Is This Real? (WARNING VERY SAD AND GRAPHIC!!)

[MrMaelstrom]

Nation-building? You mean like South America in the 60's, 70's and 80's?

God know what it must have been like before Pinochet, the contras and Noriega we given a little helping hand, or Indonesias Sukarno, Egypt's Mubarak, Iraq's Saddam Hussein...oops, wait. That never happened....

[edible_eye]

aw, binkie - i had a feeling you'd jump in here soon enough.

and i'll respond also, albeit to a small portion of junk bond's post. i'll wait 'til the cannons begin firing once he has more time to post his response before i unload myself.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

Edible, i'll never shy away from a good debate, and I'll certainly reply to all of your points at a later time when I'm less busy (I had the day off work yesterday and need to do some catching up). I may even open a new topic in politics about it.

excellent.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

I did assume from a few of your comments that you were a Bush supporter through and through.

i supported bush over kerry and would do so again, but no - i'm not a pro-bush guy, per se. my political leanings move toward the libertarian party. i do, however give president bush the respect he deserves as the president of our country - the same respect i would give any president.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

I'm pretty much a raging Cindy Sheehan loving, Nation reading, Air America listening proponent of the "Bring them home now" philosophy.

we will most definitely disagree on many, if not all points then - which, of course, is fine.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

When I said "You break it, you buy it," it was really in response to the principal of your contention that we owe Iraq nothing because, to your mind the country was broken before then. You say to hell with Iraq and Iraqis. We did our job. Let them figure it out. I'm sorry, but I view that as an arrogant point of view.

you did a fairly decent job of capturing my point of view here. i don't know what happened after this but you're about to go off on a tangential rant in the next paragraph and apply it to me.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

Either you're saying we have the right to roam the globe removing any leader we don't like because we are rich and powerful as a nation and the people of the countries we invade be damned, or you're saying that we should be able to remove leaders we don't like, and the people should be grateful that we came in and saved them from their horrible dictator, and now that we've done our job in all of its righteousness that they should just become good little capitalists and figure it out for themselves. If either of these is correct, then I'm sorry. Good luck. I couldn't disagree with you more.

actually, i never said any of this. what i said was - we declared war because of the global belief that iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that america believed we were in danger because of it. that was our reason to invade iraq. i also said that when the weapons were declared nonexistant, we should have packed up and left. that's it. the fact that saddam and his boys were removed was a bonus for iraq, like finding two prizes inside the cracker jack box.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

They may have had a cruel dictator, but they had utilities, running water and security. To say the people of Iraq are better off, well, we'd have to ask an iraqi about that one. But when we are the ones who knocked out their infrastructure to "free" them, I dare say we have a responsibility to help them rebuild, and we don't need troops to do it.

i disagree that we have a responsibility to rebuild. when we put forth warning after warning that our presence in iraq was imminent if saddam didn't cooperate, it was at each point understood that damage to his country would be inevitable. it was his responsibility as a leader, a president, a dictator to mind his country. he didn't. he and parts of his country were destroyed. the onus was on him, and by default his country to clean up whatever mess he invited into his land.

america has a duty to our sense of morality, though and unfortunately that boils down to our feeling as though we should rebuild, although we have no obligation to do so. and again - we didn't knock out their infrastructure to "free" them, we did it to locate and destroy weapons of mass destruction. the goals changed mid-stream and that's where we went wrong.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

If Bush would do what he said he was going to do in the lead up to the war...

he did. he went in, searched for and ultimately declared their land free of weapons of mass destruction.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

...and let the oil benefit the people in the form of money to fund reconstruction, then we'd have an entirely different situation.

this was not something george bush had the power to promise. the oil was not a piece of this war. we had no jurisdiction over it then and have none over it now - other than to make sure it stays safe from insurgent attacks. it would be up to the iraqis to use the oil for this purpose - something they would have to do if they weren't being treated like children and now had to take their own responsibility for their own country.

