Artoo Posted February 5, 2003 Share Posted February 5, 2003 I have heard a lot of people yelling on about Saddam being a madman and maniac. But why? What has he done that classifies him as a madman? Just wondering. This man made up a reason to invade a neighboring country, this isn't a sign of sanity. This man keeps lockdown on his country to keep people from protesting against him, he has more than 50 secret bunkers that he has to move between randomly each night to get a good nights sleep. This is not a sign of sanity. this man used chemical weapons on his own people. Why? Not because he was sane. Look at these 3 things. You cannot say he is sane. Well, there are many alternatives: 1. Encourage the people to (peacefully) overthrow Saddam. 2. Put pressure on Iraq by strongly increasing inspections and such. 3. Leave him alone, let him die of old age and then try to help Iraq getting a democracy. Well: 1. He murders them and their families, plain and simple. there is no such thing as peaceful revolt in Iraq. He would killl them, he has done it before, he does it today, there is no reason for him to stop doing it. (Another proof of insanity) 2. We cannot increase inspections except with Iraq's permission, something he isn't giving us. Plain as daylight. 3. He'll only continue building weapons and terrorizing his own people, we have a window which needs to be exploited simple as that. Oh, so all that does not agree with your opinions is nothing but propaganda? Jeez... Not all it just happens that the liberal media slants nearly everything instead of giving you the facts, they give you the facts with their spin already attached. Not what the media should do. So the sources you quote have already twisted the truth. The essence of propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Oh, you poor oppressed conservative masses, is that bad liberal media getting you down again? Jesus, its like the media killed f'ing Kennedy (Although he was liberal), you all just seem paranoid about it. Its MEDIA for chrissakes, no one likes it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn 3. Leave him alone, let him die of old age and then try to help Iraq getting a democracy. YEAH! good Idea...I mean it works for Cuba right? I just doesn't work that way. He has family, he has brainwashed his public, and he'll probably live to the ripe old age of 90+ and knowing him he'll still be in power then. I mean he won't be any worse off than the pope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Originally posted by Clefo Oh, you poor oppressed conservative masses, is that bad liberal media getting you down again? Jesus, its like the media killed f'ing Kennedy (Although he was liberal), you all just seem paranoid about it. Its MEDIA for chrissakes, no one likes it! That is where you are wrong. The media is the number one source of political/economic/news information for most people. And it just doesn't just include TV, either, because newspapers and magazines are inlcuded too. Combine all those and you have an incredible influence over people. I mean, look back to not so distant past at guys like Hearst and Pulitzer. The media has an incredibly huge influence on people, especially the common people, and, in my opinion, one rather large reason why the Democratic Party isn't dead at this very moment. But don't think i'm whining about the media, it is what it is and Republicans still control the House, Senate, and Presidency. All i'm saying is its basically the nations propaganda source, which is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Artoo- 1) Countries have been invading neighboring countries for the entire history of mankind (or womankind, to be pollitically correct ). That would make all of us insane. 2) I suppose, OK. 3) Prove it!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Originally posted by Artoo This man made up a reason to invade a neighboring country, this isn't a sign of sanity. Well, Bush&friends are making up reasons to invade another country, what is the difference? This man keeps lockdown on his country to keep people from protesting against him Then he won't get protests. Smart. he has more than 50 secret bunkers that he has to move between randomly each night to get a good nights sleep. Hehe, that it what Bush&friends want you to belive. this man used chemical weapons on his own people. Why? Not because he was sane. It was because they were revolting him, it wasn't for fun. Don't mess with an angry dictator, I say. You cannot say he is sane. I can't. But you cannot say that he's insane either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Can't we just assasinate him? It's not like anyone will miss him... If we just invite him to the US and shoot his plane down ... I have heard a lot of people yelling on about Saddam being a madman and maniac. But why? What has he done that classifies him as a madman? Just wondering. - Refuses to hold elections - Kills whoever fights him - Kills whoever he suspects is against him - Fires Scud missiles (47, to be exact) at neutral countries - Uses chemical and biological weapons on his own people (but that's okay if they're democratic and fighting him, you say? I'd say that just makes matters worse..) - About the US and nukes: The US maybe had no choice but to nuke Japan. Just don't say they "didn't know how powerful it was" or whatever, because they knew that even before the first one . Artoo- 1) Countries have been invading neighboring countries for the entire history of mankind (or womankind, to be pollitically correct ). That would make all of us insane. *sigh* That maybe means those leaders are insane, but Bush isn't necessarily insane because of the war against the Indians in the US for 300 years ago, to put it that way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishflesh Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 world war 3 started on 1 april Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle Can't we just assasinate him? It's not like anyone will miss him... If we just invite him to the US and shoot his plane down ... We can't. That's political murder, and is strictly forbidden. - Refuses to hold elections - Kills whoever fights him - Kills whoever he suspects is against him - Fires Scud missiles (47, to be exact) at neutral countries - Uses chemical and biological weapons on his own people (but that's okay if they're democratic and fighting him, you say? I'd say that just makes matters worse..) You don't answer my question. All of those statements (except for the scud one, wich I would like scources for) are excellent ways to be kept in power, isn't it? It's a deadly smart tactic, and only disproves that he is mad. It's rather bad though, of course, but he's not a madman because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Ok, let me get this straight Qui-Gon, you are supporting Saddam's using terroristic, dictator tactics to stay in power? Would you have supported Hitler also? How about Fidel? It doesn't sound you like you like the concept of democracy very much if you support the man who kills the people why try and support it in their own country. and only disproves that he is mad. It's rather bad though, of course, but he's not a madman because of it. So you support the bad man? Oh yeah and did you hear what Saddam did today? He authorized his military commanders to use these chemical weapons that he is claiming they don't have. How can you authorize your military leaders to use weapons you don't have? It's Super-Easy! He has them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jatt13 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 1. Encourage the people to (peacefully) overthrow Saddam. 2. Put pressure on Iraq by strongly increasing inspections and such. 3. Leave him alone, let him die of old age and then try to help Iraq getting a democracy. ok, i know people have already responded to this, but it's so lucrative i have to say something. 1. he won't hold elections. he kills his opposition, plain and simple. whatever happens to remove him from power, it won't be peacefully. he'll either be assasinated, killed in war, overthrown, or forced out of power by another country. there is a slight chance he might die of old age. but it won't be peaceful. 2. that's what we've been trying to do, haven't we? first he wouldn't let them in, then he hid stuff and denied he had it. i don't think more inspections will cut it. 3. as many people have already said, we can't just leave him. we have to do something, even if we don't invade or whatever. we can't just stop now. he is a dictator, and in my strong opinion, mad. and your arguments will not convince me otherwise. It's Super-Easy! hee hee. nice. oh, and thank you havoc for trying to keep this a civil debate and making sure it didn't escalate into a flame war. EDIT -- I was looking around on msnbc news today and found this. now, some of you will call it propaganda, but i'm posting it for those who are interested. it's some of the more recent polls of americans' views on bush and the issues going on today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Originally posted by Artoo Ok, let me get this straight Qui-Gon, you are supporting Saddam's using terroristic, dictator tactics to stay in power? You are completely misunderstanding me! I do not support Saddam, alright?! Is that cleared up now? Good! So stop making baseless accusions! All that I am saying is that if you want to stay in power of a country, like Saddam does, then those are efficent tactics, aren't they? Thus disproving that he is insane. Hitler was a genious, and that's why he managed to get so much power. So you support the bad man? :mad: Oh yeah and did you hear what Saddam did today? He authorized his military commanders to use these chemical weapons that he is claiming they don't have. Source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Source is the president's speech he made today. You should've listened it was very good. I hard the quote where he said that 3x on Rush as a sound clip from the speech in like 30 minutes. Oh so you support Saddam's tactics to stay in power, but not the man himself. Do you know how inhumane and cruel these tactics are? So you support such inhumanity and cruelty? Also don't get me going on Hitler. Unlike Saddam, he was brilliant. Hitler had a wonderful political mind. He used democracy to make himself a dictator. The only problem was he was insane also. He set out to conquer all of Eurasia. He made several increasingly bad political moves, and several bad strategic moves. Due to his insanity he had to keep the power to himself for his fear someone would usurp him. Hmmmm, so you say Hitler is a genious who gets power for himself like Saddam so you support Hitler ike you do Saddam? Do you support the mass-murdering of jews? How about the concept of the father-race? You really need to get yourself straightened out ya liberal. If ye looked at the facts ye wouldn't be supporting Saddam so much against the "evil west" and it's allies in the east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Well with the new developments in the last few days it looks like it is SUPER EASY. I mean that there is just right there like an answer on a hundred dollar calculator. It's not that hard to see the proof now. So since he showed evidence, go for it. It's better than he did with Osama *runs away from bullets fired over the Osama issue* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Originally posted by Artoo Source is the president's speech he made today. Ah. So you trust him blindly? Oh so you support Saddam's tactics to stay in power, but not the man himself. I support neither. Stop making false accusions. I just said that the tactics works good for Saddam. That does not mean that I support them. So you support such inhumanity and cruelty? No. so you support Hitler ike you do Saddam? I support neither. Do you support the mass-murdering of jews? No. How about the concept of the father-race? No. Don't accuse me like that again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Since when did "liberal" become an insult? Some conservatives have apparently started to equate liberal with "unpatriotic"... or worse. Does questioning the administration's facts and evidence presented automatically have to make you a "Saddam Supporter"? If so, then this country has already become as much a dictatorship as Iraq is. I thought the ability to question, and even disagree with the current