and I still support USA,England and their coalition in this issue.
Sometimes it's un-avoidable to use "tough actions", in order to keep the world "safe".  I know we all have different views on this subject but in my opinion war isn't always a "evil" action.

Interesting to hear that opinion from Sweden. Is that a general consensus there?
Quote

Ps. I listened to President Bush "speach" (47 hours ago) and I must say I liked some of the things he said.

I've really liked his speeches as well. The one just now (Wednesday evening) was good too. Obviously they're written by other folks and he reads them off the teleprompter, but they still reflect a very strong stance, and (at least apparently) a firm belief in his cause and in God.

It sure beats the wishy-washy Canadian position. Andrew Coyne tore it apart in a brilliant column in todays Post... once it's online I'll post a link.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 20, 2003, 08:42:58 AM
The media like always show things incorrectly or dramatically. I think there would be less problems if there wasn't a media like there is.

The stance that america are only fighting for oil is mute, they aren't going to get anything major from Iraq. As far as I know Iraq is apart of Opec and Opec sets the prices.

And with the notion that America shouldn't step in, I couldn't disagree more. There are many countries where they should. Zimbabwe for one, but unfortunately there are too many cowards to do anything. And Mugabe is only a threat to his own people not others. I believe in the notion that good people don't let bad things happen if they can help it. A peaceful loving wholly united world is a nice dream, and may be possible in the future; but I seriously doubt it as there are always evil people or even bad people in any large group of people.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 20, 2003, 10:49:49 AM
U.S.A. won't act in Zimbabwe: it is not interesting. I am not against U.S.A. acting in conflics searching for something interesting and valuable, I'm against them being that cinic, saying that they are the saviours when they just are there for the money. No money in Zimbabwe, no acting in Zimbabwe.

What is more, the U.S.A. financed Pinochet's take over Chile's government ("to stop communism" ooooh), causing two decades of pain and dictatorship. They moved some threads in Argentina as well. When they say "God Bless America"... Are those exploited south-american countries "included" in America? They have leeched those poor southamerican countries until burst. Please don't say they are agains't dictatorship and lack of freedom. They put up Pinochet and some others. Ben Laden was trained by the C.I.A. ..., Ariel Sharon, one of the greatest genocides in history, is heavily supported in the U.S.A.

Please don't make me laugh telling me that war is for humanitary, freedom and wisdom purpose. It is the plain contrary.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 20, 2003, 11:06:00 AM
Yes they've taken chances by training people. But anyone can turn out how they want to, you seem to bring across they america are wrong. They are not purely wrong, they've made lots of mistakes; but name a country that hasn't. Spain has caused its fair share of problems, all countries in the world have.

Arield Sharon has an impossible task so I wouldn't use that as an example. You try defend a country from bombs let alone suicide bombers; its almost impossible.

Remeber that Saddam did start the war by invading Kuwait. The only problem is that, he wasn't beaten properly.

Edit/addition:
Quote

Please don't make me laugh telling me that war is for humanitary, freedom and wisdom purpose. It is the plain contrary

Such a general statemtent to make is always going to have a problem. It is incorrect, war can be used to free people. A very simple example is Scotland in the 13th Centuary.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 20, 2003, 11:25:55 AM
On the other side, these suicide bomb men are there 'cause Israel stole their land.

And of course I am aware of those historical mistakes. But mistakes that happened only 20 years ago are not historical for me. Spain ruled the world as a totalitary super-power country in the 16th Century that owned almost the whole world, was imperialist and did exactly the same things that the USA does right now.

I better stop posting under this thread, 'cause I see that my position is completely different from yours. You will never convince me and I will never convince you. To me, war is an excuse. You gave me the point in your prev. post: why Sadam and Iraq, and not Zimbabwe?

The saddest thing is that 90% of spanish people are now in the streets in big strikes and shouting against spanish government for supporting the war and having sent effectives. 90% of Spanish people are shouting STOP WAR. And we are supposed to be one of the supporting countries.

I only want to say 1 thing: SPANISH DOES NOT SUPPORT WAR, OUR GOVERNMENT DOES. No a la guerra.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 20, 2003, 12:07:50 PM
When I said Spanish I meant its government and past. You can't hold the past against someone all of the time. Most governments change often so giving historical examples is mute. There have been 2 different governments since the Gulf War in USA, but Saddam is still in power.

I agree that this thread is a bit pointless in that its not going to change anything really, thats why its best to stick to QB ;-) , well for me atleast.

My last question to those totally anti-war. How can the situation in Iraq/with Saddam be resolved peacefully? Nevermind whether he weapons of mass destruction or not, he has a proven track record of human rights abuse. Not comlpex human rights just the simple ones chartered by the UN. So how do you see stopping him peacefully?


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 20, 2003, 02:40:33 PM
Ok I haven't posted in a while but when I say this thread I had to put my 2 cents in. BTW I agree with wildcard and wizardlife. I saw Bush's speach and thought is was good. As DoD secretary Donald Rumsfeld would say: It was a Rumsfeldian speach. Any-hoo I think that sometimes war is the only option and although it is the worst thing that can happen it has to be done(ie when an evil, stupid, or a combination of the two cause a big problem) And about oil this war is not about oil! There is loads of oil here in the States only problem is the enviomentelist wackos don't like us drilling any oil(You know capitolism is bad-live in a hole in the ground sort of thing)

BTW Lachie check this out! http://www.fileplanet.com/files/120000/121074.shtml

It is at fileplanet!


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Zack on March 20, 2003, 03:04:16 PM
Quote from: "toonski84"

   The only time Iraq came close to building an actual nuclear (not nucular) bomb was in 1985 and israel bombed the living bejesus out of it, so far into oblivion (in israel's ever so subtle style) they've never come close or tried since.  All they have are some vats of anthrax which isnt exactly hard to find and less effective than other poisenous substances which can be put in a water supply.

