mightyfee

You, like so many other people, ignore the fact that Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the 911 atrocity. Iraq had nothing to do with it. Nothing.

__________________
But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore.
We're already overcrowded from your dirty little war.

mightyfee

Saddam Hussein is considered an infidel by radical Muslims. His was a secular dictatorship (one which the United States sponsored and bankrolled, by the way), and he is therefore hated by the Osama bin Ladens and the other militant Muslims.

__________________
But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore.
We're already overcrowded from your dirty little war.

mightyfee

What about the dead ones? Are they free too? Are the victims of the Fallujah massacre "free"?

What about all the babies being born with birth defects over there because we've irradiated the earth and water? Are they free too?

__________________
But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore.
We're already overcrowded from your dirty little war.

jex

This is a typical example of misinformation. The gov't leak out something (like the passport of one of the alleged hijackers, remember that one? Well the FBI retracted it) and everyone reacts to it. Then some people dig around and find that these links are tenuous at best. Then months later at the bottom of page 25 of some unread newspaper there's a tiny caption that says "gov't retarcts statement X". Now they can (rightfully) say that the statement was retracted, but no one read it, so in the mind of the public, the fact still remains.

Now I don't know if that statement was at all retracted, but they wouldn't tell you that because then they would have to explain why, and for them its best brushed under the carpet.

Misinformation not only helps them at the time they need it, but also causes confusion on discussions such as this one because no one's quite sure where they read it, or where they read the counter argument to it. In the end, we and up just going over the same stuff we all talked about when this all started - I doubt much has changed since then.

__________________
Jex

leejo

No, you, like so many other people, don't get it: 9/11 launched a world war. You and your ilk insist on some Columbo-style connection that nobody calling the shots (thank God) gives a rat's ass about.

But if you think there is a connection between 9/11 and our hamstrung military, camped out in Saudi Arabia (which UBL did actually care deeply about) taking pot shots at the no-fly zone while being locked up and shot at on a routine basis while doing nothing about it, then I would agree that years of impotence gave terrorists and the regimes that aid and abet them the notion that they could attack the United States with impunity.

If you think that there is a connection between Iraq and the now-free-of-Syrian occupation Lebanon, or if you think that the presence of the US Military affects Syrian, Iranian, and Saudi Arabian actions, or if you look at a map Iran and consider
the territory to which you *must* have access in order to launch an invasion to prevent their going nuclear, then yes I would agree there is a connection.

There WAS a connection between 9/11 and Afghanistan, and we took care of that first. Iraq was the next step in the GWOT, but not the last.

The only people who ever seriously talk about a connection between 9/11 and Iraq are the people who insist that there is none. The rest of us sort of shake our heads and see that you don't get it. You just don't get it, do you?

leejo

Oh Christ. Dude, peace out. Seriously. Enjoy the show.

GAH I can't take it. Yes I'm terribly sorry for all the babies being born with birth defects (statistics please?) from all the depleted uranium shells from the a-10s that shot up the tanks who were I guess just sitting there doing nothing. How the pilots, who spend hours each day with 1000s of those shells 2 feet from their nuts, survive must be part of the vast right-wing conspiracy with reality.

We've reached fag factor five, captian. - Cartman.

DudeMan

.

this cing is why i mention what i do, this does not as you say convey a personal safety and security, but the assumption that because you have guns you could stop this happening. when as i have pointed out, it does no such thing, because the groups involved are always minorities, aqnd as such even if they put up a momentus fight will loose.

i did not try to make this a country issue, i believe that americans want guns, and so let them have them, and for the reasons you describe cing, all well and good if a gun makes you feel secure, it doesnt affect me because i dont want a gun in my house, and i dont want my nieghbour to have one either, so our laws (both countries) exist as they do.

and fenix, not once did i say that Britains was somehow better or worse than the usa, we actually (if my history serves me) invented the concentration camp in the boar war. but it happened in europe it happened in the states, and there was two different gun laws, it still relies on majority rule over fair and just actions.

oh and FYI Bush is the most religious spouting president i have seen in the USA, so i would say you have a hardline christian in power, thats not a bad thing, many of the laws you live by are christian based, same here,

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

DudeMan

here is where you are looking too narrowly at the situation, what about halabja, (or however you spell it) the gassing of the kurds, the human bones found in sadams sons lions cage, what about the regiem of fear, dont put a foot wrong because sadam is watching.