administration is one of the things that made our country so great and worth defending. But then what do I know,.. I'm just a liberal. (And proud of it!) I think that right now there's a whole bunch of us just trying to make sure we are commiting to a war for all the right reasons, and not just blindly swallowing a line of propaganda from our own government that may have other possible agendas for starting conflict with Iraq. (And if you believe for a second that our government isn't just as capable of feeding out as much, if not more, propaganda to the masses as the so-called "liberal press" can, then you will apparently buy anything.) We also want to make sure that the possible aftermath that such a conflict may stir up is also fully considered before jumping in. If we move in, alone and unsupported by the UN and much of the world, and extract a huge cost in Iraqi civilians as collateral damage, we can expect a HUGE outcry from Islamic Extremists. We are going to be target for terrorist activity the likes of which we have never dreamed of in our worst, most fevered nightmares. Americans and American interests are almost certainly going to pay an enormous price in the aftermath of any war with Iraq, even if we are totally in the right. But if we are seen as impatiently jumping in unilaterally, with anything less than a full charter from the UN to do so, it is likely to stir anti-American sentiment even in places we would never suspect. We NEED to make sure we have all the facts in place before we make a move. If we do this alone, and it ever becomes exposed that even a few of the claims made against Saddam were even in the slightest way exaggerated, then we will be as guilty of human rights violations in the eyes of much of the world as we are claiming he is. Being cautious in this area has as much to do with the fact that there are dangerous people on this planet looking for any excuse to hate us more than they already do. Should we hold back if we know we are right, and yet unsupported? I'm not saying that. But we need to be prepared for the years of hard times that are surely going to follow if we do. The more support we get from the rest of the world the better it will be for us in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Artoo, why don't you just stop with demagogic flaming rhetoric and get back on track. No one likes such horrendously silly accusations, especially when they're as baseless as yours. Knock it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted February 7, 2003 Author Share Posted February 7, 2003 I agree! I don't feel we should be jumping into any kind of war without making sure it is the right thing to do. I guess I am put off by Bush. He is making some harsh accusations and threatening etc. I guess I don't feel comfortable with a leader like that. He seems to hasty to me. I'm all for the cause...but not for the concequences....unless it is proven that the cause outwieghs the concequences. The other thing is that...is this something that we want to do now alone? We will definatly be a TARGET even more so than now. We keep pissing countries off and we aren't going to have any alies. We have a lot to loose with this war. And there is a time article out there...I believe it was something to do with "What about the other war that's going on in Afganastan (sp)". I mean...why aren't we finishing up with that? Before we start stepping on others toes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 I totally agree with you on Afganistan...in fact I'm still waiting to see EVIDENCE that convicts Osama, but it really isn't the issue here. We now KNOW that Saddam has violated his restrictions. With this information the UN can not hope but make a coalition. I admit I was skeptical...but not anymore...If this nut has Weapons of Mass Distruction he should be taken care of. And many were complaining about Iraq not being given the right to keep these even though many other countries have them. Iraq is under RESTRICTIONS. It is considered unsafe by the UN to let Iraq have this power. It has attacked it's neighbors and tried to put a stranglehold on the world's oil supply. Would you like to see the world's markets be controled by Iraq? One country? If they chose to put an embargo on a certain country and not sell them oil that country's economy could completely deteriorate. Iraq IS a real danger. That is why we will attack if they have these weapons of mass distruction, not because Bush Sr. told his son to. US is allowed to keep weapons of mass distruction BECAUSE we are a responsible nation and firing them will be only as last resort. Everyone knows this. With this system in place it keeps world order. If we let everyone make nukes without restrictions you could expect several to be fired within a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Seems to me like Artoo was asking a question...NOT accusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 On the whole chemical weapons thing. Check out my post in the N. Korea thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 Do you know where Bush got the text for his speech? UN intelligence. What do you have to say to that Mr. I hate both Saddam and Bush and the Conservatives. I'm just trying to figure out what your logic is, the way your showing to me your trying to support what Saddam's doing without any reason to if you don't like him, why support him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted February 7, 2003 Share Posted February 7, 2003 As Bush once said, "Either you're with us, or you're against us" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted February 8, 2003 Share Posted February 8, 2003 Originally posted by krkode As Bush once said, "Either you're with us, or you're against us" ...wich proves the name of the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted February 8, 2003 Share Posted February 8, 2003 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn ...wich proves the name of the thread. Actually, it proves nothing. As exagerated as it is it's not statements like that that illustrate morons. It's statements like "stupid USA" and "why did they bomb a populated area" that illustrate a true moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.