You realize, toonski, that all Israel got back for bombing that nuclear plant was dissing.
Then, 15 years later, everbody realized that if Israel hadn't bombed that nuclear reactor, Iraq really WOULD have a nuclear bomb.
And another thing:
na_th_an, you realize, that Saddam has killed and tortured more people than will probably be killed in this war.

So, in this case, war works.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 20, 2003, 03:21:35 PM
Quote
Interesting to hear that opinion from Sweden. Is that a general consensus there?

Well, the latest "polls" in Sweden says something like 30-35 % of the people of Sweden support a war against Iraq. There are some demonstrations in our country (against the war) and our goverment are not supporting USA (and their coaltion) but they're also not supporting France (and Germany) and there acts in UN.

Quote
I agree that this thread is a bit pointless in that its not going to change anything really, thats why its best to stick to QB  , well for me atleast.

Sure, we won't change anything. But I still think it's interesting to be able to discuss a issue (as important as this one) on a place I love to visit.  :)


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: red_Marvin on March 20, 2003, 06:07:55 PM
Quote from: "wildcard"
So how do you see stopping him peacefully?


Quote from: Somebody before the forum was hacked
Single bullet for single person


I say that Saddam maybe must be killed in order to stop him
but war? Cant USA hire the man who shot JFK? j/k, maybe not
right place to joke on but USA should have more than one sniper
in the CIA or some even more secret organization...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 20, 2003, 07:42:27 PM
Seriously I think that if that could be done, it would have been done already. Quite hard to kill a "target" that is aware of the fact that a big part of the world would like to see him dead. Why didn't someone "sniped out" A.Hitler ? Same sort of question, same answer.

No, I think it will be hard to kill Saddam, even if USA and their coalition will invade Iraq. It just seems like Saddam is the sort of person who has thaught about this "problem" and I'm guessing it will take a huge effort to catch him.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 20, 2003, 07:49:43 PM
he's already got his escape route.  just like bin laden.  in either case, it will take another 200,000 innocent people dead to catch him and it's just not worth it.  bush's rhetoric is one of the most propagandist in the country.  biological weapons are now "weapons of mass destruction", and military bases are now "terror camps".  he stated and repeated a few facts several times and offered no support to the things he stated, no reason they were true.  i didnt like his speech at all, and it's almost as bad if not worse than saddam's own speeches attacking america.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 20, 2003, 08:16:57 PM
Quote
it will take another 200,000 innocent people dead to catch him and it's just not worth it

Either he escapes Iraq or he doesn't.
If he escapes from Iraq he will sooner or later be "catched". Right now I think there's only one country who claimed that they will provide Saddam with a "safe-hosting".
If he stays, and hides out in a well hidden place, he'll get "catched" sooner or later but I don't see how this will affect the number of "innocent deaths" ? America (and their coalition) will invade Iraq and remove their goverment and they'll do that in any ways, no matter if Saddam gets killed or "runs away".
But I agree that the a future invading of Bagdad will be "hard-work" and I think that's the most difficult part of this war.
If Saddams lifeguard-company (don't know the name but it's commanded by one of his son's and hosts about 20.000 soliders) doesn't surrender to the coaltion when they reach Bagdad and they fight to the "bitter end of the battle of Bagdag" it can be a horrible battle... Americans military are way superior then the Iraq's military but as for "street-to-street-battles", no battles are won easily and I fear that it might could take a long time and alot "blood" will be caused...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 20, 2003, 10:13:23 PM
I agree bio weapons aren't weapons of mass destruction they are weapons of mass murder.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 20, 2003, 10:33:40 PM
actually, if he gets away, we'll stop caring as public interest drops to nil.  kinda like, i dunno, bin frikkin' laden.

and anthrax, while useful, isnt exactly a potent biological weapon.  there are better viruses to put in a water supply, if you were to do that.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 21, 2003, 12:32:44 AM
Quote from: "toonski84"
actually, if he gets away, we'll stop caring as public interest drops to nil.  kinda like, i dunno, bin frikkin' laden.

and anthrax, while useful, isnt exactly a potent biological weapon.  there are better viruses to put in a water supply, if you were to do that.


Antrax isn't a biological weapon, it's a non-contagious poison. Something like the smallpox virus would be a serious bio weapon. I'd hate to think of Saddam possessing that kind of sh*t. Whether he does or not, he certainly wants to...

Although like above, he'd have to be awfully stupid to actually use the stuff at this stage, with public opinion and the UN on his side.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: banAnnA on March 21, 2003, 06:55:42 AM
It's such an unfair game. I mean, who is really making money out of this? War industries in the U.S. are really going well and it wouldn't surprise me if they have been selling weapons to Saddam too, in the past. The whole thing is about money, with a thin layer of a moral excuse (ok, I have to admit that saddam really should go (and his look a likes: it would well be possible that some of them would take over power....these are speculations.....)). If the US wants to save the world from dictators, let's be honest:Irak is not the only place to remove them from. Besides, what is going to happen after saddam? another dictator, willing to cooperate with the US? Or how long will democracy stand??? Maybe a pessimistic idea, but it's hard to imagine democracy will really have a good start and progress.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: banAnnA on March 21, 2003, 06:58:28 AM
Quote from: "Jocke The Beast"
. Why didn't someone "sniped out" A.Hitler ?

Well, at least they tried...
Quote from: "wildcard"

My last question to those totally anti-war. How can the situation in Iraq/with Saddam be resolved peacefully?

