lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: The War in Iraq
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 07-18-2004, 06:50 PM   #41
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Your lack of knowledge is extyremely disturbing. Ypou live in Canada, and Canada's government actually has forbiddon Fox news from being shown in Canada yet allows liberal CNN to be shown. You talk about government propoganda!

Canada has become almost as socialist as France and it is really unfortinate. You talk about the Canadian healthcare system yet your citizens scurry across the border whenever they need any major medical treatment. You know why? Because Canadian, along with other socialist country's, healthcare systems create aweful health treatment methods along with increadiably long waiting lines!

And you are increadiably wrong about the US healthcare system. Every citizen in the US has access to healthcare, the best in the world actually. You know why everyone does? Because of the good heartedness of others. That's right, people in the US actually help others. When a man in my city needed a $100,000 heart transplant he was able to get the money because of the good heart of others. We had a very nice fundraiser which got so much money that operations for others were paid for.

And most companies give there employees healthcare benefits anyway. Even assemply line workers get healthcare and it's a heck of alot bettyer than Canada's.

Now, time for a little economic lesson. The problem with Socialism is simply that people are not modivated to work. And that is why healthcare in Canada stinks so bad. Doctors don't have the incentive (Money) to do their work to the best of their ability and therefor do a really crappy job. Drug companies don't create new, innovative drugs simply because the government in Canada does everything possible to make the Drug Companies miserable and basically takes away any reward for the Drug companies work. Just think, would you invest all that time and money into making something if you get nothing for it? Most people won't. And that is why the Canadian Healthcare system SUCKS.

My favorite part about the Canadian system is that the government actually decides when you are sick and when they deem you "sick enough" for medical treatment you have to wait an eternity for treatment. So, by the time you get into the operating room your pretty much doomed.

Quote:
And you know what...if the US had just kept up shipping goods to britain and the USSR... (which they eventually did after much begging and pleading from S.W churchill and stalin. Hell, it took them years to convince the US to open a 2nd front against hitler, but hey.....long topic..)...and decided to NEVER actually send troops..Hitler still would have lost.
Not true at all. You must be reading the Candian version of World War II. You state that the US never sent troops to Africa until it was practically over is highly incorrect. US casualties in Africa were far over 50,000, and that just doesn't happen when all the fighting there is over. And then you forget to achknowledge the US's main part in the invasion of Italy.

But besides that there is one key thing you are wrong about. You say that without US troops to allies still could have won the way they did. That is highly incorrect. Without US troops Britain was unable to do squat other than chill in their battleships, the army just wasn't large enough. This would of allowed Hitl;er to dedicate more troops on the eastern front. And even if the Russians were able to advance at the rate they did Germany still would have come out on top because they would of had time to fully inplement their rocket systems along with their fighter jets. This would of guaranteed air superiority and completely turned the tide of the war on all fronts. It was US led invasions of Italy and France which didn't give Hitler the time he needed to harness this technology. He only needed 2 months more after the war ended before these new weapons could be implemented.

Quote:
I would be willing to tough out the collapse of the US and its ramifications world wide then to stomache this tripe they do to the world over and over. If sanity is not brought to the leadership of the US I fear for the world and what might happen.
The US is insane now? Since when is bettering an area of the world being insane? Since when is defending your country being insane? Just because Canada has never been attacked doesn't mean they're safe either. The fact that they are cooperative with terrorists though does make them less vulnerable.

Quote:
I assume you mean...like..the welfare system. You wanna know what else is Phenominal? The amount of people on it. Now thats BLOODY phenominal.
The US does not care about its population.....hell ..that would be socialist. HELL..that would make sense.
And Hell I wasn't talking about welfare. THe welfare system in the US needs serious reform and many of the socialist welfare programs we have are, well, socialist. And, Hell, Socialism would be terrible for the US just like it has been for Sweden, France, Germany and Canada. While some socialist programs are fine, full blown socialism is horrible.


Quote:
To the first part of that quote...HA! HAHA! HAHAHA! Ever heard of a man named Richard Nixon? And that's only one of the FAMOUS incidents of government corruption. If you truly believe that ANY government of ANY nation isn't corrupt, you are more naive than even I gave you credit for.
And you obviously know about how quickly Richard Nixon was brought to justice. The US government is not corrupt compared to other governments. In a truly corrupt government like France, leaders liek Chirac are allowed to get away with making illegal buisiness deals with Iraq even when he is completely violating international law.

