Fuck one-third of the French

[kenrug]

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty, I’m free at last!

Thanks to John, Daddo and Rudy for this gift, this blessing, this free raining realm of iniquity and vitriol. A place of pure, unrelenting venting and spleen purging.

I will be the first to christen this hallowed ground with the appropriate dose of piss-and-vinegar.

To wit:

Motherfucking Frogs. I had always thought it an axiom of civilized Western society that no two, true democracies would ever come to blows. Call it enlightened self-interest. Call it the McDonald’s Theory of Realpolitik. Whatever. But I find now cause to reconsider. Especially when I read of how one-third of the French… (sorry, had to wash my fingertips) want the mass-murdering, rapacious Saddam Hussein to win the war against the Brits and Americans (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-631671,00.html)

This bloodlust of the Franks, this joie dans la calomnie is beyond all civilized sophistication. It is so childish, so churlish, that it has wandered from the well-groomed fields of genuine discussion into the brambles of babble and ignominy. It is the hooting of monkeys fighting over the most glamorous piece of shit.

They are so fearful of their tiny-ness, their insignificance that they are like savages, desecrating the graves of their benefactors. What loathsome creatures.

I wash my hands. The next time you need us, call somebody else.

Ingrates.

You don’t hate us because we help others. You hate us because we helped you. We showed you that you, too, need help from time to time, like we do. But you can’t deal with that, you arrogant apes. You are like Milton’s Lucifer: “It is better to rule in hell than serve in heaven.” You’d rather be important in a toilet than the fellow citizens in an equal world. We know your secret self-loathing, but will no longer excuse you for it. Yours is the psychosis of envy. We will have nothing more to do with it.

I’d rather send my son to Canada then have him risk his life for such a slovenly, ungrateful and ignorant lot such as you.

I was much more ecumenical in times past, in times before the craven Jacques Chirac, before the cringing and deceitful Dominique de Villepin. Well, I guess the French have done one thing for me: they’ve made me sophistiqué.

May God piss on the lot of ‘em.

Ken

:thebird: :thebird: :thebird: :thebird: And, just so you remember who the boss bitch is... :soldier:

Get used to it.

Can you feel the love in the room?

[bfrug]

Hi Kengug,

May I be the first reply then ?

You'vsaid it all & very well indeed - I couldent agree more (except maybe sending my son to Canada !).

take care mate
bfrug

[QT-Sweet_Feet]

Look Kenrug,

I don't gonna talk about politics with you, but I don't believe what I had read from you. I don't believe how racist you are and that make me sick. I never be like this with the american peoples or other ethnic groups cause I have respect for the human beigns. We ALL do mistakes and this is not a reason to be so racist. Did I read somewhere that the racism is not allowed in this forum?
I talk to your girlfriend a few days ago, we were talked about the nice stories you wrote and a few other things, I though you were a nice guy but after reading your sentences, gosh I was wrong!!!

Jessica.

[QT-Sweet_Feet]

This is absolutely disgusting!!!!!!!!

[kenrug]

I’m sorry QT-Sweet_Feet,

As I said at the start, only one-third. Maybe “on the lot of ‘em” was over the top. I’ll give you that. But I’ve never advocated the mass deaths of French soldiers like 1/3 rd of the French people want to see the deaths of British and American soldiers. I said “fuck one third of the French”… not “kill one third of the French.” There’s a difference there. They (that despicable one-third) want my countrymen to die. Now, that’s disgusting.

Also, it can’t be racist. Frenchmen are of the same race me (Caucasian). Also, as I’ve posted elsewhere. I am (partially) of French ancestry. I am, to some extent, in a uniquely qualified position to criticize, even using such harsh language. Especially because I’m part French can I legitimately use harsh language.

If you do not count yourself as one of that bloody one-third, then I sincerely apologize for having offended you. But I will not retract my words decrying that one-third. I may heap contempt on them, but they want my friends and family members to die. Which, prey tell, is more disgusting?

I would have never, ever said these things in the other fora. That’s why the Flame Pit was created. The other discussion areas are for more civil discourse. But when I read that one-third of a former ally’s population supports the defeat of my brothers and sisters on the battlefield, a little clarity is in order. A little plain speaking is de reguir.

I am a nice guy. I am, however, not immune to feelings of loathing toward those who advocate support for the vile Saddam Hussein. For Christ’s sake, QT, he employs professional rapists!. Who, here, are the un-nice guys? The people who wish him success, or the ones who decry his criminality and insult those fellow-travelers who hope for his success? Again, some clarity is required.

If you don’t count yourself as one of that motley crew, that one-third of the French who wish my brothers and sisters to be killed, then the post was not aimed at you.

Did you read the news story to which I linked? The story detailing the desecration and defilement of memorials? If you have not, then please do. Then come back and re-evaluate my critique.

Finally, again for the Record: my statements reflect my own point of view. They should not be read to reflect those of any other person, including Ms Sara. That is not to say that she differs. That is to say that if she chooses to state her views on this, then she will. Otherwise, please don’t read my words as hers.

Regards,

Ken

PS if this means you will have hate in your heart for me, then please understand what you hate me for: using harsh language against those who want my friends and family to die on the battlefield, killed by the friends of Saddam.

I can live with your hatred, if it’s given on that basis. Can you?

[footsniffa]

i can Live with that hate... it's a wonderfuL thing.

[TF0]

You know before I was making fun of us Americans who used their own money to buy french wines and pour them down the gutter or changing french fries into freedom fries[like whats next, cover up the face on the statues of liberty since the french made it]....but this...French defacing WWII graves are just inexcusable.
People around the world are free to voice thier opinions but defacing graves?
How low can you go?
Screw these french idiots.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2907701.stm

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030326/capt.1048706951.france_liberty_vandalized_bor101.j pg

[feetlover]

"Les USA forment un peuple qui est passé directement de la barbarie à la décadence, sans passer par la civilisation" (Albert Einstein):kissbutt:

[footsniffa]

bah.. screw you

[feetlover]

http://rosella.apana.org.au/~mlb/cranes/peacemov.gif Your country is a facist country

[footsniffa]

Originally posted by feetlover
http://rosella.apana.org.au/~mlb/cranes/peacemov.gif Your country is a facist country

oh yeah? my country can kick your country's ass!!!

and it's not fascist, it's nationaList

"i, uh, stand by my, uh, ethnic sLur. go head frogs; do your worst!"

[shoelove]

:mad: What do these yanks know about French people, should I say that all americans are idiots just because of some made nationalists or even worse KKK racists

we have no lessons to be received by you about democracy nor about friendom: during the second world war IBM machines did help the Nazi in germany to help deportation of million of jews. Do you know that?

In vietnam thousand of people wre killed under napalm bombs sent by american B52

Know yr telling about sadam, but why the hell did you do the job in the first place in 1991? why all the cilized sold him the tools to be a new dictator

so please just for Christ sake if you want just make war to the entire world we just ask you to keep us apart

thanks


ps europe had so many wars in her history and do not want to be involved against her will that is all
Kenrug you should read SUN TZU <the art of war in one of the page we are told that the best way of winning the war is not to do it.

[TF0]

Originally posted by shoelove


we have no lessons to be received by you about democracy nor about friendom: during the second world war IBM machines did help the Nazi in germany to help deportation of million of jews. Do you know that?

In vietnam thousand of people wre killed under napalm bombs sent by american B52

Know yr telling about sadam, but why the hell did you do the job in the first place in 1991? why all the cilized sold him the tools to be a new dictator

so please just for Christ sake if you want just make war to the entire world we just ask you to keep us apart

thanks



So?
You forget that we American's also had long dark years of slavery and nearly wiped out the entire Native American population and culture?

But does that mean we can shouldn't even try to help other people anymore? That somehow a checkered past record means that the U.S. should not even try to better ourselves and the world and to point out injustice and wrong in the world as much as possible?

[John]

Originally posted by feetlover
Your country is a facist country

And you're ugly....

fas·cism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fshzm)
n.
often Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Oppressive, dictatorial control.

HAHAHAHAHA..sounds just like the U.S. doesn't it? Morons....

Fascism does sound kinda close to facesitting, though...

[buffalover]

Kenrug, you're a crazy man in crazy country.... We are not for Iraq, Not for US, Not for WAR... nothing for PEACE all around the world.. and not all around the USA World Company, you know ?


We're 'motherfucker frogs' perhaps... but you are Genocidy nation.


Bye

Chris, French Motherfucker Frog

[footsniffa]

if there's one thing i hate more than the crowd saying this is a war to Liberate the iraqi peopLe.... is the crowd saying this is about oiL

[John]

Originally posted by footsniffa
if there's one thing i hate more than the crowd saying this is a war to Liberate the iraqi peopLe.... is the crowd saying this is about oiL

Exactly....both are full of shit...we don't care about the oil OR the Iraqis...

Get it thru your head....Iraqi oil means NOTHING to the U.S.

[TF0]

Well, freedom for Iraqi people from Saddam...
Oh I understand about the oil part too Trinity...I'm not ignorant about the subject.
But it's really not about oil, or oil alone at least.
The conflict in Iraq is very much a combination of wealth, freedom, and security for America from Saddam.

Saddam is certainly not a friend to America. Nor is he a friend toward 2/3rds of his own people. Countries around him fear him.
Even Osama Bin Ladden hates his guts too.
Political wise, it’s not really important to remove him because he is a mass murderer. There are other dictators around the area who are mass murderers too. It' because Saddam destabilizes the region.
His neighboring countries want him to go to.

Why didn't we remove him during the first Gulf War?
Again, politics. [We were not really after his oil or we would have went into Iraq back then.] We accomplished our objective and Senior Bush was afraid of the backlash if more Americans were killed in an invasion.

Is there any other way to remove Saddam without resorting to war? There probably is...but fact is the methods that people have been trying to remove him have failed.
An embargo around Iraq have only managed to punish and starve the people of Iraq while Saddam still managed to divert relief funds into military development.
Iraq was a thriving place before the Persian Gulf conflicts, and now its citizens are lucky to get a can of water a day.
Such embargoes to pressure Saddam out of power have resulted in prolong suffering of the people in the area.

So you're saying the U.S. is only in this war for its own security and the freedom of the Iraqi citizens?
Well yes but, there are also certain monetary gain too.
No, we are not going into Iraq to simply "take" their oil.
But once Iraq is free from Saddam, the new government in place hopefully will be more U.S. friendly. This "friendly" government will probably also sell oil to U.S. for "cheaper" prices.
Plus, much of the rebuilding of Iraq will probably also be done by U.S. companies. I'm told the Umm Qasar port in Iraq has been sold to a U.S. company to rebuild and maintain for now.
Any goods going into Iraq through this port will need to pay a tax to this company like any other ports in the world.