im sorry, whilst i see many problems with the inteligence of the iraq war, removing sadam from power can only be described as a good thing, the only problem is it seems the united kingdom and the US, will not be moving in on mugabe, because there is no oil or foothold in the middle east to play with.

but do not get your figures confused, how ever many have died on both sides since the war started, double it and you will not be close to the amount of people sadam has killed through the years.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

Buck Fush

Neither have I. I was messing with you, but my point being; One, you don't know who you're talking to. Two, one doesn't have to have fought for freedom to appreciate the great people who have died for it. I think it was an unfair blanket statement that "Dumb Americans" can't appreciate freedom.

DudeMan

i dont know the entire context of this, but if cing has called them dumb by definition, then why do you feel the need to defend that statement. he called them dumb americans, he didnt say most, or all, but the dumb one....

just a little puzzled as to why you think that is blankett, unless you think most americans are dumb, it shoudlnt come under the heading as a blanket statement.

anyway, as i say i dont know the whole story so shut me up if i am getting that all wrong.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

USN_Squid

Yes the difference being 911 happened. We can no longer wait and see what happens. And don't throw NK and Iran back at me, because they are being dealt with diplomaticaly first just like Iraq was. Saddam was given a chance as will Iran and NK.

Stockpiles are not necessary, in fact, what would a terrorist do drive an 18 wheeler across the border filled with Anthrax? We saw how distructive a tiny envelope could be after 911 didn't we? And I'm sure you're aware of the hundreds of people who have been arrested here and abroad with plans, photos, etc. preparing for attacks on the US.

If only GW was a bit MORE hawkish and shunned international coaltions and diplomacy alltogether you'd be right there with him huh?

So, you didn't read the post I put up from the London times? There is no proof, NONE, that attacking Iraq was predetermined.....Someone for the love of God show me the proof and while you're at it show me the proof that Bush lied! Anyone have any proof at all? Up it!

__________________

Buck Fush

Good thing? Yes. Our job? A reason to send our youth to die in war? A reason to lie about why that war is needed? NO!

You’re supporting my side now. That’s my whole point. The argument was made that Saddam supported terrorists because he paid the families of Palestinian suicide bombers; suggesting that Palestinian suicide bombers, by default were terrorists. My point is that Americans, if pushed in the same corner would fight with that same tactics. You only fight with honor when you have the upper hand.

If I’m fighting a foe that obviously has me outclassed, I’ll fight dirty too. You wouldn’t? You’d rather loose your war than break some arbitrary law of war? Are you British?(Revolutionary war joke forthcoming, no offense intended) “Hey. We’re going to march down this street in a single file line. We’ll wear bright red coats to make us easy to see. You guys feel free to pop in and out of the woods and shoot at us whenever you feel like it. this probably shocked people back then as much as what we see today shocks us.

Really? You don’t get the equation (carpet bombing + city) = (schools + hospitals + civilians targeted)? Here’s another analogy. I’ll type slower this time so you can keep up.

6 August, 1945, Hiroshima, Japan, America became the first, and remains, the only country to ever use an atomic bomb against a foe. 80,000 were killed instantly, 200,000 died by 1950 from the effects; by 1980 the toll rose to almost 300,000. 52 hospitals were destroyed. Nagasaki was almost a carbon copy 3 days later. All in all over 500,000 dead in 2 bombings. Were there better military targets in Japan? You betcha. Could we have just flexed our muscles and shown them what we could do in a sparsely populated area? Yup. Could we have even chosen a smaller city? Sure. Why didn’t we? Because civilian casualties are what end wars; wars of attrition take generations to win. If targeting civilians make you a terrorists, then America is a terrorist nation. That’s how we win wars. Not by eliminating the enemy’s army. I don’t believe America is a terrorist nation. I believe we win wars by any means necessary and we shouldn’t call another nation terrorists for using the same tactics we would. What I’m trying to say is, “Get off of your hypocritical soap box.”

Facts taken from: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/hiroshima.htm

Buck Fush

I might have misread it, but it stills sounds pretty much like a blanket statement to me.

DudeMan

fair enough,

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

Pokerface

"The US is going to attack Iraq. They haven't shored up really good reasons yet, and haven't thought much about what happens when they're done attacking Iraq, but they're going to do it."

__________________

NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
<anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
<LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash
Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2