That is a tough thing, if not impossible. I think the mentality and structures in the middle east are so different from the ones we have in the west that, even if you get rid of it's dictator, there will be a family member, or someone else, closely allied or opposing, waiting to grasp power. I'm not saying every chance is going tobe doomed, but such a scene is possible. I mean, how well is democracy working in afghanistan right now? It isn't a stabile regime. should the us get involved in this? it isn't a structural solution. A big deal of the problems in the world is about the division of people who have the money and power, and the ones who don't. I mean: the western world does not really trade fair, does it? And the worst is, most people know, but don't want to. And more worse is that it includes you and me.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 21, 2003, 01:50:25 PM
More than 20 innocent people have been killed in Iraq yesterday.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 21, 2003, 03:16:58 PM
Saddum may even be dead from the first strike.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 21, 2003, 05:50:56 PM
Saddam will not get caught, and more and more innocent people will die. I don't know how you can be happy of bagdhad going down in flames. I don't know how anyone can be happy of people dying.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 21, 2003, 07:30:01 PM
I agree, but is there another way?


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 21, 2003, 07:58:13 PM
Quote
More than 20 innocent people have been killed in Iraq yesterday

That is really sad news (not that it comes as a complete surprise to anyone) and I think that all people feels the same about that.

That's the worst part of a war, innocent people often dies. But never forget that some negetive effects may (always?) occur while moving towards a goal. The goal in this war is to remove Saddam and his goverment to free the world from Saddam's capabilities to use terror on the world and make a better life for the people of Iraq. If the war wasn't launched thoose innocent people wouldn't die, but perhaps 1000 other innocent people would been killed by Saddam and his goverment.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 21, 2003, 09:01:03 PM
Bill: A bit more sensitivity and respect is called for. Remember that most of the people in Bagdhad are innocent.

Same applies to all people posting here. People have given there lives already, so show respect.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 22, 2003, 01:20:14 AM
Quote from: "na_th_an"
More than 20 innocent people have been killed in Iraq yesterday.


Whoa. I expected far greater than that with 320 cruise missles hitting military targets in residential neighbourhoods... Saddam parks his tanks in front of hospitals and schools... interesting strategy, but it works in a PR war -- at the cost of innocents.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 22, 2003, 01:33:02 AM
I am not happy of anything! Especially innocents dying! However I see war as an unfortunate necesity. BTW Post edited


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 22, 2003, 01:42:34 AM
20?  over 350 cruise missiles have been targeted in baghdad, a city of over 5 million people, one of the largest in the world.  the entire city is ablaze.  all five million of them have lost their homes.  at least a million people have stayed.  the amount of death and destruction in this one attack has totalled to more than the entire gulf war.  if performed by any other nation, it would be declared genocide.

take a minute and watch cnn.  count how many times they tell you about the 14 american/british casualties and how many times they give an iraqi death count.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 22, 2003, 03:33:18 AM
Remember who runs the Commie News Network. Ted Turner owner of probobly the biggest monopoly there is. AOL-Time-Warner. Internet, Internet browsing, movies, news, and printed media. So you can expect him to lean to the left.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 22, 2003, 03:42:45 AM
I wonder if GB has thought in advance about this...

War is not like checkers, it is like chess. You have to plan 10 moves in advance. And if he took a moment to consider what his actions would look like to other third world countries perhaps he would have thought about it more carefully. The image he portrays is that 'if America doesn't like our government, they'll come and hammer us.' 'But how do we defend ourselves, President Mugabe?' (to name just one such person) 'Why, but developing or buying nuclear weapons, of course!!' And then the next time USA invades they're gonna have to use nukes themselves to take out the third world countries nukes.

It should be written in the laws of democracy that to declare war you must have a referendum of your people. (Trouble is, who would police this? The UN? USA???)


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 22, 2003, 04:18:51 AM
I dought that the UN will ever police the US :bounce:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 22, 2003, 05:24:42 AM
Exactly my point!!!!


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 22, 2003, 11:12:58 AM
oracle, the problem with that is any idiot knows iraq doesnt have what it takes to build a nuclear bomb.  the only time they ever came close was in 1985 and their facilities were horrifically leveled by israeli bombs, so completely destroyed that they havent come close since.  tie that in with the fact that two thirds of the iraqi military was destroyed in the gulf war and it's not hard to tell that they had no nuclear capabilities.  all they're referring to by 'weapons of mass destruction' are the chemical weapons he tested in 1997 on his citizens, which if your brain can go back that far was the reason we launched the largest military conflict since the gulf war in 1998 that destroyed most of the weapon factories in iraq nonetheless any chem factories and started the routine inspections to ensure iraq's disarmament.  since then, we've owned iraq like a puppet.

but now, a million people are dead, and the people of iraq will always hate us.  the entire middle east will hate us because we launched an unprovoked war and targeted a city with 5 million innocent people in it.  this will go down in history as the fifth crusade, and relations will never recover from this.

the media was locked out of iraq, then allowed in accompanied by the army, if you've been watching the news.  trust me, it's heavily watchdogged.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 22, 2003, 12:41:07 PM
((psst: _Bill_: Ted Turner no longer owns CNN :) ))

*goes back to lurking*


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 23, 2003, 03:40:24 AM
toonski84, the problem with that is that India, Pakistan and China all have nuclear weapons, just to name a few countries. They could easily sell these (note in my earlier submit: "Why, by developing or buying nuclear weapons, of course!!"). Russia is a prime example of a country so poor they could sell nukes to pay off debt (I believe the current asking price of nukes on the black market is 200 million US).

ps: third world despots can afford nukes - Saddam himself is worth 6 billion!


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 23, 2003, 10:24:25 AM
Ok, the problem is not that India, Pakistan and China have nukes, the problem is that nukes exist. USA also has nukes, and I fear those nukes as much as I fear India's, Pakistan's or China's. So you pretend that only USA is smart and/or responsible enough to have nukes, and the other countries are the "bad guys" and are not allowed to have nukes. Nukes outside USA are dangerous; nukes in USA are to protect freedom... What a bummer.