[footsniffa]

i just heard on CNN that we bombed 2 more baby-miLk factories, and iraq's Largest mustache-comb factory.

[trenton talbot]

Geeze! You guys take polls way too seriously!!!! A few years back, I remember seeing a poll on television which stated that over 40% of Americans believe that Elvis is alive and that aliens from another world secretly walk among us. Now strange as it may seem, I didn't and don't conclude that over 40% of Americans are morons; merely that a poll had been devised to elicit exploitive headline results.

Imagine that; a newspaper or television show twisting the results of a poll to create interest in their product. Sounds like something invented in England.

First of all, I guess I have to say that I'm for the war in Iraq although not for the murky, interchangable reasons given by the American administration. I think the multi billion dollar contract forwarded to Haliburton, Dick Cheney's company, for the rebuilding of postwar Iraq pretty much speaks for itself as to the administration's motives. And therein lies the point.

[trenton talbot]

Continued...

Anti American sentiment in Europe or around the world isn't anti the barber in Philadelphia or the meatpacker in Chicago. Its anti Coca Cola and CNN, oil companies and an administration that is suspect at best- all the ugly faces of American nationalism.

I'm a Canadian and as such I think an Iraq run by the U.S. would be better for the Mideast and the world at large than an Iraq run by Saddam Hussein. But true or not, that doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with me is a coward; Canadian, French or Samoan.

For the most part, people around the world(and millions of Americans at the same time) just don't trust your president and his cabinet of gangsters. That's not anti American, that's just anti Bush.

Perhaps you can understand the "foreign" point of view.

[trenton talbot]

Your president, the unaccomplished son of an unpopular coat tails president squeezes by the competition, another unaccomplished son of a noble family, with a minor 24% of the people voting for him. No matter which way you lean, the results of that election are again, suspect at best, the state in question being under the stewardship of the first unaccomplished son's brother.

Now instead of having some sort of runoff in the country or in the state as would happen in most other democratic societies (like France) the election of the most powerful man in the world is decided by some lawyers who mostly owe their Supreme Court appointments to the suspect's father and friends.

Upon taking office, the suspect one cavalierly cancels the US's participation in the Kyoto agreement (right or wrong) and demonstrates his prior loyalties to the industries which pretty much made the agreement necessary to begin with. I'm not making a judgement, just trying to illustrate a "foreign" POV.

[trenton talbot]

Now instead of having some sort of runoff in the country or in the state as would happen in most other democratic societies (like France) the election of the most powerful man in the world is decided by some lawyers who mostly owe their Supreme Court appointments to the suspect's father and friends.

Upon taking office, the suspect one cavalierly cancels the US's participation in the Kyoto agreement (right or wrong) and demonstrates his prior loyalties to the industries which pretty much made the agreement necessary to begin with. I'm not making a judgement, just trying to illustrate a "foreign" POV.

NAFTA is repudiated as time after time the American administartion refuses to honour terms set out specifically. by American negotiaters to begin with.

Then, we look on in horror as the World Trade Center comes down and international sympathy for the United States is at an all time high.

[trenton talbot]

continued...

A couple of weeks later we look on in disbelief as leaders of the religious right, big time backers of the suspect one, blame homosexuals and women who have had abortions for the events of 911. Suspicions grow as no rebuke comes from the White House.

As Afghanistan is devastated with no tangible results achieved, we "foreign" people are a little perturbed that pro-American sentiment in the world is being highjacked by the presidency.
Pro-America and Pro-Bush mean two different things despite the suspect one's efforts to convince people it means the same.

Then, out of the blue, a comicbook like, "Axis of Evil!!!" erupts, including no country that can be proven to support terrorism; and leaving out quite a few of those that likely do. Exemptions appear to apply to those who do business with the Bush & Cheney families. (14 out of 19!!!!)

Something has to be done to divert attention and so war with a nation contained for a decade is launched.

[trenton talbot]

continuing....

Realizing the rest of the world is not subject to the daily rantings of American Falwells, Limbaughs, Robertsons and Hitchens', and that outside of the U.S. CNN is generally viewed as the mouthpiece for corporate America, the administration hatches a with us or against us scenario and is probably surprised when most of the world chooses to opt out. Only the British prime minister is game; not Britain-just the prime minister, and it looks as though he's going to lose his job over it.

The "foreign" view, at least as I understand it being one of them, is that your president is hardly legitimate and has squandered world sympathy to pursue personal corporate ends. If the American people choose to follow this man's agenda (and millions don't- remember 24% voted for him which means 76% didn't) then that's their business and we have no right to interfere.
continued...

[trenton talbot]

continuing....

But in trying to incorporate the rest of the world as following in his suspect win of the presidency, I'm sure the reasonable can easily understand why traditional friends of the United States like Canada and France have chosen to demure. We didn't vote for this guy. It seems like even you didn't vote for this guy. The suspect administration appears to creating enemies as a way of diverting attention from poor presidential performance. But I guess that's for the American people to decide for themselves just like.... just like..... we do.

Just a little bit on the history that's been floating through here. Yes its true that the United States primarily liberated France in WW2. However, it seems that the U.S. waited more than 3 years before getting involved in that war and only after they were personally attacked. Of course that was entirely different. Everyone knew the other side had weapons of mass destruction that time.

[jump]

TFO wrote:

But does that mean we can shouldn't even try to help other people anymore? That somehow a checkered past record means that the U.S. should not even try to better ourselves and the world and to point out injustice and wrong in the world as much as possible?

Helping other people are fine and America does help a lot of countries with food, medicine etc.

The war in Iraq is not about helping the Iraqi people and its not about oil - officiel its about protecting the National sequrity of the USA by destruction of weapons of massdestruction claimed by the coalision being produced by the regime of Iraq and not yet destroyed.

If weapons are found - they have a good reason to be there becaurse the UN have strictly forbidden Iraq to produce more weapons of this kinds - and to destruct those they had. Thats the same goal as the UN weapon inspectors had in Iraq - the coallision are just using other ways to get to the goal - a war.

The "help" to the Iraqi people, eliminate the regime and introduce democracy, thats only side effects of this fight for national sequrity.

Becaurse no weapons of massdestructions are found yet - they use the arguments of helping the Iraqi people - else there would be even more people against the war - people want something that appeal to the hearts if they schould accept a war - the humanitarian aspect of all this. But the arguments of helping the Iraqi people are only part of the propaganda maschinery to keep support for the war high in the public opinion.

For decades the US have had dictatorships all around in their own region - Chile, Argentina, Honduras, El Salvador etc. Most of them working hard today to implement democracy in their countries. The US have supported many of the dictators economic, political and military in South- and Central America over years, even that the regimes killed 1000´s of people. Thats why its very difficult for me to belive that the motives of war in Iraq is help for the Iraqi people. I think the motives are pure selfdefence of the USA. I think that the majority of the people against war does not see this threat to national sequrity like the Bush-administration does, and if they see it - they think there are better ways to eliminate the problem

What we can´t see - we can´t fight, it would be fighting against ghosts.

Time will show if the Americans have better eyes then the Europeans - or if its only a better fantasy they have.

We can say a lot about the French and the American people - and about their presidents also. Right now the French president is the one with overwelming support from the people in French, much much more support then Bush have from the American people.

best from jump

[baloooza]

Ok, i have tried to avoid politics on this board for quite a while, but its gotten to my head, and some posts just aggravate me. So here goes:

For those that think this isnt about oil and that America doesnt need Iraqi oil, and if they did they wouldda took it in the first gulf War:
America couldnt take the oil in the first gulf war, because that was a war sanctioned by the U.N. to liberate Kuwait not to topple Saddam.

America needs as much oil as it can get, with crude oil supplies in the world running low, and the depletion of the supplies seeming imminent, stocking up would be a smart choice wouldnt you think, seeing that Iraq has one of the largest potential oil output.

For those who say that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons and must be disarmed:
I ask would the U.S and the U.K if they were so sure Saddam had those weapons position 250,000 troops right on his border poised to attack, right out in the open?

Perhaps its a bit hypocritical of the US & UK to condemn Iraq's (possible) chemical and biological weapons when they sold them to him in the early 90's. Uk selling anthrax and mustard gas, and US selling the antidote to nerve gas (widely known to be easily reverse enginereed to manufacture nerve gas)

Another Hypocracy, is the US condemnation of Iraqi chemical and biological weapons when North Korea announces publicly that it would use a nuclear bomb on Americans if they attempted to invade North Korea.

America's usage of "agent orange" on the vietnamese poplulation is disgusting. That puts the Americans in the same league as Saddam when he used it against the Iranis. There are vietnamese families in which all of their children are born disabled.

For those who say that this war is to prevent terrorism:
It will not prevent terrorism, it will only fan the flames of hatred towards America that already exist in arab's hearts. This war will cause more people to sign up to join Al Qaida, and resort to terror. This heavyhanded approach does not work. If America wanted to stop all terrorsim immediatly it would put pressure on its lapdog Israel to grant palestinian people a land of their own. A lot of Westerners and especially Americans do not understand that Arab anti-americanism is due to America's blind support of Israel. It is because President Bush supports Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, a man once disgraced and removed from office in the 80's because of the massacers at Palestinian Refugee Camps in Lebanon. It is because America supports a man that is accused of war crimes oppress the palestinians that arabs hate America. The arab world sees hypocracy on the part of america, whereas America will stand up and say saddam violated resolution 1441, yet it will not acknowledge that Israel has continouously violated 14 security council resolution at the expense of the Arab people. UNDERSTAND THAT AND SOLVE THAT PROBLEM AND YOU WILL HAVE KNOCKED THE WIND OUT OF OSAMA BIN LADEN'S SAIL.

AMERICA IS NOT STOPPING TERRORISM BY ATTACKING IRAQ IT IS MERELY HELPING BIN LADEN REQRUIT MORE DISSILLUSIONED YOUTH AND FRUSTRATED OLD MEN INTO HIS DISGUSTING ORGANISATION.


To Kenrug: you seem like an intelligent guy, but your blind acceptance of statistics is worrying. 1/3 of the french people would not like to see sadam win. 1/3 of a sample population (usually 2000) would like to see saddam win, that number is then projected on to the population. Statistics are bullshit. I am sure i could find 2000 people somewhere in the U.S., and after a lot of searching i could find 1/3 of a group of 2000 people who wanted Saddam to win, you also forget that France has a high muslim population which would like to see an arab defeat a westerner just as you would expect a frenchmen to want a fellow westerner to defeat saddam.

Someone else said something stupid along the lines of french are stupid, because some idiot defaced a cemetary. Well i might as well start thinking all americans are serial killer nutjobs, cause manson butchered his family.

[trenton talbot]

..ending..

