ZBomber Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 They could start by getting the f*ck out of areas they aren't supposed to be in. I may be wrong, but wasn't that their land in the first place? And isn't it their holy land? Edit - Wow, the thiongs Denmark sent are really gonna make a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 It wasnt thier land,so to speak. The US gave it thier land(abliet, they did live in it before the country was taken by the Romans). Any,Caged Crado, you speak almost like if civilians are worthless. Like you think that Denmark(or Finland) should be taken over or left to rot because they have no military power,but they still have actual living people,dont they? And uh,in a way, it IS good that Denmark are only sending a submarine and a warship. The rest of the money they have must be sent to something else,right? I mean, look, at the first initial attack on Iraq, the US sent 36! Tomahawk missles. Each Tomahawk missle is worth roughly a million dollars(that's what CNN said,anyway) so that's 36 million dollars on a small initial attack. You know what that money could do? It could give almost all the schools in,at the very least, the pacific coast, ample supplies and good payment for teachers and better school buildings. My school needs money, it barely has enough to print out needed materials(no paper for school-rooms, only the office has some) but instead it's put to designing and making MOAB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Originally posted by CagedCrado Sith that excuse is no good any more, how do you know there wasnt a REASON why they were firing? there most certainly was. Also what proof do you have to show that the commanders knew the troops were friendly? Friendly fire happens in war. Casualties happen in war. Get over it, dont whine. Maybe if the pilot reported in he wouldnve been shot down. Also nobody cares about scandanavia because your countries have no power. The US has all of the power, britain has power, and you dont like it, get over it. they knew they were friendly. you are an ass i seriously think you have issues they told my uncle to have his troop fire on the friendly troop. it was a U.S. troop and my uncle knew that and he had decided to disobey that order he was almost dishonorably discharge until the leading officer giving that order admited his judgment was hasty but it was also supported by president Bush (Sr.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Originally posted by Clem crado 1 of these days america will piss off china and i dont wanna be about when that happens I hope I'm living in Japan before that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agen Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Honestly, there was other ways of disarming saddam but america had to be contrary and go for the war that everyone knew would happen 2 months before, cos they already decided this war was going to happen well before they poured troops into iraq. After this is over the chances are america & britain will have a hard time trying to clean this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by ZBomber I may be wrong, but wasn't that their land in the first place? And isn't it their holy land? Edit - Wow, the thiongs Denmark sent are really gonna make a difference. actually it first belonged to the muslims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 i kinda hope a nuclear war occurs just so bush realizes hes an ass. I know it sounds mean but damn people are so stupid these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldritch Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 I don't want to get into all the politics behind each nation's decision to be involved or not in the war, I just want to state a few points. 1. Do I think that the US is using it's power as leverage to get other countries to contribute? Yes. Is it right? No. 2. Is it apparent that France and Russia sold jamming technology (and other items that Iraq was not supposed to have) during the embargo over the last 12 years? Yes. 3. Is it wrong to go to war over a nation of oppressed people (and more importantly, their oil)? Yes. 4. Was there another way to remove Saddam from Iraq? My answer is no. The US and the UN tried peacefully for 12 years. He's not leaving, except through death. I don't see another alternative, but I'm open to any suggestions. 5. Is it wrong for the US to display partial treatment to Israel? Absolutely. I don't know what's so special about Israel, but I suspect it has something to do with the large amount of Christians in our country. Israel is a holy land after all, not just for Muslims and Jews but for Christians as well. Perhaps that's why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zodiac Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 I think US is so pro-israel, because Bush has a big Jewish lobby behind him. And I'm pretty embarrased about Crago.. he comes up with really poor arguments and for example thinks of socialists and communists in the same way. How can you NOT know the difference between socialism and communism. And if you do know the difference, how can you even think of them in the same way. He also mentions absurd things that France is ruled by a dictator, this war being supported more than the first Gulf War and that the war protesters are uneducated, misinformed, naive and have no real reason to protest it. Now I am for this war, but stating that everyone who's against it has no reason and is misinformed is like putting your head up your butt and not wanting to listen to others. People must realize that their are strong