Life is not a cartoon. Nukes are as dangerous in the hands of China as they are in the hands of Bush. Defcon descends quite fast with any stupid offense.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 23, 2003, 02:03:10 PM
Nukes are just like guns. They are only dangerous when you are not careful with them.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 23, 2003, 04:52:22 PM
nukes are not like guns.  a nuke is the most terrible, devasting weapon man has created.  there are thousands of gun accidents of year.  a thousand people die.  life goes on.  but a nuke kills everything around it for 90 miles.  thousands, millions of people will die if a single nuclear bomb goes off.  even if it goes off in the sahara desert with no one around, it will cause cancer as the fallout cloud moves across the land.  over half the world has soaked up radiation from nuclear accidents in russia in the 80s, and people in eastern europe still have double the cancer rate where the fallout clouds fell.  

no one has the right to use or own a nuclear bomb, but i'm glad that the united states does over other nations.  having invented the bomb, in its development we killed many people, many soldiers and many american civilians.  we witnessed its awesome power and knew the damage it can do, and bastards or not, the people in power know what it does.  same goes for russia, and most of the major european nations.  what i am worried about, though, are nations like north korea and others who have simply obtained the bomb.  i dont know about their leaders but i have a terrible feeling, due to the fact that the united states has already been publicly threatened by the north korean leader, that they dont understand the terrible carnage of such a bomb.  that scares me.

if there was a way, i'd gladly destroy every pound of weapons-grade uranium on the planet.  we dont need it to power our cities, other types of nuclear material work that cannot be turned into bombs.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 23, 2003, 06:10:23 PM
If you all have such a strong anti-nuke stance, you should come live in New Zealand. We are nuclear free!

ps: whose gonna waste a nuke on little old us anyways?

pps: our navy has three frigates. That's all!!! We'd be easy to invade without using nukes, and our isolation means not too much radiation.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 23, 2003, 06:17:16 PM
Quote from: "oracle"
[...]We are nuclear free![...]


We are also nuclear-free in Spain (well, if you take appart power plants)... Thanks god.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 23, 2003, 07:05:13 PM
We don't even have nuclear power plants! We use geothermal power and hydro power, and the rest is oil-fired I think. We got in a whole lot of sh*t with the US because we wouldn't let them bring their nuke boats into our harbours. Someone even bombed a greenpeace ship because they were so annoyed with us!

I'd get out while you can nathan, lots of nukes in your area, even if not in your country. You can't choose your neighbours if you stay at home...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 23, 2003, 07:29:35 PM
Quote from: "oracle"
I'd get out while you can nathan, lots of nukes in your area, even if not in your country. You can't choose your neighbours if you stay at home...


Isn't that somewhat paranoid?


I'm not concerned if Western countries have nukes. The rulers of those nations are elected officials for whome their positions will be removed long before they were able launch a nuclear warhead... Can Bush just order a nuke missile on Ottawa? No. It would be vetoed six times before it left the Oval Office.

But third world countries with mad dictators in charge might just be willing to go down in a blaze of glory in exchange for nuking San Francisco or London...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 23, 2003, 07:35:18 PM
Or Madrid....


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 23, 2003, 09:57:16 PM
Ok I should have said fissile material. What about the space program? How do expect to make energy in space? Through osmosis? Solar panels work for a time but don't work in the dark however fissile material is perfect for the job. Example: Take a thermopile with an exothermic response and put some said fissile material and you have electricity. Iam still waiting for a watch with Tritium dial illumination. Trituim is also an isotope of hydrogen used in H-Bombs.
BTW did anyone know that the sun and all stars use a reaction similar if not the same as an H-Bomb?


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 24, 2003, 12:10:39 AM
the epitomy of energy is antimatter: 100% efficiency.  however, they can only produce about 2 antimatter atoms per hour.  which is a wee slow for powering a city.

there are fission (i'm guessing that's what you're trying to say) materials that are not weapons grade.  i forget the name of it, but every reactor in japan made since 1996 is incapable of creating a nuclear blast.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 24, 2003, 12:40:17 AM
Neg the word for a material that will fission is fissile. U238?(Uranium 238 isotope?) Nah that wont blow but it would make a dirty bomb. And an antimatter atom is supposed to destroy a matter atom when thay come in contact. But I don't believe everything that scientents say untill I see some sort of proof so I have no opinion on that.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 24, 2003, 01:52:27 AM
Your Japanes reactors must be pretty screwed then. The whole point of a nuclear reactor is to be a place where Uranium or Plutonium atoms can be blown apart in a barely contained nuclear bomb. Any reactor could 'meltdown.' But perhaps Japanese reactors don't produce weapons grade stuff.

U238 is the name of the Uranium isotope with a mass no. 238. Uranium has 92 protons in its nucleus, plus 146 neutrons. Uranium also has two other isotopes - U235 (the actual fuel of a reactor) and U234, each with a smaller number of neutrons.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 24, 2003, 02:26:54 AM
Yea I know that I was asking toonski if that was the isotope he was talking about.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 24, 2003, 08:54:32 AM
Well, no shit sherlock, but there are more than one type of nuclear material (my apologies on fissile, that is a word).  But the reactors in japan dont use weapons grade.  it could potentially be used for a bomb, but the material needs to be refined, and even then it would only be a few kilotons.  the process of stealing it, refining it and placing it in a bomb is more trouble than just buying and using conventional explosives to the same effect.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 24, 2003, 10:50:51 AM
Quote
20? over 350 cruise missiles have been targeted in baghdad, a city of over 5 million people,


I think it's approaching 3000 for the entire country now.

You said there were a million casualries already and that everyone lost their homes.

 :rotfl:  :rotfl:  :rotfl:

Saddam Hussein even says that there were N injuries and no casualties in Baghdad, and I can still see the homes through the cameras on Fox.

Or maybe they're just re-running the tapes?