And as France supposedly owing... Well liberation did come with the Americans in 1945 but I think a reasonable country would assume that it was something like payback. After all, France's support pretty much made the United States happen way way back in yer revolutionary war. And in 1812, the British (and Canadians) might have kept going after burning Washington to the ground if France hadn't been keeping the Empire busy elsewhere.

Incidentally, Kenrug, I've enjoyed your stuff in the past & I'm kind of surprised to learn of your belligerent nature, at least in relation to this war.

As this & other strands show, there's no shortage of morons willing to leap onto racist bandwagons.(Duh... I went to France an' I didn' like it. 'Der musbee something wrong with 'DEM!)

But your attitude seems to be- "See what I want you to see & take it like I want you to take it or your an idiot." That sounds just like, just like...
Oh. Yeah...

Nevermind!

TRENTON

[Mistress Sara]

I swore up and down that I would not be reading this part of the website. I know that Ken had written a post, but I did not expect so many responses. It is my personal policy to not discuss politics and religion in public or in the work place but you could say that I am a little pissed: I’ve read twice now that Ken is, apparently, a racist.

A racist? Excuse me?!!!

What the hell is that all about? I am so angry that you would think that. Ken of ALL people is not a racist. If you recall, which I am sure some of you who are a participants at Wildcat and Valerie’s that when some person started to point fingers at Valerie and saying racial slurs towards her, who was the first one there to rip out the buzz saw? Oh…was it you Balooza? Or how about you Trenton? Buffalover? Jump? That’s right, I didn’t think so. IT WAS KEN!

Ken is the most UN-racist person I know. I know for a fact that people who are racist make his skin crawl and he finds them personally a waste of skin. He is not saying that if you don’t get on his “bandwagon” that you are a moron, he is saying you’re wrong. If you all want to argue about this then do it honestly.

Just so that you know, this entire war is personal for reasons that I cannot say but I know a select few on here who know us know the truth.

Sara

[trenton talbot]

Well I suppose it is natural to defend one's mate and so I suppose a little clarification is in order.

First, I spent most of my little rant trying to explain that the world at large appears to distrust the current American administration, the presidency so to speak, rather than America as a whole, which seems to account for most of the world opting out of the "coalition" forces attacking Iraq.

Second, although I had recognized racist comments by those I deemed morons within this strand, I thought I had separated Kenrug from those others by specifically calling his attitude belligerent, which means pugnacious or warlike.
Perhaps I was unclear and if so- my apologies.

However, I think its useful to point out that one can love and honour the hill people, rush to their defense upon racist attack and still hate and despise the valley people as a whole. The lack of prejudice towards one people does not exempt or equalize hatred and prejudice towards another people. cont.

[TF0]

Originally posted by baloooza
For those that think this isnt about oil and that America doesnt need Iraqi oil, and if they did they wouldda took it in the first gulf War:
America couldnt take the oil in the first gulf war, because that was a war sanctioned by the U.N. to liberate Kuwait not to topple Saddam.
And taking the oil is sanctioned now?
No it never was.
The U.S. was operating well within its limits in the unofficial Gulf War to oust Saddam back then. A conflict of that nature as defined by the world, allows you to pursue it to the point in which a victory can be ensured.



America needs as much oil as it can get, with crude oil supplies in the world running low, and the depletion of the supplies seeming imminent, stocking up would be a smart choice wouldnt you think, seeing that Iraq has one of the largest potential oil output.
...and that oil is also needed by much of the industrialized part of the world too...See where I'm going with this?
This frame of thought doesn't link to any concrete reason behind the Iraq war and it would never hold up as they say "in a court of law"...unless the U.S. got its hand caught in the "cookie jar" in the future.


For those who say that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons and must be disarmed:
I ask would the U.S and the U.K if they were so sure Saddam had those weapons position 250,000 troops right on his border poised to attack, right out in the open?
...^Meaning we know he doesn't have those weapons and therefore sending chemical suits to our troops are just for show that costs us a good several million.
And if Saddam do have those weapons, we would never go against him and do our best to carry out any requests he have for the world?
Also by that frame of logic, why would Saddam's forces even resist the U.S. forces when they know we do have chemical weapons and nukes then?


Perhaps its a bit hypocritical of the US & UK to condemn Iraq's (possible) chemical and biological weapons when they sold them to him in the early 90's. Uk selling anthrax and mustard gas, and US selling the antidote to nerve gas (widely known to be easily reverse enginereed to manufacture nerve gas)
Doesn't this statement contradict itself? So...they "possibly" have the stuff we sold them?


Another Hypocracy, is the US condemnation of Iraqi chemical and biological weapons when North Korea announces publicly that it would use a nuclear bomb on Americans if they attempted to invade North Korea.
Please explain how we should handle the NK crisis then?
Nuke them first?
Place an embargo even though NK have a self-imposed embargo on itself for the past 50+ years.


America's usage of "agent orange" on the vietnamese poplulation is disgusting. That puts the Americans in the same league as Saddam when he used it against the Iranis. There are vietnamese families in which all of their children are born disabled.

Yes and we also had slavery for many years and decimated the Native American populations.
I guess by that account of our bad history we are then the same as Nazis and should have joined their bandwagon during WWII?


For those who say that this war is to prevent terrorism:
It will not prevent terrorism, it will only fan the flames of hatred towards America that already exist in arab's hearts...
Agreed. I've been saying all along that this war will probably not make a dent in the long term issues.
But these new militant groups will have significantly less capability to produce their own weapons of mass destruction.
Al-Queda despite having millions have yet to produce their own nukes.

If America wanted to stop all terrorsim immediatly it would put pressure on its lapdog Israel to grant palestinian people a land of their own. A lot of Westerners and especially Americans do not understand that Arab anti-americanism is due to America's blind support of Israel.
Oh I thought the original forming of Israel was rather risky and I never voted for Bush.
But Israel does exist today and it's rather naive of anyone to think that by not supporting Israel it would somehow stop the Middle East's dissent for the U.S.
As stated in another thesis, the middle east's problem have been centered around resisting to change.
Nothing short of the complete destruction of Israel would appease the militant elements of the Arab nations and even then it would not appease them for long.


Someone else said something stupid along the lines of french are stupid, because some idiot defaced a cemetary. Well i might as well start thinking all americans are serial killer nutjobs, cause manson butchered his family. [/B]
That would be me and I did not “diss” the French population if you had bothered to read what I wrote.
And about Manson...you will notice he is behind bars.
The people who defaced the cemetery are not.
In fact, certain elements of the French government would rather blame the U.S. for the defacement.
"Its really your fault that you made our citizens go and deface G.I. graves because of your outrages war with Iraq...look what you turned our once good upstanding citizens into"

[trenton talbot]

This doesn't insinuate anything about Kenrug one way or the other. But on the other hand, when one uses terms like "frogs" in speaking or writing about the French(or any fraction thereof) its a little like saying some of my best friends are black and I only hate niggers. Some might say suspect.

Anyhow, for any personal stake you or Ken may have in this conflict, I sincerely hope that whoever is at risk returns home safely and unharmed. I'm sure the rational members of this board all have the same feelings, regardless of where they live and how they view the justice of this war.

Although I support the conflict, I believe it is entirely possible to oppose the war and still support the troops prosecuting it. The former is just politics while the latter is humanity.

TRENTON

[hobgoblin_31]

This is so disgusting and ridiculous... Some people really think the rest of the world is full of stupids.

I wonder how the hell does it happen everyday listening to news of the type "possibly a mistake...." and "under investigation..." where innocent people (preferably women and children) are killed by the US army down there. Where? NOT IN A BATTLE under heavy fire conditions, BUT AT CHECK POINTS... They thought a BUS FULL OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN (!!!) could be a threat while they failed to recognise a suicide bomber ALONE IN HIS CAR WAIVING AT THEM a couple of days earlier.... Fucking liars... You took your revenge and now you lie...

And as Mr Blair said the missile or bomb in the Iraqi forum was possibly launched by the Iraqis.....As if we don't remember some identical situations in Yugoslavia in 1999 (Ask the Chinese...) Were ALSO the Iraqis responsible for those hits in Yugoslavia Mr Blair?

We will believe anything you say now that our troops are down there Mr Blair...

Not to mention AIRCRAFTS FIRING AGAINST UK TANKS... Did you listen what the survivor say?

And I say the hell with these cowboy killers...

Nobody believes your lies. We don't care if its about oil or Saddam. Just let innocent people live....

YOU LIARS...

[footsniffa]

Originally posted by Mistress Sara
I swore up and down that I would not be reading this part of the website. I know that Ken had written a post, but I did not expect so many responses. It is my personal policy to not discuss politics and religion in public or in the work place but you could say that I am a little pissed: I’ve read twice now that Ken is, apparently, a racist.

A racist? Excuse me?!!!

What the hell is that all about? I am so angry that you would think that. Ken of ALL people is not a racist. If you recall, which I am sure some of you who are a participants at Wildcat and Valerie’s that when some person started to point fingers at Valerie and saying racial slurs towards her, who was the first one there to rip out the buzz saw? Oh…was it you Balooza? Or how about you Trenton? Buffalover? Jump? That’s right, I didn’t think so. IT WAS KEN!

Ken is the most UN-racist person I know. I know for a fact that people who are racist make his skin crawl and he finds them personally a waste of skin. He is not saying that if you don’t get on his “bandwagon” that you are a moron, he is saying you’re wrong. If you all want to argue about this then do it honestly.

Just so that you know, this entire war is personal for reasons that I cannot say but I know a select few on here who know us know the truth.

Sara

yes, and some of ken's best friends are french. this is actuaLLy a great post. you can defend ken aLL you want to, but it's a wasted effort; ken's post speaks for itseLf.

[kenrug]

Thanks, Ms Sara. I really appreciate the effort.

For the record: I don’t make a practice of insulting those who disagree with me, as long as it’s done with some thought behind it. I think that I’ve been pretty calm and deliberate. Yeah, I’ve “flamed” the conspiracy theorists, but that’s pretty much all the attention and time that they deserve.

As to the racist thing: Now I will insult. What a bunch of pathetic assholes. All this “nigger” crap. Calling me “racist” is such a cheap shot. The French, by themselves, are not a race. They are Caucasians. As am I.

Call me jingoistic. Call me Chauvinistic. Call me arrogant or a hater of the French. I don’t think any of those are accurate, all my commentary on this war taken as a whole. But to call me “racist” is a jade’s trick… a simple device meant to de-legitimize by public acclaim, without defeating the statement at hand. Cheap guys. Really, really cheap.

Think it through. If I were to insult the Brits as a whole, would you still call me “racist”? Does the word have any meaning anymore? It used to. It used to mean a person who disliked a group of people because of their race. If you folks can’t use the language with even a modicum of accuracy… no, if you willingly misuse words in order to mischaracterize my point of view, then you are simply dishonest. You’re simply trying to out-shout me.