arguments from BOTH sides about this war, and in my case it just happens to go pro-war, but that doesn't mean I can't understand why others are against it! Yes I do have mixed feelings about being for this war, but everybody should have mixed feelings, because only the outcome of this war and the upcoming years of future developments in Iraq will prove who was right and who was wrong. Open your mind, be open for ideas of both sides and you will become less ignorant. Stating stuff like that makes him look like the misinformed one. What also bothers me is that he also referred to WW2, where the US (with the help from other countries, like Canada for example), liberated Europe. Now I am for this war, but bringing up the whole "we liberated you thing" is not relevant at all! Should European nations approve everything from the US, just because they were part of the allied forces that set us free in 1945? No of course not! Doing good back then does NOT necessarily mean you're doing the right thing now!! Poor argumentation like that almost makes me want to change my mind and become against this war. Thank god I've already heard good arguments to know this war is, in my opinion, the best way to get rid of Saddam's regime. I'm sorry Crago, but I think you should do some more research of why people are against this war, because it looks like you've only concentrated on things that are pro-war. But anyways.. I haven't heard anyone here of how they'd act to get Saddam out of Iraq. How would you do it? In my opinion, this war is the only way to get rid of Saddam's regime... How would the anti-war people do it? Talk to him about it over breakfast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacky_Baccy Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Posted by C'jais Actually, I thought it was more intended to convey the idea that the US see themselves as cultural liberators (imperialists in my eyes). But as we know, that C'jais dude does speak a lot of innuendo, so who knows? LOL I see the things in much the same way - organised religion and the US are just trying to spread their values and perpetuate their hegemony and supremacy... =) Easy there, fiesty one! I didn't know you had it in you!Well that's hardly surprising since you don't really know much about me at all now, is it? I shall have to educate you You go girl!Oh, I shall - have no fear *Worships Wacky for a bit*LOL I think I'll add that to my list of quotes to use one day Posted by CagedCrado Most of the dollars have been paid back? no they havent, but they were spent for the better good.... so it doesnt matter. I was speaking form a British perspective, but I'll rephrase what I said - "most of the debt has been repayed"... Im just saying that weve spent a lot for the better good of europe with little or no spoils besides the liberation of hummanity.Oh really? So preventing a very large fascist bloc emerging over the sea from you (WW2) wasn't in your interests and didn't help you just as much as it did the Europeans? The US does not benefit from war usually because we give the countries back to the people, and allow them to rule as we keep the peace.Just so long as they don't do anything you don't want them to, yes We do many times put in pro US leaders, but the people do appreciate being liberated, this is very evident in iraq.Can't really argue with that, except to say that you don't seem to have a particularly good track record in stabilising nations after you've 'liberated' them... Europe has benefitted from this war, in economy, security, protesters dont understand this, they dont look at the reasons for the war etc. I doubt many of them have seen what saddam has done. Bull. European economies will not benefit from this war, because all of the reconstruction and oil rights will be (or already have been!) given to US companies, and the contracts that European countries and Russia had with Iraq before will be null and void - a clear detriment to their economies. As for European security benefitting form the war... How can you say that? Saddam did not pose a threat to any European countries, and this war will only serve to inflame terrorists and encourage them to attack European countries more fervently. Oh, and we have provided medical attention to iraqis, civilian and military.Any decent human would do that - it's not something special. Its really a wonderful sight to see people who have gained their freedom.There are many kinds of freedom, and none of us have all of them... In france, iraq, kuwait, korea, the philipines, the netherlands, norway, and all other countries we have liberated since the 1940s. You cant see the looks on those peoples faces and tell me that the US is doing them wrong. In removing their oppressors; no. In exploiting them afterwards for the US's sole gain; yes. Also look what israel goes through, if people were trying to blow me up, id be fighting them too.If people were taking my land and killing my friends and family for no good reason, I'd be fighting them too, although I wouldn't blow myself up, because I believe that is futile and counter-productive. *goes to reply to all the other posts made since he started this one ages ago and got sidetracked* x.x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 God, the anti-american sentiment on this board is disgusting... I can understand criticizing american foreign policy. But then flipping out and saying "America is more dangerous than Iraq because they blew up a RAF plane by accident!!!!11 Can they see the markings on the side in their radar in the dark????