 :roll:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 24, 2003, 11:48:45 AM
Quote from: "Agamemnus"
Quote
20? over 350 cruise missiles have been targeted in baghdad, a city of over 5 million people,


I think it's approaching 3000 for the entire country now.

You said there were a million casualries already and that everyone lost their homes.

 :rotfl:  :rotfl:  :rotfl:

Saddam Hussein even says that there were N injuries and no casualties in Baghdad, and I can still see the homes through the cameras on Fox.

Or maybe they're just re-running the tapes?

 :roll:


Y'know, Iraq is a big country, it is not only Baghdad. There HAVE BEEN many casualties in other towns, most of them have been destroyed by the bombs.

This morning an American missile hit a bus full of civils from Siria who were scaping to their country. Nice hit, Mr. Bush. Now you have scored 5748834 and you have the new bonus. Write your initials.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 24, 2003, 02:56:02 PM
You have no proof.  :roll:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 24, 2003, 07:18:19 PM
of denial.

300,000 iraqis died in the first gulf war, and it lasted three days.  During the "shock and awe" or whatever the hell we call it we've fired off more artillary from the entire gulf war per day, for the past week, into one of the world's largest cities, so how many people do you suppose are dead?  How many people died today?  Just because they dont show it on fox news doesnt mean it happens.  We ARE the bad guys in this war.  We invaded a nation unprovoked and are firing missiles into civilian cities.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 24, 2003, 10:03:37 PM
This is exactly the debate that is going on in NZ right now... Is it right for GB to go invading another country without UN permission, based on flimsy and often downright false evidence? Or should we be thanking him for ridding the world of a despot whose policies have killed more of his own citizens than any US led war could make? I tend towards the former.

Don't forget that people die from the sanctions because of Saddam, not because of the US. Adequate food, medicine etc. does get throuh but Saddam hordes it for the royal guard or what ever they are called.

After the war there will be a big question. When the US wins, will GB be put on trial for war crimes for starting an illegal war?

Will anyone be stupid/brave enough to suggest this???


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 24, 2003, 10:13:59 PM
actually, people are already making plans to.  Which is dumb, because while the UN doesnt back this war, if you know how the UN works, the five or so superpowers get a much higher ranked vote than any of the others.  America and Britain are among these.  There are also all the countries who dont have the gall to vote against him or others who are too economically dependent on America to risk a vote.  So no, if someone ever does indite him, it'll never go through, but on second thought the bad publicity might be enough to prevent him from getting a second term.  You gotta remember, that beneath all the super-hero/villain fasad it's all political.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 25, 2003, 12:45:33 AM
Toonski, you're wrong and I'm right. Admit it and let's get on with our lives.

 :evil:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 25, 2003, 02:42:18 AM
Agamemnus, you've gotta be crazy if you think US weapons don't kill civilians. They do. Even US missiles go crazy sometimes. You can probably get the specs of cruise missiles from news agencies or even the manufacturer (if you know where to look) and the accuracy will not be 100%.

Perhaps you want to go to Baghdad and live there now, to prove it is safe from US weapons?  :humm:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 25, 2003, 04:43:21 PM
I've been following the "war" on tv (Swedish news programs,FOX NEWS and CNN) and I realized that there's alot of differences between the news reporting.
Swedish news programs are pretty objective and shows material from 'Al Jazira' (probaly not spelled like that),CNN,BBC and other big channels. Swedish news programs also showed pictures of thoose dead coalition troops and colation tropps that now are prisoners of war.
What do u ( from USA and England) think about "your" news programs reports of the war?


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 25, 2003, 08:21:05 PM
you've seen fox news, and cnn.  those are the major networks. lots of yellow journalism and slant, and little information.

and @agamemnus: whatever.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 26, 2003, 01:29:23 AM
There is no New Zealand reporters in Iraq, so we all have to watch CNN, BBC etc. We know it's all biased, because the NZ media think they are clever by pointing it out, but the only way the CNNs of the world will change is if we all stop watching them. And that's not gonna happen.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 26, 2003, 01:33:47 AM
what I'm saying here is that there aren't as many casualties as some people would lead you to believe.

Now tell me again why Fox has "yellow-slanted" journalism? It seems to me a lot of other people are being yellow here.....


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 26, 2003, 01:44:45 AM
A simple formula for working out civilian casualties: Take the worst case Iraqi amount (eg 50 thousand), and the best case American amount (eg none), and divide by 10  :rotfl:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 26, 2003, 10:05:08 AM
Today a market in Baghdad has been bombed while many people were buying food. 20 to 30 civils have died, there are more than 50 injuried. Nice one.

And I've seen those dantesque images of a market full of people eviscerated in the floor. Maybe you americans are not getting all the images. And that was *not* an error: 5 missiles hit the market, not a misleaded one.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 26, 2003, 01:20:30 PM
Quote
And that was *not* an error: 5 missiles hit the market, not a misleaded one.


Until I hear this from centcom, all that is just Iraqi propaganda to me.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 26, 2003, 04:18:08 PM
Not Iraqui propaganda. I saw images from Spanish corresponsals there. Actual images.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 26, 2003, 07:06:17 PM
look, agamemnus, i'm not trying to change your stance on the war or anything.  to be honest, there is nothing you and i can do except watch it on cnn.  but dont look at things so black and white.  there has never been a war fought on usa oil for nearly 150 years, so your or i might not understand, but atrocities, sick, horrible things happen in war.  a LOT.  you can ignore them as easily as you can click off a tv or click x on a window, but they happen.  you can support the war, it's a free internet, but try to consider what's happening on the other side.

i guess this guy can say it better than i can.  i guess they have something called "communication skills" wherever he's from.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/889519.asp?cp1=1


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Jocke The Beast on March 26, 2003, 07:20:25 PM
Quote
horrible things happen in war


I agree with you here, Joe. There's no black & white.
I support the war but I realize that this war (like every war) have negative effects. Innocent people always gets hurt in a modern war (the wars back in 1000-1600 AD didn't hurt the innocent citizens in the way wars today do) and that's never good. But sometimes the goal of a war is so important that we must allow thoose negative effects (even if we all pray to God that the coaltion's attacks and strategy is as safe as possible for civilianz) to take place. If we don't, more innocent victims will die and the world will be more un-safe (with Saddam and his goverment ruling).