I think somebody smells blood in the water, found an issue that gets under my skin. Well, guys, this “racist” thing does. Keep up the false accusations. Let all who wish to read your evaluations of me as a person do so. Get on the record. Post it in bold type, indelible ink, carved in stone.

For your educational purposes, you louts (and yes, that’s a personal insult, for the record and carved in stone):

rac·ism
n.

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

It’s called the English language, folks. Look into it.

Ken

[John]

It's ridiculous to even answer such an accusation, Ken...

Racism? It's too funny...

Is this racism from hotgoblin?

"And I say the hell with these cowboy killers"

No...it's an insult (and a retarded one) at a nation because you disagree with their stance...that's it....nothing more to see here, folks...please drive thru...

[trenton talbot]

KEN

CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY

race n
1. Group of persons or animals connected by a common descent, posterity; house, family, tribe or nation regarded as common stock; distinct ethnical stock...any great division of living creatures.

The French consider themselves a distinct race. The French in Quebec consider themselves a distinct race. Recently I've read of some Americans who consider American a distinct race. I think casting slurs upon people in reference to their ethnic background is racist. I'm pretty sure most would agree without having to go back to root stocks to justify themselves.

And so yeah, if you slagged the British or even 1/3 of them as a whole because of some dopey poll I'd probably think you were a racist. Sharing some descent doesn't make you exempt. I understand that you wouldn't feel like a racist. But then, they never do, do they?

CONTINUED

[John]

And you all know what it's time for.....

http://www.mistressdestiny.com/pig.gif

[John]

Originally posted by trenton talbot
The French consider themselves a distinct race. The French in Quebec consider themselves a distinct race. Recently I've read of some Americans who consider American a distinct race. I think casting slurs upon people in reference to their ethnic background is racist. I'm pretty sure most would agree without having to go back to root stocks to justify themselves.

Maybe racists consider themselves a distinct race also! You are racist against racists and are therefore a racist yourself....

In fact, I have now decided to consider myself a distinct race. I am a race of one....the race of John! Anyone that disagrees with me or calls me names is now a racist...

As long as we're being silly.... :D

[trenton talbot]

It might have escaped you that , I at least, have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt. Your concern for brethren in the field combined with your outrage over idiotic acts of desecration seem to have inspired a strain of hyperbole absent from your other writings here.

As a fellow supporter of this war, I'm convinced that deposing Saddam Hussein is the right thing to do. But elements of righteousnous coupled with hyperbole seems to have alienated some of our natural allies, even dividing members of so esoteric a group as Daddo's Trample Board. This need not be so.

You are, by my estimation anyway, a writer of merit, and as such I'm sure you know the point of writing is to communicate. Many of the users of this board do not use English as a first language and struggle to be understood. It does no good at all to criticize English skills.

If one is trying to make a point & fails, the fault lies in the writer, not the reader.

Its the singer, not the song.

TRENTON

[trenton talbot]

John,

Well, we always knew you were distinct.


TRENTON

[John]

Originally posted by trenton talbot
If one is trying to make a point & fails, the fault lies in the writer, not the reader.


I disagree 10000%....

If you're too dense to understand me, I can't help it... :cool:

[trenton talbot]

John,

Well actually you can help it. You just won't.

What's the point in speaking to someone if they don't understand?

That strikes me as somewhat dense; especially if you know in advance that with some modification they will understand you.


TRENTON

[John]

I will speak to someone only on the grounds that there is honest discussion. Calling Ken a racist for poking at the French is so far beyond ridiculous that I call "SHENANIGANS! immediately and refuse to entertain REAL discourse...I don't wish to be understood by people incapable of understanding.

[jump]

I can understand its more interesting to discuss a member of our community then the real question here:

Are the French (about 30%) really so that we can conclude in a very few sentences about the 30 % French ?

How I see it - absolutly NO - NO NO NO WAY!

I have been around with Ken for serval years online - I´m very convinst that he is a man with a deeply humanitary wiev to the world - even that many of us don´t really see any connections between war and humanity - never then less - I, for my part, have absolutly no doubts about Ken´s view to life in general.

This said - sorry Ken, but your post is not only stupid - its made of of the things making things even nore evil - I know that have not beeen your attension - but it confirm my opinion - we all are very bad helped leaving the judgements about the Middle East to the Americans alone - sorry to say - but you are simply not clever enough for this big question - nor have your proved that you - the Americans - have any good intenssions in the Middle East - you have been supporting the most extreeme goverments of Israel - not only now - but since the birth of the state Israel.

How in earth schould the Arabic people ever trust you - your, the Americans ... thats one of my really - still open - question to your Americans - How will you prevent the people of Iraq to raise against you as a invassionforce - and not an army of liberation.

Please you Americans - leave the Middle East to people that have been dealing with those issues for years - people that have been working for peacefull solutioins whenever a problem was public displayed.

Being the worlds biggest armey force doesn´t meen that you also are experts of negoicitions - infact you arew not - nothing really succesfully have been solved by the Americans since the democratic prsident Jimmy Carter when he - and first of all his administration - workjed out the Camp David agreements.

Infact - the French have a lot of more experiences with the Middle East - then the US administration - let the those with some real experiences do the hard work.

And if you don´t belive me - think of the very bad negociations of the US and Turkey - a moderate muslim country - no extra batllefield was given by the Turkish .

Thinking of the American us-administration - I only find one word for all this mess =========>


You Americans have done one hell of a bad job - you will be hunted out of the Arabic world, not becaurse of the war alone - but you hade serval occations where you didnt really want to disturbe the

Think of this - by this action there will mere killed serval more then in "litlle Big Horn" where America had itsa most drastic feeling of defeat - the Vietnam war implemented as a museum of how much the goverment leaders really think about those that have decded to use their lifes to defend the

best fron jump

[John]

Jump is a racist...

[chairboy]

seeing as this section is for 'heated debates' i thought i might add fuel to the fire:
i don't particularly like the french, either;:lildog: :lilgump: :barf: :fart: :kissbutt: :p :p :p :p
(this is an english thing)

[footsniffa]

i beLieve the angry responses here, and LabeLing of "racist" was do to the vuLgarity of ken's post. they couLd have caLLed him a "nationaList" (or jingoist is it caLLed?), but that doesn't have the bite that racist has (it stings and burns). what i find a LiL odd is the offense now being taken to the "racist" name caLLing. hmmm
-----------------------------------
kenrug wrote:

Note to all. As I understand it, the Flame Pit is not, necessarily, a fetish forum. It is a place to take all off-topic, heated or intense discussions. Please understand it to be such. Only go there if you are willing to endure rather strongly-worded “discussions.” That’s why it was created.

If you’re not interested in that kind of thing, then stay away. Otherwise, come on in, and don’t forget your asbestos panties!

------------------------------------------------

[footsniffa]

i beLieve the angry responses here, and LabeLing of "racist" was do to the vuLgarity of ken's post. they couLd have caLLed him a "nationaList" (or jingoist is it caLLed?), but that doesn't have the bite that racist has (it stings and burns). what i find a LiL odd is the offense now being taken to the "racist" name caLLing. hmmm
-----------------------------------
kenrug wrote:

Note to all. As I understand it, the Flame Pit is not, necessarily, a fetish forum. It is a place to take all off-topic, heated or intense discussions. Please understand it to be such. Only go there if you are willing to endure rather strongly-worded “discussions.” That’s why it was created.

If you’re not interested in that kind of thing, then stay away. Otherwise, come on in, and don’t forget your asbestos panties!

------------------------------------------------
http://mistressdestiny.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9851

[footsniffa]

i hate when i doubLe post

[footsniffa]

i hate it when i doubLe post

[John]

Originally posted by footsniffa
what i find a LiL odd is the offense now being taken to the "racist" name caLLing.

I'm offended at your findings....you are a racist!

[footsniffa]

you racist bastard!!!

[John]

footsniffa is racist against bastards!

trenton talbot has proven that one only needs to "consider themselves" a distinct race in order for it to be true...we expect the race of bastards to appeal to the UN, shortly...

[baloooza]

Originally posted by TF0
And taking the oil is sanctioned now?
No it never was.
The U.S. was operating well within its limits in the unofficial Gulf War to oust Saddam back then. A conflict of that nature as defined by the world, allows you to pursue it to the point in which a victory can be ensured.

TFO you have missed my point, it was made to those that claim that argue that America is not after oil, because if it was it wouldda taken it in previous gulf war. Well my responce was meaning to say that it couldnt take the oil in the first gulf war because it was a war sanctioned by the U.N. to liberate kuwait, not for any other reason, and you prove my point when you say "pursue it to the point in which a victory can be ensured". Victory being the liberation of Kuwait.



...and that oil is also needed by much of the industrialized part of the world too...See where I'm going with this?
This frame of thought doesn't link to any concrete reason behind the Iraq war and it would never hold up as they say "in a court of law"...unless the U.S. got its hand caught in the "cookie jar" in the future.

However it is not the rest of the world launching a military campaign which has already resulted in thousands dead. It is America, you may say that the Americans will hand the oil fields to the people of iraq, but let me ask which companies will the american instated government of iraq give oil contracts too? American companies perhaps??


Meaning we know he doesn't have those weapons and therefore sending chemical suits to our troops are just for show that costs us a good several million.
And if Saddam do have those weapons, we would never go against him and do our best to carry out any requests he have for the world?
Also by that frame of logic, why would Saddam's forces even resist the U.S. forces when they know we do have chemical weapons and nukes then?


As the US administration continuously frightens the american public by telling them that chemical and biological weapons could be snuck into the United States, it has not stopped and thought that Saddam might try and sneak them into army camps, if he had any.
No if Saddam had those weapons, there wouldnt be hundreds of thousands of troops on his border in the open with their positions shown on satellite news. How the war was fought would be differently.
Saddams forces resist because they know the U.S. will not use nukes or chemical weapons against them. However, if Saddam had those capabilities, i am sure the United States would believe he will use the weapons against them if he was to be attacked.


Doesn't this statement contradict itself? So...they "possibly" have the stuff we sold them?

None of it has been found, suggesting that possibly Saddam has destroyed the stocks or depleted them. However even if he still had them, the U.S. military campaign, is like a drug dealer giving a health lecture to one of his customers.


Please explain how we should handle the NK crisis then?
Nuke them first?
Place an embargo even though NK have a self-imposed embargo on itself for the past 50+ years.

So are you suggesting you should disarm weak countries that may or may not have bio/chem/nuc weapons, yet leave rogue regimes that announce their plans for the creation of nuclear weapons untouched because theres no forseeable plan of action?

Yes and we also had slavery for many years and decimated the Native American populations.
I guess by that account of our bad history we are then the same as Nazis and should have joined their bandwagon during WWII?