/" Man, thats a very foolish thing to say... And then I saw people going on about how America owes France for its independence and existence. Yes, we do. Thank you France. You'll excuse me if I dont kiss your boots, as I wasnt exactly alive back then, and neither were you. I'm not going to kiss up to 300 year old French aristocrats. (and for those of you who will point out the americans yelling about ww2, they shouldnt do that either). It seems to me that people here are striving to find a reason to bash America, even if it is a stretch. Stop trying so damn hard to find a reason to flame my country! We Americans spend far too much time defending our countries name from angry Europeans (and Canadians) who think they know more about us than we do. I try to brush it off, but I'm simply getting tired of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by CagedCrado No you werent being taken over by the soviets thanks to the US, instead mongolia, armenia, kazakstan, the ukraine, poland, germany, estonia, latvia, bulgaria, macedonia, yugoslavia, greece, afghanistan, korea, and vietnam were being taken over by the soviets or were supported by soviets... theres more than that too. Oh yeah and finland was too.... thats pretty close to you right? Actually, these states were GIVEN to the Soviet Union as part of the agreement that came about during the end of World War II. This was to allow Russia to have a buffer zone that would protect them in the event of another act of aggression by a country such as Germany, which killed about as many Russians as they did Jews until the cold hand of winter gripped them by the bollocks. So you might say that these countries weren't dominated by the USSR, but rather the "world" governments that chose their fates. Originally posted by CagedCrado When i say that europe became communists i mean that they became socialists, which to me is communism.... To very different animals. Unless of course you only acknowledge the few individual characteristics they both share. Originally posted by CagedCrado Yes i know the US supported Iraq in the iran-iraq war, but thats because the iranians were terrorists. And it proved to be a bad investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacky_Baccy Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Posted by ZBomber Wow, the things Denmark sent are really gonna make a difference. He was being sarcastic Posted by CagedCrado When i say that europe became communists i mean that they became socialists, which to me is communism... Then you have a very perverse view of socialism and/or communism... I'd wager it to be the latter. Posted by C'jais That's true. Pacifism is not the way to go. We all saw how pacifism got us nowhere in WW2. Very true. Agreed. =) We were being taken over by the soviets during the 70's? Whoah.No, we were being taken over by horrific fashion styles and an abundance of multi-coloured plastic furniture Posted by ShockV1.89 God, the anti-american sentiment on this board is disgusting... I can understand criticizing american foreign policy. But then flipping out and saying "America is more dangerous than Iraq because they blew up a RAF plane by accident!!!!11 Can they see the markings on the side in their radar in the dark????/" Man, thats a very foolish thing to say... That was Clem, and, well, it's just the way he is I'm not saying that America (READ: The American Government/Big Corporations - the people with the real power) is more dangerous than Iraq/Saddam because they blew up an RAF plane - I'm saying they're more dangerous because they have FAR more capability than Iraq has EVER had, and now they have the will and seemingly the intent to use that power for whatever reason suits them and their needs, without adequate foresight or regard to and for the global repercussions. I know that American peole themselves are mostly like the rest of us - a mix of views, some like mine, some not, and I don't blame the people for what the government does, except when they allow it to continue without speaking out against it for fear of being branded 'unpatriotic' or even a 'traitor'. And then I saw people going on about how America owes France for its independence and existence. Yes, we do. Thank you France. You'll excuse me if I dont kiss your boots, as I wasnt exactly alive back then, and neither were you. I'm not going to kiss up to 300 year old French aristocrats. (and for those of you who will point out the americans yelling about ww2, they shouldnt do that either). Thank you - that was my point entirely It seems to me that people here are striving to find a reason to bash America, even if it is a stretch. Stop trying so damn hard to find a reason to flame my country!I'll quite merrily bash any country with good reason - I've just picked America first since it's the most interesting to scrutinise at the moment, and there is an abundance of intriguing information to dig up about it (: The other countries will/already have had their day in the spotlight, and your country will be out of it one day (: By seemingly appointing yourselves the "world's policeman" however, you will draw extra attention and scrutinisation. We Americans spend far too much time defending our countries name from angry Europeans (and Canadians) who think they know more about us than we do. I try to brush it off, but I'm simply getting tired of it. But why are the Europeans, Canadians, Arabs, et al angry in the first place? Ever stop to consider that? That, I think, is where the main problem lies... I am not "Anti-American", but I am anti-"big corporations that exploit weak people and their land" - America has more than its fair share of those - and I am anti-"let's bomb