Quote:
TRIED, so they obviously DIDNT get a paycut. That doesn't change the fact that Bush WANTED them to get paid less than what they do for fighting in the war.
Find me a reliable quote that Bush ever siad "I want the military to have a paycut". ANy quote, as long as it is credible, which means any news producer other than Al Jazeer.

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-18-2004, 08:58 PM   #42
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally posted by boranchistanger
And you obviously know about how quickly Richard Nixon was brought to justice. The US government is not corrupt compared to other governments. In a truly corrupt government like France, leaders liek Chirac are allowed to get away with making illegal buisiness deals with Iraq even when he is completely violating international law.
Nixon was brought down quickly because his corruption was brought to public eye. He got CAUGHT by people who weren't in his inner circle. You dont' think most presidents engage in unlawful and corrupt activities? Well, you get my mark for most naive person on these boards, because that's just foolish.

I'll get you a link on the pay cuts sometime, I'm not in the mood to go news searching.

Edit - I suppose perhaps a statement from a US Senator would sway you?



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 01:45 AM   #43
VanLingo
Banned
 
VanLingo's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coronet
Posts: 411
Quote:
Quoted from the link that ET Warrior posted
The Pentagon wants to cut combat pay for soldiers by $225 a month by eliminating pay raises that Congress approved earlier this year.
The first thing liberals want to do when a Republican is voted into office is make him accountable for every branch of the government.
Also note that this is not so much a pay cut as it is a Clinton fix. The fact that Clinton's demilitarization of American was soon after replaced by huge pay raises disproves the move as a "budget cut".

What I think is really funny is the Canadian whining. I wanted to make some quip about "don't like it, vote it", but then I remembered -- you don't vote!
I guess you're whining is warranted. It's all you're allowed to do.
VanLingo is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 02:58 AM   #44
PanzerTekk
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 96
Health care blah blah....people helping others who need money blah balh.....you think that only happens in america? I am not saying our own system is flawd, but thk GOD the conservatives didn't get in power here. If they ahd we would have been down the privately owned hospital road...WHICH is bad bad bad.
And the reason you are in a line is because YOU are no more important then someone else who is just as sick as you are. People go across the border to get medical treatment from the US if they have the cash....the only reason.
(Cough cough affordable medicine that we are selling a truck load of to US companies and people because your prices are insane for simply medicine)
Its just another money making angle in the US. Thats it.

I'm not beating down on americans...i'm beating down on AMERICA.
And I never said that canada was free of propaganda.....I dont watch Tv(but when I do I see more mundane fluffy thigns then ...5 killed, 3 killed, war war war this ugy is bad..that guy is bad)..I find other sources if I want to know about a topic....I make it my responsiblity to NOT be fed propaganda till I smile and nod or turn apathetic.
I wont be conditioned.

Even though the..."If the US never went to europe with troops the allies would still have won" is largely a WHAT IF scenario I honestly believe that the soviets would have continued to decimate the germans.
The germans just didn't have the manpower anymore. the end.
When the german forces were in sight of the Kremlin spires(suburbs of moscow) the high command found out that there were WHOLE new divisions of Red Army soldiers being sent at them. They were baffled because they appeared out of the blue....
The manpower that Russia could harness was absolutey crazy.
After the entire stalingrad/pride/personal slight to Stalin it was over for the germans. It was only a matter of time. Americans or no americans.
They made a gamble. Take Moscow before winter. They failed. The war was doomed.
The events that took place on the eastern front decided the war. Everything else was just frosting on the cake.

June 22nd'41
Gernmany declares war on russia in a lightning war.
The USSR went 3 years essentially fighting the German war machine alone.
Apart from researching a nuke the germans had no chance. Even with new tank tech they had no chance....the USSR had finally bested them in what was considered the German advantage.
Your theory of the US diverting needed resources from the Russian front and thereby giving the victory to Russia(essentially) is flawed. All the best crap was already over there. The soldiers holding the fort in the west were 2nd to 3rd rate trooops for the most part. HELL...many of the troops defending the german bunkers on d day were in fact conscripted POWS from the east.
Maybe the fact that the Russians were already in germany long before the US forces came a knocking helps you see that the US was not the cause of Germanys defeat.( if there direct intervention was even needed at all)

O...US casualties in Africa. Ya they had casualties, but the majority of fighting was already done and Rommel was in retreat for the most part. And if the # is 50k men then thats a drop of water in a large pond.

But thats not what makes me mad. I'm just stating a more then likey scenario that would have happened.

Uncle Ben had some good advice bush and the US should listen to.
"With great power comes great responsibility."

Anyways...we totally hijacked this thread. heh.