It took the Americans a long time to ban slavery, and segregation. Your country has had time to develop. I am sure your ancestors would not have been happy if a country back in the times of slavery decided regime change was necessary for such horrible acts.
While the west may realise that the rest of the world's technology develops at a slower pace than its own, and that the rest of the world is far behind, it does not recognize that a lot of the world is also behind in thinking. It takes a lot of time to develop thinking, and how people percieve their governments, and how governments percieve their people. May i remind you that in the Arab world, organised government has been around for less than a hundred, and before that it was tribes and nomads in the desert. Changes in thinking takes time, and just as your ancestors would not have appreciated the crusader humanitarian foreign power interfering to ensure equal rights, the arabs do not appreciate american interference in the arab world.


Agreed. I've been saying all along that this war will probably not make a dent in the long term issues.
But these new militant groups will have significantly less capability to produce their own weapons of mass destruction.
Al-Queda despite having millions have yet to produce their own nukes.

Let me remind you that Al-Qaida did not use chem/bio/nuclear weapons in the 9/11 attack. Those weapons are not a neccessity for terrorist. They are scum, that will look for any method that causes maximum terror among a population.


Oh I thought the original forming of Israel was rather risky and I never voted for Bush.
But Israel does exist today and it's rather naive of anyone to think that by not supporting Israel it would somehow stop the Middle East's dissent for the U.S.
As stated in another thesis, the middle east's problem have been centered around resisting to change.
Nothing short of the complete destruction of Israel would appease the militant elements of the Arab nations and even then it would not appease them for long.

Supporting Israel is fine, what is neccessary is American pressure on Israel to make peace with the Palestine Authority, as well as American pressure on the Palestinian authority to make peace with Israel. Arabs no longer want to see the destruction of Israel, you are living in the past my friend. Israel engrages Arabs because they see American bombs dropping on innocent palestinian refugees, made refugees by the Israeli occupation of their land in 1948. Followed by Israeli 'preemptive' strike in 1967, the westbank and the gaza strip fell under Israeli control. Resolution 242 ratified in the security council by all members includding the USA demanded that Israel relinquish the land occupied in 1967. It has not to this day. This is what frustrates Arabs worldwide. It is the blind support of Israel, and Israel's carte blance to do what it pleases in the region that creates the military extremists in the first place. American pressure on ISrael, which is extremely possible seeing that ISrael recieves $2.8billion yearly in aid fromt he U.S., would see the reduction of extremeism in the Arab world.
The arab world might have an element of resistance of change, but I challenge you to present to me one nation that does not resist change. Arabs as well embrace change when it is necessary. I take you back to several revolutions in the mid 20th century, when nationalist movements overthew many arab monarchies. The people adapted.



That would be me and I did not “diss” the French population if you had bothered to read what I wrote.
And about Manson...you will notice he is behind bars.
The people who defaced the cemetery are not.
In fact, certain elements of the French government would rather blame the U.S. for the defacement.
"Its really your fault that you made our citizens go and deface G.I. graves because of your outrages war with Iraq...look what you turned our once good upstanding citizens into"

Manson is behind bars, and the french police are vigorously condemning the defacement, and will pursue those who committed the crimes. I challenge you to find me a law enforcement agency that can find the people that defaced the graves in four days. It has not been more than five days since the defacement, how do you expect any law agency to aprehend people that fast?

And no the french government is not blaming this on the U.S. in fact french politicians have condemned the defacement,those who did it, and praised the brave soldiers who gave their life to liberate france from nazi clutches.



Sorry this is so long.

[kenrug]

John – Thank you, man, for so cleverly and completely destroying the apparently popular “definition” of racist. I’m reading some of your posts over and over, almost peeing my pants!

Footsniffa – You wrote, “what i find a LiL odd is the offense now being taken to the "racist" name caLLing. Hmmm” Yep. You caught me hoist on my own petard. Nice comeback with the quote from my Discussion Board post.

Okay, I stand guilty of being a little too thin-skinned. But considering the (entirely appropriate) stigma attached to being labeled a “racist,” I’d do it all the same way again.

You see, you also said, “they couLd have caLLed him a "nationaList" (or jingoist is it caLLed?), but that doesn't have the bite that racist has (it stings and burns).” -- And it was because I suspected that the accusation of “racist” was due more to its effect than any accuser’s heartfelt belief that it was true, that I reacted so strongly. I saw it as a red haring, a cheap attempt to smear me. “Racist” is the Mother-Of-All-Accusations. It cheapens the intensity of the word to misuse it.

Jump – I luv ya, man, but that was the most pompous screed of European “we’re older, more mature!” bilge that I’ve ever seen you write. Put another Euro coin into that Random-European-Snobbery-Generator you must be using, and try again.

Your tantrum of effete pretentiousness is unworthy of your better posts, my friend.

As to your dire predictions of impending gloom and doom, only time will tell (and as time goes on I get the increasingly solid impression that your prognostications will be proved quite wrong).

Trenton – You wrote, “inspired a strain of hyperbole absent from your other writings here.” (emphasis mine) Exactly. I don’t speak, nor do I write in those tones in polite company (not a slap at the posters in this thread, but an allusion to what the Flame Pit is not). That I feel the way I do (and think, also) is manifest in the harshness of the tone. As has been noted this situation is personal, and I take personal affront at the actions of the (now) infamous One-Third. I probably wouldn’t have brought it up in the other fora, and if I had it would have been far less venomous.

I was, however, somewhat surprised to find that some gentler souls, who are not exactly fans of verbal pugilism, actually came here. I admit to mixed feelings about that.

You also wrote, “Many of the users of this board do not use English as a first language and struggle to be understood. It does no good at all to criticize English skills.” If I gave the impression that I was generally insulting English-as-a-secod-language folk, then I apologize. That was not my intention. After all, even I am not fool enough to try my pitiable German in the German Forum. I admire (greatly!) those skilled and brave enough to access a forum in a second language.

BUT: I was targeting in on those native English speakers who may have been misusing the word “racist” as a spear rather than a tool of argumentation.

Ken

[TF0]

*note, quotes shortened to save space :P*

Originally posted by baloooza
[B]TFO you have missed my point,..... Victory being the liberation of Kuwait.
"America not after oil"...<---that I cannot promise, but during the first gulf war, the U.N. basically sanctioned the U.S. to take the war into Iraq if it is felt that by doing so they can secure a "true" victory in Kuwait. After all it will be a military blunder if Saddam's army is allowed to regroup in Iraq and launch a counter offensive back into Kuwait the following week. But due to a number of reasons, the unofficial war was decided best to be ended after the "highway of death" clash.
True, in a court of law, this kind of reasoning does not mean that the U.S. had no ambitions towards Iraq's oil.
But on a side note, the U.S. also did not simply take Kuwait's oil for reasons of "safe keeping" either.
This shows that if we were "really" after everyone else's oil, we are not at least stupid enough to rob everyone at gunpoint.
However it is not the rest of the world...... iraq give oil contracts too? American companies perhaps??
This is basically what I have said in the other post, that a future new Iraqi government would be more friendly toward the U.S. and result in beneficial returns. But this is really no different or more "underhanded" than the other "real politics" going on with Iraq right now.
Russia and France have been engaging Iraq with trade for years, even after the embargo.
In return these nations have been treated to many favorable deals. You may say, well at least this sort of "relationship" hasn't resulted in the death of supposed thousands.
But they did only not directly.

As the US administration continuously frightens the american public by telling them.... sneak them into army camps, if he had any.
Which is a real possibilty.
By giving WMP to terrorist groups not linked to Iraq, Saddam can get away with attacking America without fear of instant retaliation.

No if Saddam had those weapons, there wouldn’t......with their positions shown on satellite news. How the war was fought would be differently.
No, this speaks more about how news and coverage of war have changed since the last decade than U.S. strategy.
Also no exact positions are shown on TV.
Saddam don't need to check CNN to know the U.S. is basing forces in Kuwait.

Saddams forces resist because they know the U.S. will not use nukes or chemical weapons against them.
Actually Rumsfield said we might use non-lethal nerve agents on Iraq. This plan is kept on the back burner as a back up plan.
However, if Saddam had those capabilities, i am sure the United States would believe he will use the weapons against them if he was to be attacked.
Which the U.S. do and therefore issued several level chemical suits to the divisions deployed in Iraq.

None of it has been found, suggesting that possibly Saddam has destroyed the stocks or depleted them.
The U.N. inspectors did not find the Al-Samud Missiles either.
Or recently the new long range Chinese ship-to-ship missile.
Or the chemical suits in the hospital.
This doesn't mean Iraq has WMP but it does mean Saddam can hide things pretty well and that if he really doesn't want the UN inspectors to find things, then they won't.

However even if he still had them, the U.S. military campaign, is like a drug dealer giving a health lecture to one of his customers.
I'm sure there was a Hollywood movie with that theme.
Classic Disney ending. :D

So are you suggesting you should disarm weak countries that may or may not have bio/chem/nuc weapons, yet leave rogue regimes that announce their plans for the creation of nuclear weapons untouched because theres no forseeable plan of action?
Yes. It’s not so much as hypocrisy as "real politics".
You want your cops in blue to pick up the drug dealers on the streets but you don't want to send these lightly armed police officers after drug cartels in South America. For that, you need a combination of political pressure, maneuvering and a lot more firepower.
Sure, that may not be a right-on analogy but its trying to point out that NK, like the cartels, have strong backings.
You want to make the ones backing NK up to look into this first.

It took the Americans a long time to ban slavery, and segregation. Your country has had time to develop....
Yes, time does solve a lot of the problems. If the U.S. left the Nazis in control of Europe, then time would have solved the Nazi problem too. They either would have been defeated by the Soviet Union alone or they would have simply collapsed like the Soviet Union eventually did.

I am sure your ancestors would not have been happy if a country back in the times of slavery decided regime change was necessary for such horrible acts.
I'm sure they would not have been happy...no wait...it was called the American Civil War.
Yes, the civil war was fought over a multitude of reasons and not just slavery, but slavery would have went away eventually and no one is really disgruntled that the Civil War took place and ended it sooner.

and that the rest of the world is far behind, it does not recognize that a lot of the world is also behind in thinking..... It takes a lot of time to develop thinking, and how people percieve......rights, the arabs do not appreciate american interference in the arab world.
Change is often brought in by outside influences.
The Arab world was the shining beacon of civilization for hundreds of years while the west was going through a dark age.
Now dark ages do happen every now and then but one does not get out of it by choosing more isolation.