the problem until it goes away instead of solving the problem, after we created it ourselves" Now I'm off to lunch - I hope there will be more replies to dissect and deconstruct peice-by-piece when I get back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by CagedCrado The US does not benefit from war usually because we give the countries back to the people, and allow them to rule as we keep the peace. Oh, that's strictly so-so. In Chile, Nigaragua, and all over the Middle East you didn't. Skinwalker posted a handy reference in another thread, but a quick trip to any decently-stocked library would also turn up juicy stuff... Oh, and you need to keep in mind that there are two kinds of Imperialism: Formal and Informal. Formal Imperialism: Go in, kick butt, install governor, rip off country. Informal Imperialism: Go in, establish trade dominance, defend trade dominance, rip off country. Have your guess at which one the US is practising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 That was Clem, and, well, it's just the way he is Well, I dont have to like it, or him, for it... I'm fed up with everyone bashing America all the time... But why are the Europeans, Canadians, Arabs, et al angry in the first place? Ever stop to consider that? I understand if their reasoning is sound. But what Clem said farther up... man, he's just reaching to find a reason to flame America. It's very insulting. Others do it. There was a thread in another forum in which someone said this ... Just heard on the news US and British troops have secured some Iraqi Oil fields. Ahh, how predictable... It seems very obvious that this person has abandoned reason and any real thinking in favor of rabid anti-american sentiment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by CagedCrado When i say that europe became communists i mean that they became socialists, which to me is communism.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Two very different animals. Unless of course you only acknowledge the few individual characteristics they both share. Not so quite different, methinks. Communism is just a more fanatical version of socialism... But Communism has really been redefined by Lenin, Stalin, and Mao... Not that it would work anyway, even if it had been done 'by the book'. *puts on flame retardant suit* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Solar Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by CagedCrado No you werent being taken over by the soviets thanks to the US, instead mongolia, armenia....Oh yeah and finland was too.... thats pretty close to you right? When i say that europe became communists i mean that they became socialists, which to me is communism.... OMG! That's the biggest load of bs yet, CagedCrado! Well done! Finland was taken over by Soviet? Oh gee, I must have missed that.. Our country of 5 million people fought 2 wars against Russia/The Soviet Union and remained independent. We lost 90.000 men, which is only a fraction of what the Soviets lost even though we had virtually no planes, tanks or artillery....something for you to think about when you talk about "American Heroes". Europe became communist/socialist?! WTF are you talking about? Are you on drugs? Is there a single FACT to be found anywhere in your ranting? No, we did NOT become communists. Do you even know where or what Europe is? Please get a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 24, 2003 Author Share Posted March 24, 2003 "What also bothers me is that he also referred to WW2, where the US (with the help from other countries, like Canada for example), liberated Europe." ur like forgetting that EUROPE FOUGHT FOR THEIR OWN INDEPENDANCE 2!! ... and ozzies and new zealanders i believe ... and prolly others and we fought for alot longer than the americans infact the americans didnt care .... till .... (quelle suprise) their port was bombed and it was IN THEIR INTEREST! oh and im not anti american ... im anti what u do to the world ... the average american is the same as ne other person ... but the prescence america put out into the world (and what an overbearing prescence) picture this .... a schoolground situation america is a bully ... a bully that rescues rich kids who pay them britain is the bullys tiny friend (they all got 1) who does whatever the bully says to do iraq .... iraq (or saddam) is that wield little kid who likes to torture insects the terrorists are a combine of people the bully has beaten up in the past ... and are sabotaging his milk this infuriates the bully ... who strikes out at the picnic table where the terrorists hang out ... ... they scatter .... the bully being large and slow ... (like me ) doesnt bother to chase them instead he decides to attack the wierdo ... who on previous occasion hes given pointy sticks to and stood by and watched him gas hundreds of the ants ... cos the wierdo has orange juice ... and boy does the bully get thru alot of that infact ... the bully refused to sign a whole treaty on reducing the use of orange juice cos we're running out of oranges ok i cant be arsed to think of ne more of this ... i think my point is gotten across altho my view may be simplistic ... its on the whole accurate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