[quote-junk bond trader]So there is no inconsistency in my position. I say bring the troops home now, but I also felt the need to respond to a view I thought was at best nihilistic and at worst arrogant. I won't judge, but I'd ask you to rethink that.[/quote]

unfortunately, the inconsistency just reared up again. bring the troops home now... we have a responsibility to rebuild. can't have it both ways.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

You said that Fallen Angel appears to be a Dubya hater. It gave me the impression that on some level, you are a Dubya defender.

anyone who takes f-911 to heart has a predisposition to hating / despising george bush. that movie makes them feel justified in their disgust. it's not an accurate "documentary". it's hugely biased to fuel the fires of those who already harbor negative feelings. 'nuff said.

Originally Posted by junk bond trader

Far as PNAC being a leftist conspiracy theory, it's right there out in the open on their website for all to read for those who will. The neo-conservative architects of the PNAC foreign policy are in power right now. I'm not going to go down the slippery slope of conspiracy theories. I'm sure you've heard them all. I believe what I believe with regard to them and that's all I'll say. PNAC is not a conspiracy theory, which is what, in my view, makes all the more unsettling. I'm not talking about fitting certain damning sentences into conspiracy theories. I'm talking about the whole nutty thing. It is a vision of American foreign policy that basically spells out what the Bush administration is actually doing in Iraq. The reason they will not leave is that one of the key components of their vision is having permanent military bases in the M. E. It calls for the spreading of American values by nation building by means of military might if necessary or, where possible, through diplomacy. But the vision starts with Iraq. This much is not conspiracy. They did exactly what they said they would do. It remains to be seen what this misadventure will lead to. I see it as dangerous and against what America is supposed to stand for.

a fanatic is a fanatic is a fanatic. they're a bunch of fanatics. they have no more power than gay rights groups, the naacp, the working mothers union, or nambla. special interests always have a big voice.

anyway, i await your more thought out response. hope your lunch was decent.

[MrMaelstrom]

My apologies for letting my feelings interfere with my reasoning. My posts can be perceived as offending and I apologize for that.

It was a very bad day. Again, sorry.



.

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

I was instructed to change the title of this thread..

*Thread Title Edited by Moderator*

[sartain]

first off, disfunction: respect. I doff my hat, or would if I was wearing one...<goes to find hat. puts it on. doffs it>. nation states are entirely fictional (drawing a line on a map and whacking a flag in the ground does not a coherent entity make. trust me. the uk tried it and now look where we are, devolved to buggery. oh that's an idiom by the way, I'm not talking literal sodomy).

and also, woah. hated the thread title, by the way. am perverse so looked on it anyway. Quick question - where did the french=cowardly thing actually come from? please tell me it's not the second world war. cos if you're calling all the countries that fell under the nazi yoke you're gonna be here a while (Czechoslovakia, poland, allsace, italy was in cahoots, etcetc and that's just europe). It's not that cowardly to kill your king and form a terror-crazed republic. that takes some serious attitude. and just look at napoleon.

It makes me really uncomfortable when people are really proud of being from somewhere. Be proud of your country's acheivements, sure, so I'm proud that the UK has the NHS. I know it's not perfect but the concept is FANTASTIC. free health care for all? yay! but I'm not proud of colonialism, our football hooligans, our tabloid newspapers or the fact that we have been known to deep fry mars bars. Perspective and not just sticking up for something cos "gee we did it it must be right" is important.

and generalisations about people who live in a particular area are a load of crap. it just leads to the mentality of "you have an indie haircut, i'll beet you up" on a massive scale.

and who needs that. besides, i like my hair.



there. all sorted?

hardly. but

[AlKilyu]

Wow. I make a blanketed statement, in a joking manner, an old joke at that, on a site where anti-American views are not only accepted, they are encouraged...all that and one joke about cheese eating surrender monkeys and all of this. Mael even got a pot shot in how wonderful!

I am dead-serious when I say that sense of humor or not, if a lot of you people know the term "double-standard" you either choose to ignore it or believe it does not apply to you.

I am glad the topic header got changed, from here on out if people cry it won't be any sweat off my balls.