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 26, 2003, 08:33:04 PM
no, toonski, you're wrong. And that's not what I meant.

I am not denying those tapes were real but denying that it is a fact they were US missiles, and especially 5 of them.

Irak still has Surface-to-surface missiles and those may have attacked the market.

It's not an impossibility that Irak's troops would have done such a thing.

The US says that Iraki irregulars are dressing up in US / British soldier clothing, accepting surrenders, and then executing people.

Irak's irregulars and Republican Guard are using fake surrenders to kill and capture American soldiers.

Irak is situating its soldiers, weapons, and anti-tank/anti-air/anti-personell installations near civilian buildings.

Irak has put mines into the harbors of the port cities. I saw one on TV. It was round and looked 4-5 feet in diameter.

The US deliberately did not go into cities where there is resistance because they don't want to kill innocent people accidentally.

To me there is an obvious black and white here. Sure, the US may make mistakes (and not deliberate ones too-- Irak may also have used jamming equipment, 6 installations of which were blown up according to Centcom..)

but

the US is morally right concerning both the strategy to minimize both coalition soldiers and Iraki civilian and surrendering Iraki military lives (and therefore EXTEND the war, the cost, and inflame stupid idiotic people who think the war is going bad!)

There.

I'm sorry but I just don't see how this just and right war is even close to being a gray area. It is good for Irak and good for the world.

Examples of idiots:

1) Iraki living in Jordan who is going back to Irak to fight coalition soldiers, allegedly:
"Yeah, I was against Saddam b4 the war but now I will go to fight the Americans as well b/c they invaded Irak."

2) Pope John Paul II: This war is lik' totally gonna destroy the world.

3) Igor Ivanov: Stop the war ; we haven't sold anything to Irak (nor any of our private companies);
Quote

MOSCOW (March 26) - Reflecting a new chill between Moscow and Washington, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov accused the United States on Wednesday of trying to destroy Iraq and waging what he dubbed an information war against Russia.


-AP, Vladimir Isachenkov

Now Saddam Hussein isn't an idiot. He's managed to get about half the civilized world, indeed the people he's opressed for dozens of years, to support him against the infidels and murderers that the coalition and Mr. Bush is.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: toonski84 on March 26, 2003, 09:51:01 PM
i dont have anything to say to that.  silly quoting and pointing fingers is not going anywhere.  i've expressed my opinion, and it still stands, amist what you've thrown at it.  ohers have expressed valid opinions as well, including yourself, but it's turning into repetitions and unsupported refutes.  i'm going to stop posting in this topic.  i'm tired of this, i'm tired of this "war", and i'm tired of the politics wrapped up in this.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 26, 2003, 11:44:15 PM
Whether it's a helpful discussion going on in here or not, the fact is that an awful lot of what's going on in the media is both propaganda (from both sides) and a lot of mudslinging and mockery in the place of debate.

As such, we have nothing to work with. Based on the images of CNN, the war is perfectly justified and underway, but Al-Jazeera shows the starving Iraqi children with their arms blown off, which looks atrocious

I was reminded of the media slant again today by the way two Toronto newspapers dealt with the issue of the US ambassador to Canada's speech. The National Post said that the US had lost faith in Canada and the article pointed to them screwing us in border-trading and stuff, whereas the Star's approach was that the Canadian position still held strong, in spite of US opposition.


Title: yeah
Post by: Agamemnus on March 27, 2003, 01:38:03 AM
the US is gonna screw everyone who disagrees with it... Canada, Russia, France, Germany, China, Saudi Arabia... To be neutral is to be apathetic, someone said. And it's true.

Now you can't really say that Al Jazeera has the same amount of credibility as the US. Why? Simply BECAUSE they report all this crap and they don't EXPLAIN the relatively miniscule amount of US casualties... they don't EXPLAIN that (my estimate) 87% of Irak is under US/Kurdish control.

When US media shows some sort of conference of the lying Iraqi government pigs, it is obvious by the sheer contradiction with the facts (that are before and after shown as well)
Al Jazeera doesn't look like it's showing the centcom briefings and it doesn't HAVE ANALYSIS. IT HAS BLOODY BABIES.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: _Bill_ on March 27, 2003, 03:41:33 AM
About the so-called US strike on a village/marketplace. That is total bull****. It is the Iraquies falt. They have Russian made GPS jammers. And guess what some US missiles use for guideance? C'mon guess. They use a GPS system so when the Iraqis use them the missiles loose track of where they are and where they're supposed to go. And I wouldn't say that the Iraqi 'soldiers' can be called soldiers. Real soldiers don't use civilians as human shields or intentially use civil buildings so when they get killed the people they are trying to protect get killed as well.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on March 27, 2003, 09:01:44 AM
Please don't make me have to lock this thread. Think before you post and especially before you make stupid insults at anyone else. And remember news is almost always going to be slanted one way or the other.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: red_Marvin on March 27, 2003, 09:05:17 AM
In a war there can not be a good nor a bad side.
You can agree with one or another side,
but civilians are being killed by one side or another
anyway.

When we have a war where no civilians are killed, the prisoners
of war ar treated like humans then my opinion might change, but how do I know it's real and what have they not shown to me?

I rest my case.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 27, 2003, 09:23:30 AM
Yeah, the problem is, like I said, that Americans haven't suffered a war since Civil war in the XIX century. They don't know about starvation, diseases, poorness, mutilated children, cancer and the like. WW and WWII were in Europe and Pacific Ocean. They only have suffered two important attacks: Perl Harbour and WTC. It is easy to state things when you don't know about them. You are making all those people suffer.