Let me remind you that Al-Qaida did not use chem/bio/nuclear weapons in the 9/11 attack. Those weapons are not a neccessity for terrorist. They are scum, that will look for any method that causes maximum terror among a population.
...And as scum, they would not seek out aid from rogue countries that produce WMD?
Saddam: "no, please take these WMD to use against the Americans"
Al-Queda: "nah, we don't want your charity. We'll think of something of our own no thank you" LOL :D

Now, the link between Iraq and Al-queda before this war was fairly limited, but now due to this war, their ties are the closest since they ever have been.
And its not something we can go back and correct anymore.

Supporting Israel is fine, what is neccessary is American pressure on Israel to make peace with the Palestine Authority,
Agreed.
Arabs no longer want to see the destruction of Israel, you are living in the past my friend.
Disagree. I haven't seen any reports that indicate the Arabs are now more happy to be neighbors with Israel.
Followed by Israeli 'preemptive' strike in 1967, the westbank and the gaza strip fell under Israeli control....
Things are called a preemptive strike because it was provoked.
Though I don't support Israel, I don't see why Israel need to give back the land it seized when it was clearly war. But that’s a whole different can of worms.
The arab world might have an element of resistance of change.............Arabs as well embrace change when it is necessary. I take you back to several revolutions in the mid 20th century, when nationalist movements overthew many arab monarchies. The people adapted.
Once again, changes in history usually occur from pressure from the outside.
Hell, a bad democracy institution is not better than a good monarch.
But we can agree, that Saddam is not the thing that Iraq needs to turn to.
Manson is................It has not been more than five days since the defacement, how do you expect any law agency to aprehend people that fast?
True I was just poking fun of your Manson analogy.
I would think KKK would be a better fitting example.

And no the french government is not blaming this on the U.S.............liberate france from nazi clutches.
Not publicly, but a good number of sentiments was that if the U.S. is not acting so "belligerently" than this "belligerent" act would not have occurred.

[trenton talbot]

And so returns the Kenrug whose writing I've enjoyed and even admired in the past.

One of the problems I see, both in those around me and within world media is that side issues keep clouding the central question in relation to this war, which is- Will Iraq, the Mideast and the world at large be better off under American dominion than right now with an Iraq ruled by Saddam Hussein? In my view I'd have to say yes despite an ardent distrust of the Bush-Cheney mob currently in power. They might be greedy but they haven't gassed anyone yet.

I keep trying to illustrate, here and elsewhere, that excessive verbiage on both sides of this question stokes a fire that doesn't need to burn. What one actually conveys in caustic remarks matters a whole lot more than original intention.

And just in case it matters to you, I don't personally think you're a racist. I just understand how some of your remarks in this forum might be construed as such.

TRENTON

[turbs]

Ok, is it my turn now?

A few words on Ken. For someone who doesn't know him very well I can see where they would not understand where he is coming from. Although I don't always quite agree with him either, I must say that I do understand his frustrations and where he is coming from. I think that he was speaking out of frustration and was simply spelling out his thoughts. What I always respected (and still do) about Ken was that he speaks his mind and says it like he thinks, whether you like it or not.

To label him as a racist is totally completely off the wall. Yes he is angered and yes he pisses a lot of people off at times, but damn it at least he's one of the few around here that is always honest and doesn't bullshit around. You gotta respect that in a guy! Argue with him, debate with him, hell even completelly disagree with him, but Ken is trully a great person who I feel does not mean harm to anyone. His sword is his pen and he uses it well, (usually) :p

But if anyone takes time to understand the man, it's not difficult to see where he is coming from. His only fault is that he's a little trigger happy at times. ;)

So Ken, don't lose any sleep over it, the respect that matters the most is still there from the ones who can call you a friend.

Paul

[footsniffa]

i won't deny that the LabeL racist was a cheap shot, but i feeL (i and onLy i) that it cLoseLy matches up to the LeveL of the vuLgarity of ken's initiaL post. take the cheapness aside, and the post couLda just said "fuck you ken".. but that certainLy won't inspire such rapid repLies.. and isn't that what were reaLLy here for? to read witty/angry/insipid posts at a high-speed rate.
---------------------------
takin a LiL detour down a winding tangent road.... i work with a frenchie from quebec city. she's nice enough (aLso my boss) to me, yet she's quite snobby. (i think i'm Liked due to my french-canadien ancestory.. and of course my good Looks and charm)
anyhow, she usuaLLy makes derogatory comments about chinese peopLe (and by chinese she means aLL asians).. she aLso makes statements Like, "whenever you see a vioLent crime it's aLways committed by a bLack person"... so, i aLways joke with her about racist views. she gets a big kick out of it, because she beLieves quite firmLy that she is not a racist. but yesterday, she became quite upset (aLmost to tears) and wanted me to reassure her that she's not a racist. after much discussion, i tried to Let her down easy, because we do get aLong; as many peopLe here jumped in to defend ken, because "they know him."
but i feLt it a "duty" to inform her that she can't just say those comments, because they are offensive, regardLess of the fact that she befriended the onLy bLack student at quebec coLLege (or whatever the name of it is). it visibLy upset the woman for the rest of the day. i assured her that i was not hoLding myseLf up above her as being pure, as i'm not. the onLy difference, is that i acknowLedge my fauLts. if she truLy beLieves the comments and statements that she makes (another one made yesterday whiLe trying to defend herseLf: "why is it then your prisons are fiLLed with bLack peopLe?") then yes, she is racist. maybe onLy a LiL bit racist, but at Least admit it. by the end of the day i had dumbed it down to, "you can't make those kind of statements aLoud in a pubLic setting, especiaLLy when you're a person in authority."
so not reaLLy reLevant here, except the racist taLk... i just figured i'd give a snippet of the footsniffa's work Life.

[barracuda426]

I almost quit participating in these flame wars primarily because our media can't quite seem to get their story straight before it hit's the air, loading me with misinformation that blows up in my face. But this is just an unbelievable load of horseshit. Resulting to name calling..bunch of fucking kiddies. No wonder our governments won't tell us everything. YOU CAN'T HANDLE IT! I sincerely believe history is doomed to repeat itself and it's because of emotionally based dumbasses who don't take the time to actually try to idukate themselves on the sitiuations they speak of. Like the ones flaming Ken on here.

http://www.dontsupporttraitors.com/downloads/video/Iraqi-womans-point-of-view.wmv

Listen to this, and you may want to check out the homesite @ http://www.dontsupporttraitors.com/

Here's a valid question: Why is it the majority of the people who don't support war can't spell and have no sense of grammar?

Maybe it has something to do with education. And I'm not just talking about book intelligence either. Hell I've even had people tell me our government was violating the Dixie Chicks First Amendment rights because *I* was voicing my opinion against them. How does that work?

Strange a country as terrible as the US has an extreme immigration problem and it's not from people LEAVING. Sadly people are going to believe what they want to believe no matter how much proof you present. But I can't believe you son-of-a-bitches that wish our troops harm. I hope you all(and I mean ALL, not one third of you) burn in hell, and go there very soon.

I just knew someone would bring up the checkpoint shooting. Go run a checkpoint and see what happens. Do it.. I triple dog dare you(and you'll be doing the world a favor too)!! See if you don't get a body full of .223, 7.62x39mm or 5.56mm depending on which country the checkpoint is in. While we're on the subject of common sense why don't you do another test for me. Go test the affects of gravity and jump off a cliff you fucking moron(hobgoblin).

'Cuda

BTW I noticed nobody seemed to notice all the news video footage of Iraqi civilians giving our troops food and general support for "liberating them". Funny how that was missed.

[footsniffa]

ooooh, that was a proper gander....

i aLso notice no one's bringing up the shiites' seLf-fLageLLation

[barracuda426]

U.S. Secretary Defense Donald Rumsfeld

U.S. Secretary Defense Donald Rumsfeld apologized today for referring to France and Germany as an "Axis of Weasels."

"I'm sorry about that Axis of Weasels remark," said Mr. Rumsfeld.

"I didn't mean to dredge up the history France and Germany share of pathetic compliance with ruthless dictators."

The Defense Secretary added that he was "way out of bounds" with the comments. "I should have known better than to remind people that these two nations-which live in freedom thanks only to the righteous might of America, Britain and their allies-that these nations are morally and politically bankrupt, and have failed to learn the lessons of history," he said. "It really was an inappropriate thing to say-you know, the Axis of Weasels thing. I really should not have called them the Axis of Weasels. I think it's the 'Weasels' part that was most offensive...you know, when I said that France and Germany form an Axis of Weasels. Of course, I'm so sorry."

The Defense Secretary continued, "I want it to be known that no other man holds the weasel in as high a regard as I do, and I'll be the first to point out the crucial role this noble creature plays in our ecosystem. I went way over the line comparing the weasel to a bunch of rude, unwashed, leftist Euroweenie surrender monkeys who change their underwear once a month whether they need to or not.

And I just did it again, didn't I? I just insulted the monkeys. I'm quitting while I'm ahead!"


I think this sums it up.

'Cuda

[barracuda426]

Hell, just go here and read all the quotes: http://www.dontsupporttraitors.com/quotes.php

'Cuda

[kenrug]

I’m going to withhold further comment for a short bit. You see, I’m compiling a “Crow File” (as in, somebody’s going to have to eat some…). As the situation develops I get to see confirmations of terrorist camps and sarin gas, torture chambers and liberated, celebratory Iraqis… all the things that my friendly opponents assured me didn’t, and won’t exist.

I think this next week is going to be a kick in the ass, frankly. I only wish that the other thread (on the main boards) hadn’t been deleted because so many people went on the record. I was really looking forward to a long “contrast and comparison” piece, quoting statements, then providing links to rebut.

Oh well, life can’t be as perfect as the 3rd ID’s run through southern Baghdad.

Oh, and just so that you all know, I won’t let you live it down. When the investigation develops, and Chemical Ali’s (RIP) toys are discovered again and again, you should expect some painful days of revelation and embarrassment. Sorry, but when you so boldly put your nuts on the table, you shouldn’t be surprised when they get chopped by Occam’s Razor.

That’s it for now

Ken

PS Footsniffa, I’m all for flagellation, but self-flagellation seems too masturbatory. (Whoa! Talk about culturally insensitive!)

[footsniffa]

in an effort to boost moraLe at my company, they're pLaying patriotic sLogans over the intercom.

"we sacrafice our bLood and our souLs for dubaya!!!"

[kenrug]

Heh heh heh. Good god. I only wish I had a soul.

[footsniffa]

mmmm soLes

[kenrug]

Paul,

I read your post and was really moved by it. You actually accomplished something few others have: After I read your post for the third time I was still speechless. It’s incredibly daunting to read such kind words about one’s self. And I truly appreciate it.

I’ve always found you to be a trusted friend, and an honorable debater. One thing that you have that I admire greatly (because I don’t have it) is even-temperedness. I don’t necessarily dislike nor disapprove of my occasional (?) explosions (they’re part of me), but I do know they have consequences that can be unpleasant.