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

My apologies for letting my feelings interfere with my reasoning. My posts can be perceived as offending and I apologize for that.

It was a very bad day. Again, sorry.



.

And don't apologize for speaking your feelings, everyone else is free to do the same, why shouldn't you be afforded the same courtesy..

It's really no big deal..

Now Hit This and Hush...

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

GAR @ Simulposts !!

[sartain]

god i'm too slow at typing - edible eye, why does your president deserve respect for being a president? why? because he's rich enough to run an election campaign against a weak candidate? where's the sense?

edible eye: "america has a duty to our sense of morality,"

eh?? what?? what bloody sense of morality? what the hell is morality? Bloody selective and should be barred from politics. everyone makes their own and it's way subjective. ETHICS if you will (calm and considered and written on and discussed by philosophers and not preachers, see UN human rights etc) but morality is imposing your own belief structure on someone else. definitely a no go. personal, fine, international policy...yikes.

[AlKilyu]

There IS a Politics Thread that this can gladly be moved to. That way, when the cerimonial kicking of Uncle Sam's balls continues, it will be under the guise of politics, and not bashing, as was everyone's original problem with the title of this thread.

"Bashing ze French? Zis is wrong! Shame on you! Now let me tell you everything wrong with you damn Americans..."

[sartain]

i'm sorry- at what point have i bashed americans? I have disagreed with the views of 2 of you - have you taken it upon yourselves to represent everyone else on your continent?

[MrMaelstrom]

Of course I got contradictions. I apologized, after all. How contradictory is that?

Double-standards? I always said I hate the US government, and I hope I won't "always will".

And time and time again I repeated I didn't confuse a country's government with the people who inhabit it, although I do consider it somewhat responsible insofar as the inhabitants feel represented by the actions of the people they vote for (I leave this bit up to you to figure out), and even then, you cannot generalize.

Once in a while, someone takes a pot shot at Bush (the man, the statesman, the village idiot turned puppet). But the pot shots at France and french showed up in a quite a few places other than the My/Your Country Sucks thread. These things are not the same by a long shot. Chirac? Fuck him and Bush. France and the US? I try to show a little respect.



Fuck it.

[AlKilyu]

...and the potshots will continue in many other places besides gnet. Sucks I'm sure, but they are in good company with all the other jokes made about and by the U.S.

Cliche? Well yeah, but holy shit this thread alone has drawn out a shitload of those ASSIDE from the 'France Sucks' jokes. I make an anti-France cliched joke, it brings out all the other anti-U.S. cliched real opnions who have typed enough of their opinion on the subject to where their fingers should be bloody nubs at this point.

Mael, the potshot you made wasn't at Bush, who deflects those off of his magnificant chest like peas thrown at Superman, you compared us (edible myself and the Great Binkie) to Sternn.

Breathe, the lot of you, relax.
Plus, I just called them 'cheese eating surrender monkeys', you wanna hate someone, here I am. Actually I'll be over there, but none the less...

[edible_eye]

Originally Posted by Junk Bond Trader

btw - forgive some minor grammar and spelling errors in my above post. I typed it fast during my lunch hour. It's no excuse though, I guess. Just know that bad grammar, especially when it's my own, upsets me more than it upsets you.

oh, i'm no grammar nazi. it irks me when someone writes in net-speak or doesn't pay attention to the way they write and i have to work at reading their words, but other than that - doesn't bother me any.

[edible_eye]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

My apologies for letting my feelings interfere with my reasoning. My posts can be perceived as offending and I apologize for that.

It was a very bad day. Again, sorry.

it seems i missed something...

[AlKilyu]

MY apologies for this fucking thread! I was outraged when I wrote it, over animal abuse. Had it been in New York, "Those Fucking New Yorkers", etc. It's the animals I worry about, people can handle themselves.

SO, with that being said, and this comes from the hothead of the board, everyone relax. Smoke Mael's weed or if you are underage have a glass of milk but relax.

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

I know I need some:




Beats the Salt Lick in my Dining Room all to Hell..