And the worst part is that the USA has more and more enemies each day. USA, the UK and my government (I refuse to say "Spain") are breaking the dellicate world peace order.

This time, I prefer being called an ex-panish rather than Spanish.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 27, 2003, 07:40:05 PM
You can't blame Iraqis for using GPS jammers to block missiles. Think of it the other way - If Russia (for example) fired a nuke at the US, and the US tried to jam it to stop it hitting the pentagon, and the missile went haywire and nuked a residential suburb, there is nothing that can be done about it. However the Iraqi soldiers hiding amongst civilians is wrong - and these deaths should be placed on Saddam's head only. We can't stop the fact that the war has begun and argue about it being "legal" (see my earlier posts) so stop complaining about "just wars" and civilians dying. I'm sure the US wouldn't deliberately attack civilians, and everyone here knows this.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 27, 2003, 08:36:15 PM
Ya know what? I've learned something from this thread.

War stinks.  Sometimes it has to be done, sometimes not.  For some, it's hard to tell until afterwards.

And even worse, Days of Conquest is a game about war.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 27, 2003, 09:51:41 PM
Humans are naturally aggressive, but also naturally God-fearing. If we were all athiest then many of the wars of the past just wouldn't have happened.

Unfortunately this war is about removing a despot who is abusing human rights. It's also about oil etc. Where abouts along the line did GB turn the anti-terror thing into a anti-despot thing? Why did the world let him?

A point of note: If the US removed all of their 4WDs, they would have enough oil to support themselves. See these articles:
http://www.carfree.com/cft/i030.html[/img]
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1991/12/12cen.htm

for just a couple of opinions against a US war based on wanting oil for 4WDs.

Lets all develop hydrogen power!


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 27, 2003, 11:47:55 PM
Quote from: "pr0gger"
Ya know what? I've learned something from this thread.

War stinks.  Sometimes it has to be done, sometimes not.  For some, it's hard to tell until afterwards.

And even worse, Days of Conquest is a game about war.


While games and movies (almost) always whitewash war, it's still to some extent a form of entertainment that informs.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 28, 2003, 01:30:39 AM
No rabbits were hurt in the creation of this rant

I still think that some people here in the world, that is :) don't get it.

Because of their lies in the pas, Iraq cannot claim to say the truth and it does not say the truth.

Al Jazeera does not criticize Saddam's gov't comments about Iraq when they lie. (like when they show Tariq Aziz saying that the US has not made any progress in Iraq..)

Al Jazeera does NOT report Iraqi war crimes. Al Jazeera does NOT interview US officials but only lying Iraqi officials. They interviewed a Kurd once, hoping that he would be against the US. Well, he said that war against Saddam is right and that the US is right. (they didn't expect it.. I saw this w/my own eyes)

If you are reading this post, chances are more than 50% that YOUR local nation's TV channels are not admitting that the US is morally right and putting Iraqi lies and US confirmations on the same level of doubt.

The USA is a great country because in the USA, we have the right to choose those who would tell us the truth WITHOUT having us believe it with no basis. "In God We Trust" Trust means that we believe someone without proof. In the USA (a democracy), you cannot automatically trust someone without proof. Only God (a representation of justice IMHO) "says" the truth.

Then why should we trust the tapes you say? Why couldn't they have been fabricated? Well, in such a democracy where there are no criminal reprecussions for standing out against the government, we can say whatever we want. And the more of the same thing that we see, the more we can believe it. from different reporters

Is it an accident that there are hundreds of embedded reporters on the front lines with coalition troops? No. It is for the world to see that the US does not lie and that Saddam Hussein's regime is brutal, murderous, and oppressive.

The US reported that they did not hit any cruise missiles, but did say that there were artillery sites nearby. Now tell me, those witnesses saw 2 cruise missiles, eh? The projecticle going VERY VERY fast, they could see NOTHING but an EXPLOSION. I am 99% convinced that the Iraqis fired on themselves. delibaretly

Also, why do you think the US didn't win in the first week? They didn't want to kill any innocent civilians.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 28, 2003, 01:51:32 AM
Would Saddam waste any of his valuable weapons on his own people when he could shoot at Americans?

This is a possibility, but not a very sensible one. But Saddam is not a very sensible man.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: na_th_an on March 28, 2003, 08:11:46 AM
Quote from: "Agamemnus"
Also, why do you think the US didn't win in the first week? They didn't want to kill any innocent civilians.


Yeah, yeah, if would have been better acting like in Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

Bush and Blair's promises about a short war have faded in the air. It is fun to see how politicians change the meaning of the words they say in the past. It just like in "1984".


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 28, 2003, 09:41:11 PM
Here is exactly what the tinpot caesar (GB) said in his address to the nation: "The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours"

Translation: threats, bribes and other forms of duress have failed to secure a vote for war, so the world can kiss our ass. Perhaps the most egregious syllogism in Bush's rhetorical armoury has been that those Security Council nations that threatened to use their veto "share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it" and are therefore the cause of the UN's problems. This from the leader of a state that has used its veto power exponentially more often than any other council member, often to thwart much milder resolutions to do with peace and stability in the Middle East.

Perhaps it is time that the smaller countries of the UN stood up and were counted. Invading another country, however detested its leader might be, is unlawful under international law and if enough smaller nations vote for action GB will be indicted and convicted for war crimes under Resolution 377: "Uniting for peace"

Note: The 1946 Nuremburg Tribunal identified starting a war as the worst state crime.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 28, 2003, 11:34:01 PM
:o  :o  :o

*falls unconscious by recent comments*


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 29, 2003, 07:39:03 PM
Quote from: "oracle"
Translation: threats, bribes and other forms of duress have failed to secure a vote for war...