griff38 Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by Luc Solar OMG! That's the biggest load of bs yet, CagedCrado! Well done! Finland was taken over by Soviet? Oh gee, I must have missed that.. Our country of 5 million people fought 2 wars against Russia/The Soviet Union and remained independent. We lost 90.000 men, which is only a fraction of what the Soviets lost even though we had virtually no planes, tanks or artillery....something for you to think about when you talk about "American Heroes". Europe became communist/socialist?! WTF are you talking about? Are you on drugs? Is there a single FACT to be found anywhere in your ranting? No, we did NOT become communists. Do you even know where or what Europe is? Please get a clue. Some of us here in the States are down right pathetic. Many people here really do believe that BS. "WE SAVED YOU EUROPEANERS FROM HITLER AND RUSSIA!! YOU WEAK LIBRALS OWE US EVERYTHING" a quote from a neighbor. To anyone who believes that, GET AN EDUCATION. Dudes, there are bars & pubs in Europe that are older and have more history than the U.S. Stop embarrasing me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by ShockV1.89 I understand if their reasoning is sound. But what Clem said farther up... man, he's just reaching to find a reason to flame America. It's very insulting. Others do it. There was a thread in another forum in which someone said this ... It seems very obvious that this person has abandoned reason and any real thinking in favor of rabid anti-american sentiment... I agree with Shock. Sometimes the anti-American feelings run a wee bit too high in here. It's not reasonable to shift all the blame on US soldiers who are just doing their duty to the best of their ability. On the other hand, I can agree with Clem, whose country has so far had 1 casualty in combat. The rest have been mid air collisions, friendly anti-air fire and a news reporter shot. When presented like that, it can get a bit demoralizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZBomber Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by Clem picture this .... a schoolground situation america is a bully ... a bully that rescues rich kids who pay them britain is the bullys tiny friend (they all got 1) who does whatever the bully says to do iraq .... iraq (or saddam) is that wield little kid who likes to torture insects the terrorists are a combine of people the bully has beaten up in the past ... and are sabotaging his milk this infuriates the bully ... who strikes out at the picnic table where the terrorists hang out ... ... they scatter .... the bully being large and slow ... (like me ) doesnt bother to chase them instead he decides to attack the wierdo ... who on previous occasion hes given pointy sticks to and stood by and watched him gas hundreds of the ants ... cos the wierdo has orange juice ... and boy does the bully get thru alot of that infact ... the bully refused to sign a whole treaty on reducing the use of orange juice cos we're running out of oranges ok i cant be arsed to think of ne more of this ... i think my point is gotten across altho my view may be simplistic ... its on the whole accurate! Well put, Clem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZBomber Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn CagedCrado, you admitted that the war is partly for oil. But USA have no right on that oil. That's like robbing a bank and getting away with it because you have more guns than the police. About Sovjet wanting world domination: Funny. Does Saddam have any right to torture, and rape his people? 'ight, heres one thing I don't get.... Saddam cuts off people's ears for rape, YET, he has rape rooms in his palace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Solar Posted March 25, 2003 Share Posted March 25, 2003 iraq .... iraq (or saddam) is that wield little kid who likes to torture insects LMAO! Good one! Does Saddam have any right to torture, and rape his people? Nope. Nobody likes Saddam. But that's not the problem. The problem is starting a war without the permission of the UN and generally just the fact that the USA thinks they can do whatever the hell they want even though the rest of the world would be against it. "We're big and strong so the rules don't apply to us" According to 30 or so legal experts the attack on Iraq was against international law. Bush's goverment (not U people) can not * brake the rules of international law, * bomb the crap out of countries just because you don't like it's politics or leader, * appoint a new US-friendly goverment and consultants all over said country to tell local authorities exactly what choices they must make(=what's in the best interest of the USA) and still be "the good guys" in the eyes of Europe. I find it disgusting that I am forced to agree with Putin; "The attack on Iraq was a huge political mistake." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted March 25, 2003 Author Share Posted March 25, 2003 Originally posted by C'jais I agree with Shock. Sometimes the anti-American feelings run a wee bit too high in here. It's not reasonable to shift all the blame on US soldiers who are just doing their duty to the best of their ability. On the other hand, I can agree with Clem, whose country has so far had 1 casualty in combat. The rest have been mid air collisions, friendly anti-air fire and a news reporter shot. When presented like that, it can get a bit demoralizing. 5 killed in non accidents afaik ... 2 by iraqis ... 2 by an american patriot missile system 1 by "coalition forces" whilst he was in a truck with TV written all over it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockV1.89 Posted March 25, 2003 Share Posted March 25, 2003 Originally posted by Clem 5 killed in non accidents afaik ... 2 by iraqis ... 2 by an american patriot missile system 1 by "coalition forces" whilst he was in a truck with TV written all over it *leaves thread in disgust* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.