[MrMaelstrom]

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

...and the potshots will continue in many other places besides gnet. ...

But this is the place I frequent. I don't care to pre-empt other sites (subtle). I care for this one.

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

...Cliche? Well yeah, but holy shit this thread alone has drawn out a shitload of those ASSIDE from the 'France Sucks' jokes. I make an anti-France cliched joke, it brings out all the other anti-U.S. cliched real opnions who have typed enough of their opinion on the subject to where their fingers should be bloody nubs at this point....

And as long as they're opinions that aren't based on utter generalizations or contain a glimpse of reason should be acceptable, no matter how opposing they may be to our thoughts. Maybe its their rants that are so long (I seldom read them) that I don't notice when they fuck up.

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

...Mael, the potshot you made wasn't at Bush, who deflects those off of his magnificant chest like peas thrown at Superman, you compared us (edible myself and the Great Binkie) to Sternn. ...

I know... Sad, isn't it?

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

...Breathe, the lot of you, relax.
Plus, I just called them 'cheese eating surrender monkeys', you wanna hate someone, here I am. Actually I'll be over there, but none the less...

Not hating you proved to be very difficult at first and an exercise which I believe made me a better person later, as time went by and I made my best to comprehend your point of view and why you might perceive some things the way you do, I grew to like you as a person and not as a great deliverer of witty comebacks no matter how wrong I thought you to be.

But not always, and your last phrase is a perfect example. You're not that thick, I know that, so why? Is it irony and I just don't get it? Are you sort of saying "you wanna step outside, I'm game"?


I'll just leave for a while. I'm goth. You get in my way, I'll walk around you. Later.


Thanks for the advice, I'll go cool my head.

[MrMaelstrom]

I type too slow. Sorry Al, Binks E_E and Wolf for offending you.

[edible_eye]

Originally Posted by sartain

god i'm too slow at typing - edible eye, why does your president deserve respect for being a president? why? because he's rich enough to run an election campaign against a weak candidate? where's the sense?

because he's the president. that's why. i'm not talking about reverence, i'm talking respect. respect takes many forms - respect for your parents, respect for a loaded gun, respect for the dead, respect for another's rights, respect for an elder, respect for your boss, etc. each of these generates a different degree of respect, but respect it is nonetheless.

i respect the president because he is the leader of my country. i do not revere him. perspective, sartain.

Originally Posted by sartain

edible eye: "america has a duty to our sense of morality,"
eh?? what?? what bloody sense of morality? what the hell is morality?
Bloody selective and should be barred from politics. everyone makes their own and it's way subjective.

america always wants to help when there's a "need". that should be barred from our political structure also but it won't be.

Originally Posted by sartain

ETHICS if you will (calm and considered and written on and discussed by philosophers and not preachers, see UN human rights etc)...

BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! un human rights stuff like this - http://abcnews.go.com/2020/UnitedNat...=489306&page=1 ?

[edible_eye]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

I type too slow. Sorry Al, Binks E_E and Wolf for offending you.

you didn't offend me. i don't even know what happened.

[Disfunction]

Need booze. One month and one week. Booze is calling. Ohhhh it is calling me.

No milk.

[MrMaelstrom]

Disgusting, but did you know that if its the presence of NATO forces in the balkan region that ignited the ongoing cycle of women being sold as slaves for brothels from Albania through Moldavia, Hungary, Serbia, Croatia, Latvia, Estonia, Check Republic, etc?

For soldiers who are there to protect locals and refugees. UN and NATO.

Both of these organizations include my country (Just for the record).

But I believe one of them can still be of some use after a good overall. And it ain't NATO.

Originally Posted by Disfunction

Need booze. One month and one week. Booze is calling. Ohhhh it is calling me.

Same here. Mind pouring me a glass?

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

It was a very bad day. Again, sorry.



.[/quote]

Check your E-Mael, Mael..

I sent ya something that might cheer you up..

Err or depress you further...

Either way, it's a win-win situation!!

Wait..

Err..

Is this thing on?