Se la vie, se la guerre.

Thank you, though. You didn’t have to do it, but you did it anyway.

Ken

[kenrug]

Posted without comment:

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030407/capt.1049733792.iraq_us_war_xits101.jpg

[kenrug]

Originally posted by barracuda426
Like the ones flaming Ken on here.

Thanks for the active defense, ‘Cuda. You make an interesting point regarding grammar, punctuation and general writing style. I do try to decipher and/or decode the meaning behind the text before me, but sometimes I just don’t bother. I know I’m ridiculously anal about most of my writing (and still err more often than I’d like), but I get the feeling that the poor grammar (etc.) is sometimes part of the message. Sometimes I think it’s used to convey a feeling of casualness and detachment.

Then again, it could all be in my head (with all the other voices).

I Loved the Donald Rumsfeld stuff. Good morning reading, that.

Ken

[jump]

so now I´m a snobby racist .....huh ?

ehe ... not at all, only went home from a birthsday party once again, drunk, nothing but drunk :D and my anti-alcoholic software, that send out painfull electric impulses whenever I touch the keyboard drunken, dosen´t seem to be working :beer:

This said - Ken, your opening statement is not racistic in any way, but its a bit dissapointing in my view, hatefull also, even its written here in the Flame Pit. If the transatlantic "war of words" here at the board, but also among our politicians schould have a chance to find a way back to some kind of normality its urgent that all intelligent people contribute building bridges instead of flame up hate on parts of whole nations. You are talking about 20 million people. Go for the politicians, the decicionmakers, thats what we got them for.

As for the much talk about WW2 - nobody here have liberated France 60 years ago - that was another generation. The young French generation 60 years ago have probberbly been extreemly happy becaurse of the USA, Canadian and English liberation. But we schoulden´t expect the same kind of gratitude of the generations 60 years after. If we did - schould we still be hating the Germans ? ... of course not!

I, for myself, have chossen to work active against the reelction of my goverment becaurse of their support to this war. Basicly I think where we can influence the most, working active that our goverments express what we see as the best way to solve problems.

Best from
jump

[jump]

@barracuda426

The link you gave us in an ealier post is about the best way to convise people against Americans. From reading here and at other places I know that a lot of Americans are smarter then those childish comments after the qotes of people against the war. If they had some vid I could see the point somehow - but they are just non-intelligent bullship at the same level as in the local bar at closing time.

As for the point where you link point us too:

"GREAT QUOTES FROM TRUE AMERICANS"

... they open proudly with Buce Willis

... just to puke against the "Hollywood Bunch" further down the page. Thats the only funny thing I saw at that site.

Best from
jump

[barracuda426]

@Jump

Some of it was to show that there are "Celebrities" out there who do support the war, some of it was tongue in cheek, and some actually was true(i.e. Axis of Weasles). Take it for what it's worth as it's not an "Official" site of the US.

And if you want some "vid" just turn on your TV to a reporter that's actually over there. That should give you all you need.

'Cuda

[kenrug]

Jump, I’ll respond to your post tomorrow (my time), though I found it friendly and entertaining (shocking, even… heh heh).

‘Cuda, are you really saying that the SecDef quote is legit? I thought it was a parody. Can you provide a second source? Either way I thought it was damn funny, but I’d like a second source for validation purposes, if you would.

‘night all!

Ken

[kenrug]

Wow. I thought it was “goodnight all” time, but something’s afoot (sorry, couldn’t resist). I’m watching Abrams A1M1 tanks (sorry if I got the nomenclature wrong, I’m a navy puke [civ]) crossing a bridge in Baghdad. The Coalition forces have made a strike against a suspected location of Saddam & The Bunch. Who knows if they took the Big Journey.

The sooner that happens the better for all of us. If you feel trepidation at that thought (of the Coalition being victorious) then you might want to re-examine your own motivations. I, personally, have no problem admitting I am wrong when my being wrong means that more people will live until tomorrow. My ego is big, but not bigger than the lives of people.

Not going to promise to be quiet for the rest of the night.

In fact, I’m starting to wonder whether I have the intestinal fortitude to be magnanimous in victory. Wouldn’t want to commit acts of mass triumphalism, after all.

Note to Jump: I’m still giggling over your reportage about your condition during that previous post of yours. Been there, buddy. Got the scars, too.

Ken.

[anamica]

how can one belive thaat US is really liberating iraqi people from saddam.i find it difficult to understand the reasons put foeward by wasington. white house says that traq is preparing wepons of mas distructions and could not find any evidence.compare this with the ferocious nature of american attack on hapeless iraqies.do u know how many bombs and missiles so far raaained on iraq.how maany times in a day US plaanes bombs baddad.do u belive thaat the wepons of us is non distrucctive? whicch ccountry haas the largest and strongest pile of nukes in the world?which country spends the highest amount of money for difence xpenditure?. ur president and whitehouse will wwin the war sure.but please not ur president is aalsso becoming one of the most haated person in west asia.i feaar he does not deserve to be the pressideent . how the americans compare current pesident with the greats like lincoln aand wasington?

america is now controlled by corporates.there is no democraccy.
half of ur highest office beaarers haave closest link with oil and weepons industry. i feaar the actul losers of this war is the people of america itself.

[anamica]

how can one belive thaat US is really liberating iraqi people from saddam.i find it difficult to understand the reasons put foeward by wasington. white house says that traq is preparing wepons of mas distructions and could not find any evidence.compare this with the ferocious nature of american attack on hapeless iraqies.do u know how many bombs and missiles so far raaained on iraq.how maany times in a day US plaanes bombs baddad.do u belive thaat the wepons of us is non distrucctive? whicch ccountry haas the largest and strongest pile of nukes in the world?which country spends the highest amount of money for difence xpenditure?. ur president and whitehouse will wwin the war sure.but please not ur president is aalsso becoming one of the most haated person in west asia.i feaar he does not deserve to be the pressideent . how the americans compare current pesident with the greats like lincoln aand wasington?

america is now controlled by corporates.there is no democraccy.
half of ur highest office beaarers haave closest link with oil and weepons industry. i feaar the actul losers of this war is the people of america itself.

[kenrug]

Well, my friend anamica, I don't know about you, but I will await the judgment of the Iraqi people, which can only be truly known once they can speak openly without fear of death.

Once again (let’s say it all together this time) “only time will tell.”

The good folks of Basra seemed a little peeved at our British allies because they hadn’t closed down the Fedayeen soon enough!.

Go figure.

Then, of course, you have the experience of the recanting “human shields” who, once having unwatched access to the Iraqi citizenry finally heard what these sad folks really think. They (the Iraqis) were getting a little miffed that we hadn’t started bombing yet.

Yes, yes, yes. Now somebody’s going to come along and say something to the effect, “how can you be so bloody naive as to think that some people are going to want another country to invade them!?” Well, I’ve done the research, posted the links. How about you folks do some work for once and prove me wrong.

Ken

PS Jump. I still haven’t forgotten about your post , buddy.

[hobgoblin_31]

hey, barracuda, since you referred to my post...

1. you watch CNN so you know a little. Go check the school group killed in Yugoslavia by aircraft firing (FIRING, not-bombing you asshole which means clear eye-contact) and tell the children parents that they were "accidents". But as Ken said you cannot realise anything unless it really happens to you or your family (yes, that unfair but still realistic comment about someones sister).
2. If you are still in doubt I can extend in time and space (1945, Japan).
3. Don't talk about common sense. You know as much about it as your president does.
4. The only accident I see is your physical existence. But nature is really unpredictable...
5. Go fuck yourself and your useless knowledge.

[kenrug]

Okay, me again. I was in the shower and I had a thought (insult joke here). So, I call out again for you opponents of the war to get firmly on record. No misty generalities. Does Saddam have WMD, or does he not (assuming he’s not already reached room temperature)? Get on the record. Lay it all on the line. Will the Iraqi people be glad the Coalition took the Hussein Regime out, or will they be generally angry at our aggression? The question about UN-banned missiles is already closed, so you can’t deny that one any longer, but there’s plenty of speculation left to be had. So roll the dice and take a stand. Provide us the fruits of your wisdom so that we can, in a few weeks (and in a few years), take a roll call and see who ended up being correct.

Come on, I double dog dare you (in the US, that’s a very serious challenge indeed). You all know where I stand. So provide specific, detailed predictions. Generalities and accusations of fascism will be seen as the paltry digressions they really are.

If I’m wrong, I promise to sit ‘round the campfire with you and sing Kum By Ya. Might even offer up a prayer to Mother Earth.

No caustic insults here, just a challenge to get specific, and to get on the record. After all, I’m willing to suffer the slings and arrows of laughter and contempt if I end up being shown to be a bellicose fool. There’ll be no place I could hide should I be proved to be demonstrably wrong, right?

Ken

[kenrug]

Trenton, I just realized I had forgotten your gracious post. I’m off to work right now, but I’ll respond later today (my time).

Ken

[footsniffa]

mkay

-saddam has wmd's (i'm kinda sick of this term by now)- yes
-wiLL the iraqis be gratefuL?- the majority, yes. the shiites, yes. the sunnai (speLLing?), no.
-is this a war for oiL?-no
-is this a war to Liberate the iraquis?-no
-is this a war for our protection?-yes
-is this a war to send shivers down the spines (i know, some wiLL argue they don't have spines) of certain heads of states?-absosmurfLy
-wiLL this war cause more terrorism, or Less?- i beLieve Less. the ongoing "war on terror" is beginning to scare the shit out of many countries (syria, jordan, iran)... they wiLL either begin to crack down or face a simiLar fate of iraq and afghanistan. additionaLLy, this war wiLL remove weapons, and another safe haven for anti-american sentiment.


Let's see here if i'm Leavin anything out. i feeL this war is aLso sending a message to north korea. i'm sure "aL davis" is sitting in pyongyang with his daffy duck memorabiLia, watching cnn. if he stiLL thinks he can take on the us and win, then he is compLeteLy insane (he is crazy, but i hope not that crazy).


i guess i'm having recoLLections of ronaLd reagan. i remember "whacky khadaffi" tweakin our noses (hey jimmy cahtah didn't do anything) and good oL uncLe ronnie dropped a "smaht bomb" down his chimney. most countries didn't fuck with us after that. who knows what that crazy, seniLe, oLd bastard is gonna do next. now the worLd wiLL cower and wonder what that born-again zeaLot is gonna do next.

[jump]

talking about ressources to the issue war/peace I often look into the homepage of the Swedish SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) - they often have more angles to international problems.