Has the UN ever acted on any other basis? The security council was a joke. It was all about buying out the votes of those third worl countries that would sell to the highest bidder. The US simply decided they weren't going to pander to that system and would save the bribe money for the war effort.

I would have regarded a decision to either effect the same way: meaningless.

Andrew Coyne raised an excellent point recently in an 'at issue' cbc panel. (it was actually on the topic of Canada's inaction in the war, but relevant here also) He suggested that following this war the UN will either be disbanded completely or greatly reduced, since other nations will realise that in wartime it is nothing but an extra layer of bureauocracy that ties the hands of nations who oppose its ridiculous rulings. Coyne suggested that in all likelyhood, smaller treaties (read: NATO, I imagine) of like-minded nations will form in its place. And those who have scorned the US for this effort (like France, Canada, Mexico, and Germany) will be excluded from whatever union the US forms.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 30, 2003, 05:26:15 AM
Does the US realise that the sort of action he is talking about may lead to more terror attacks, and possibly a coalition against America? I pray it doesn't come to this.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: pr0gger on March 30, 2003, 04:35:21 PM
I think there's always been groups of countries that oppose America no-matter-what already...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 30, 2003, 05:45:24 PM
But now you'll get Germany, France etc in that list. Here is another example of US bribery: Australia, our big neighbour to the west, is commiting troups to the gulf, and in return they are in negotiation with the US for a free trade agreement, while because NZ refuses to commit anything to the gulf without UN approval we are getting the big boot.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 30, 2003, 07:14:31 PM
Oh. Too bad you're not filming Xena anymore.

 :evil:


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on March 30, 2003, 07:50:22 PM
Quote from: "oracle"
But now you'll get Germany, France etc in that list. Here is another example of US bribery: Australia, our big neighbour to the west, is commiting troups to the gulf, and in return they are in negotiation with the US for a free trade agreement, while because NZ refuses to commit anything to the gulf without UN approval we are getting the big boot.


But my point was that countries like NZ that are apparently upholding the decision of a consensus body and really just using it as an excuse to cop of the discussion of the real issue of Saddam and nuclear weapons in the hands of third world dictators.

In short, they're screwing their future relationships with the states. Welcome to the world of tariffs and border guards.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: Agamemnus on March 30, 2003, 08:43:16 PM
NZ should at least donate 10000 free randomly-chosen "tourism tickets" to Marines!!! It's really the only thing they have to offer.

I saw the PM of NZ on the Travel Channel showing around the fat dude who ran the show.. it was cool. He kept saying the "Prime Minister" this, the "Prime Minister" that... and I had no idea what he was talking about, until I figured out it was a show about NZ.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on March 30, 2003, 09:13:03 PM
Tourism!!! How dare you!!! We have many sheep to offer the marines for throat-cutting practice!!  :rotfl:

Quote

But my point was that countries like NZ that are apparently upholding the decision of a consensus body and really just using it as an excuse to cop of the discussion of the real issue of Saddam and nuclear weapons in the hands of third world dictators.


I only offered this as an example of a bribe... But Saddam doesn't have nuclear weapons and you know it. Time and time again the US have shown dodgy and even downright slanderous evidence that Saddam has anything more that panadol (Americans: read something with paracetomol 500mG in a pack of 20 etc) to fire at anyone. Quite frankly, the evidence is not there and the US have committed the greatest war crime of all by invading a foreign nation (look at my earlier post).


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: someone42 on April 02, 2003, 08:01:05 AM
How about I start another discussion here:

How long is this war going to last?

Methinks 2 - 6 months
However, even when Saddam falls his troops are going to think it's just American propoganda so we will probably see cells of resistance (and terrorists) popping up many months or even years after the war has "ended".


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wizardlife on April 03, 2003, 12:22:00 AM
Quote from: "oracle"
But Saddam doesn't have nuclear weapons and you know it.


Apparently I don't. And that's really where the debate on the justification of the war lies.

I believe that whether Saddam was wmds or not, he wants them... so it's act now or act later, I guess.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on April 04, 2003, 02:36:19 AM
If Saddam had nukes Washington or LA would not exist, c'mon. We all know this war has a secondary undertone - oil. Who are GB's backers? The second topic we should be discussing is not how long the war will last, but what will GB do with the oil? Is he investing in hydrogen powered cars as much as he should, or even if he is, is he going about it the right way? He could be a great president if he gave the world hydrogen power, but he is as power hungry as any of his predecessors, so this isn't going to change...


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: relsoft on April 04, 2003, 03:28:53 AM
Quote from: "oracle"
But now you'll get Germany, France etc in that list. Here is another example of US bribery: Australia, our big neighbour to the west, is commiting troups to the gulf, and in return they are in negotiation with the US for a free trade agreement, while because NZ refuses to commit anything to the gulf without UN approval we are getting the big boot.


Heh. France supplies Iraq of its Al-Samoud Missiles and Germany makes Saddams bunkers. What would you expect.?


This is NOT WAR but a liberation.  Of course USA has some goodies to get after they Kick Saddam but I'd rather take the US and UK as the bullies than any other else out there.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: oracle on April 04, 2003, 03:49:38 AM
This war is not legal though - that is the whole point. GB is only doing this for the good points - like the oil and the obvious fact that he thinks we are all so dumb that if he wins we will all celebrate with him.


Title: Opinion on war?
Post by: wildcard on April 04, 2003, 08:52:11 AM
Ok, we've KOed and KOed this topic. Ignorance keeps rearing its ugly head in this topic and I'd rather not let it keep doing so. Anyway the topic is gray(kinda like the colour scheme here) so there is no right or wrong. If you really feel strongly one way or another the do something about it, don't just talk about here.. remember we still programming in QB so most of us are stuck in the 80s. Topic closed.