SIPRI (http://www.sipri.se/)

Best from jump

[kenrug]

Footsniffa,

Late for work here so just time for a short response. I agree with all you said with one caveat: I would say that part of this operation was aimed at liberating the Iraqi people. Not for mainly humanitarian reasons (otherwise we’d be doing the same thing in numerous places – I’m an optimist, but no burry-eyed utopian), but because we believe that a sophisticated, liberated and democratic Iraqi government not only makes for a less-threatening middle east, but also, as you said, sends a “message” to the other regional governments. I believe (hope) that the Iraqi people are probably the most likely in the region to successfully achieve some kind of representative government (being more secular than most of their neighbors).

Thanks, also, for responding to my request. The relative silence of late (while I watch Coalition tanks roll through central Baghdad, being met with Iraqis holding “go home human shields” signs) reminds me of the phrase (approximately) “Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan.”

Have a good day,

Ken

[footsniffa]

hey ken, thanx for your response to my response to your response to my..

i beLieve the "Liberation" is just a byproduct, aLbeit a great byproduct. you hit the naiL on the head, when you spoke of crafting a democratic govt. in the middLe east. i hope it wiLL bring stabiLity to the region, but what do i know? there's aLways stiLL the potentiaL for iran and turkey to make a power grab. there's the potentiaL for a civiL war between the tribes of iraq (aLa afghanistan). i try to see through the shit on both sides of this issue. it's rather annoying to hear the shots ringing out: "you're for the kiLLing of innocent civiLians" (pro-war) and "you're against the Liberation of an oppressed peopLe" (anti-war).. i can't see everything in bLack & white; us or them; etc..

i am not a bush supporter, but i have to admit, that i have admired his steeLy resoLve in the matter. i've actuaLLy considered not voting for my homeboy john "Liveshot" kerry, and possbLy casting a baLLot for dub' (not that it wiLL make a difference here; masshoLes hate repubLicans) in 2004.

[smotherman]

France are ingrates all they do is complain because we`re liberating Iraqi people, They don`t give a shit about that.All they care about is themselves, their investment,We need to invade france next.

Bunch of ingrate pussy fuckers

[footsniffa]

Originally posted by smotherman
France are ingrates all they do is complain because we`re liberating Iraqi people, They don`t give a shit about that.All they care about is themselves, their investment,We need to invade france next.

Bunch of ingrate pussy fuckers


oooh i can see it now... bush shouLd shave his head, grow a goatee, and scream, "who's next!!"

[MOBY]

Hey smotherman, it's better than you watch your books as you forgot something.
Or watch something different than fox news every days.

[jump]

@smotherman

Why France ? go much bigger and invade China!

I´m sure that China is a greater threat to the USA then the Frenchmen - be sure to send at least 7-8 million soldiers for this. Denmark will proberbly support this war against China with two rowbotes and a bag with stones to through at them - but only if we get garanties from USA that Denmark can get some of the consessions to build up China after the war - and garanties by the China that we get the consessions to build up the USA in case USA end up as a Chinese provins :D

jump

[baloooza]

Originally posted by barracuda426
Here's a valid question: Why is it the majority of the people who don't support war can't spell and have no sense of grammar?


Strange a country as terrible as the US has an extreme immigration problem and it's not from people LEAVING.

Bless you barracuda,
i love how you rant on about how its the anti-war people are stupid and uneducated, and then you imply that immigration could mean leaving or coming to the U.S.

However my simple minded friend, in the case of the U.S. immigration is when a person leaves their home country to come to the U.S. Emigration on the other hand is when someone leaves the U.S. to live in a different country. Next time sweety, when you want to rant on about other peoples levels of education make sure youre up to the level.



Now I really would love this to be a war of liberation, it would be great to see the United States using its might to the benefit of peoples worldwide. However the people the U.S. goes to liberate are having thousands killed in the process, nonetheless, the benefit of the group as a whole is more important. However doesnt that contradict with the value placed on the importance of the individual in the U.S?

But if liberation is the case, then why choose some places and not others? Perhaps its time to liberate the peoples of China, Palestine, North Korea, A lot of african countries, some countries surrounding afganistan, several south american countries, and some others?

The US cannot take on the role of World Policeman, it is not a role cut out for any one nation, but a union of all nations.

[kenrug]

Let’s see if I’m getting this right: The US invades a country dominated by a madman, gets greeted with glee by its citizenry, will leave the place better than it found it… and because the US won’t do that everywhere then the US has done a bad thing?

Huh?

I think that our anti-liberation friends would be more useful gathering up those dozens of
children (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=1514&e=4&u=/afp/20030408/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_war_marines_prison_030408163048) Saddam jailed, and placing them back in jail so that they could, yet again, experience the “better world” this would be if the US had not taken action.

Now, all bullshit aside, and discarding motivations, evaluating only results, let’s see a show of hands of those who wish this day had never come.

[mediman900]

GOD BLESS BUSH
GOD BLESS AMERICA


GOD BLESS CANADA

GOD BLESS BUSH
GOD BLESS AMERICA


GOD BLESS CANADA

GOD BLESS BUSH
GOD BLESS AMERICA


GOD BLESS CANADA

GOD BLESS BUSH
GOD BLESS AMERICA


GOD BLESS CANADA

GOD BLESS BUSH
GOD BLESS AMERICA


GOD BLESS CANADA


kiss my ass if you think bush is a bad leader.


GOD BLESS BUSH
GOD BLESS AMERICA


GOD BLESS CANADA

[John]

Mediman is the coolest Canadian I know... :D

[barracuda426]

@Balooza

You're being anal. The LEAVING part was for emphasis and emphasis only(notice the all caps, which usually means emphasis or yelling in case you didn't know). It's people like you that make lawyers write 500 page documents to clarify a simple statement because you require detailed definition of everything. Once again I refer back to my previous statement(s) of common sense. (i.e. quit being anal and exercise some) I guess you also missed the part about me saying "And I'm not just talking about book intelligence either." Once again I'll repeat for your sake that I'm referring to common sense. I can't recall calling one person on here stupid in reference to their reasonable(<-- check this word before citing incidents) comments.

www.webster.com

Stupid:

1 a : slow of mind : OBTUSE b : given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting in an unintelligent or careless manner c : lacking intelligence or reason : BRUTISH

I do however recall saying people were ignorant.

Again from www.webster.com(just for your sake I'll keep repeating everything)

Ignorant

1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence <ignorant errors>
2 : UNAWARE, UNINFORMED

Simply put, stupidity signifies lack of brain power whereas ignorance signifies lack of knowledge.

Ken stated part of the point I was trying to make: "...but I get the feeling that the poor grammar (etc.) is sometimes part of the message. Sometimes I think it’s used to convey a feeling of casualness and detachment." I realize English is not the primary language of certain people that post on here, and that in turn leads to improper grammar/spelling. However for the most part you can tell if someone actually takes the time to try to use proper grammar and to check their spelling. Which also shows that they post either what they feel(immediate response requiring little thinking and/or research) or have taken the time to research, check for grammatical and spelling errors, and back up their posts with credible sources.

The rest of the points of your post have already been answered by Kenrug(numerous times),Mediman, Ritchie, myself, and a plethora of others in previous posts. I suggest you actually go and do your "research" before posting again. Also please proofread: you(')re has an apostrophe, "i" in the beginning of the sentance(and especially if it's referring to yourself) should be capitalized, first sentence of the second paragraph is one huge run-on sentence etc... thanks for proving me right!

Now, I have wasted no telling how many bits in cyberspace replying to your pathetic attempt to discredit me by reading too deep in a simple(at least I thought it was) statement. I deal with people like you on a day to day basis who try to distract from my original question(s)(i.e. "Why is it the majority of the people who don't support war can't spell and have no sense of grammar?") by trying to discover flaws in my communications because they are too ignorant to answer it themselves. You "Sweety" now fall in to that catagory yourself. Congratulations!


'Cuda

[barracuda426]

Originally posted by hobgoblin_31
hey, barracuda, since you referred to my post...

1. you watch CNN so you know a little. Go check the school group killed in Yugoslavia by aircraft firing (FIRING, not-bombing you asshole which means clear eye-contact) and tell the children parents that they were "accidents". But as Ken said you cannot realise anything unless it really happens to you or your family (yes, that unfair but still realistic comment about someones sister).
2. If you are still in doubt I can extend in time and space (1945, Japan).
3. Don't talk about common sense. You know as much about it as your president does.
4. The only accident I see is your physical existence. But nature is really unpredictable...
5. Go fuck yourself and your useless knowledge.

1. Actually I watch FOX AND CNN, read publications on the internet and newspaper, and converse on a semi-daily basis with people who have pets with more intelligence than you. The checkpoint issue you brought up was a common sense issue, and obviously you weren't willing to test my theory because you're still posting here. The casualities of war are a horrible tragedy, and I do feel sorry for those families who have lost loved ones due to this war(on both sides). As in all things, shit happens. It's happened to me, people I know, and people I don't know. But if you really think a pilot cruising at 600 mph can identify enemies from friendly Iraqi's(especially with the RG dressing as civilians) let alone make eye contact with people on the ground, I'll lower your intelligence rating to that of a single-celled organism. I'm sure in your infinite wisdom you know we have planes that can fire(yes bullets not bombs or rockets/missles) from 10,000+ feet in the air(they don't have to "see the whites of their eyes before firing").

2. Holy shit you can extend in time and space??? Albert Einstein is probably rolling over in his grave as I type.

3. See rebuttal point #1

4. You can tell I have a physical existence through the internet? How do you know I'm not a program? Guess it has something to do with your point #2.

5. Nevermind me lowering your intellingence rating to that of a single-celled organism, you did a pretty good job of that yourself!

'Cuda

BTW you and Balooza ever thought about meeting? You'd make a great couple. I'm assuming since she called me "sweety" that it is a she.

[barracuda426]

Originally posted by kenrug
‘Cuda, are you really saying that the SecDef quote is legit? I thought it was a parody. Can you provide a second source? Either way I thought it was damn funny, but I’d like a second source for validation purposes, if you would.

‘night all!

Ken

Sorry Ken, *I*(as in my opinion *I*(I now have to explain everything due to certain members of this forum. My explanations in no way imply you don't know what I mean.)) felt it was true. It's satire at its greatest. Although it does sound like something DR would say. Funny as hell though!

'Cuda

[trenton talbot]

Well yabba dabba doo! the war is over seemingly with a minimum of casualties on the invading side; although its somewhat appalling that deaths from friendly fire are dismissed so cavalierly.
With all the high tech thingamajigs they like to dazzle us with on Corporate News Now, you might think the penchance for shooting at our own side would be a cause for concern.

Y'know, if I'm walking down the street an' there's a buncha big guys coming towards me, all steely resolve and carrying weapons I've never even seen before, I might do a little soft shoe if they were aiming them my way. It's a little premature to judge the Iraqi people's view of the invasion from those who are willing to mug for CNN's cameras. Children will usually smile when candy bar