Last edited by SkinWalker; 07-28-2004 at 10:02 AM.
PanzerTekk is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 11:02 AM   #45
Shadowman17
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13
boran, or for that matter, anyone out there, give me good examples of the liberal media (More than three, if you can).


Superior strategy will bring victory.
Shadowman17 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 02:23 PM   #46
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Alright, the World War II stuff shall be discussed somewhere else. Time to get back to iraq! Panzar, I would like to discuss WW2 with you sometime though, do you have AIM or MSN Messenger?

Quote:
Health care blah blah....people helping others who need money blah balh.....you think that only happens in america? I am not saying our own system is flawd, but thk GOD the conservatives didn't get in power here. If they ahd we would have been down the privately owned hospital road...WHICH is bad bad bad.
OK, let me get this straight. You want government to own everything? You're a stinking communist if that is the case! Let's not continue this debate in this thread, though I would like to discuss this with you in private.

Quote:
And the reason you are in a line is because YOU are no more important then someone else who is just as sick as you are. People go across the border to get medical treatment from the US if they have the cash....the only reason.
Ummm, the reason you wait in long lines is because of the Law That Government is Inneficient. That simple. I'll discuss this with you in private though.

Quote:
I'm not beating down on americans...i'm beating down on AMERICA.
I just cannot understand this massive anti-American hatred in the world, I just can't. He has yet to give me one negative thing that America has done.

Quote:
And I never said that canada was free of propaganda.....I dont watch Tv(but when I do I see more mundane fluffy thigns then ...5 killed, 3 killed, war war war this ugy is bad..that guy is bad)..I find other sources if I want to know about a topic....I make it my responsiblity to NOT be fed propaganda till I smile and nod or turn apathetic.
I share your same philosophy so I don't watch the liberal media, not even Fox News for that matter.

Quote:
Uncle Ben had some good advice bush and the US should listen to.
"With great power comes great responsibility."
Indeed, and would you please give me an example in which Bush has abused his responsability?

Quote:
Edit - I suppose perhaps a statement from a US Senator would sway you?
Most times, no. I don't trust senators, especially John Edwards.

Quote:
boran, or for that matter, anyone out there, give me good examples of the liberal media (More than three, if you can).
OK, where to start.

New York Times has had over 200 Editorials and news reports all about Abu Gharab in the past year. Only 5 news and editorial stories have even mentioned Saddam's mass graves.

When CNN reports a story they always lean towards a liberal side. For example, when discussing The Bush campaign today they had the Governor of New Mexico Richardson and some insignificant member of the Bush campaign. So, obviously the Governor of New Mexico won out on that. And notice too how CNN always reports the attacks in Iraq before anything else. And do you ever notice how MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS always, whenever there is opinion involved, have a LIBERAL person talking about the topic and NEVER a conservative guy?

Oh, and here is a Washington Post Front Page News story which talks about the Senate Intellegence Report. I love how they twist around the facts.

"In accusing the CIA and its top leaders of engaging in a "group think dynamic," the committee said analysts and senior policymakers never questioned their long-held assumption that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction."

There are more than three examples for you.

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 03:46 PM   #47
Ewok Homie
Rookie
 
Ewok Homie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 61
No offense.. but the war in iraq was one of the worst things america has done in a politicol stance. And boran if you still want to know one bad thing america has done think of what we did to the indians. Not to mention in uganda most of people fighting in the civil war that has been going on there are childern from 7 to 16. So dont you dare say iraq needed to be saved over that. And when you say all the soilders in iraq are supporting the war think again over 50 percent stated that we should not be there. In a war dont you think all the soilders should be agreeing that we should be fighting? And michal moore is no idiot just because he is finding things wrong with your beloved dumbut bush.
Ewok Homie is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 04:24 PM   #48
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
I didnt read the whole thing, but ewok homie, Michale Moore is a liar. Go to www.moorewatch.com if you dont believe me.
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 05:01 PM   #49
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Oh, so now we bring up the Native Americans. Now, that happened how long ago? Over 150 freaken years ago! And I find it quite remarkable too that there are more Native Americans today than there were in 1776. Very wierd isn't it?

Now, you mention Uganda. Like I said earlier, why should US forces die for something that will not benefit the country they are fighting for? WHy should Americans die for no reason just like they did isn Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia and others (All under Clinton by the way). The UN is responsable for preventing genocide and solving other people's problems. The US, like I said earlier, has 2 things in its foreign policy: US interests and improving the world around the US. Now, Iraq fits both of those requirements so it is a very legitimate war. Wars like World War I and Vietnam do not meet both requirements so they are therefor not legitimate wars for the US to get involved in.

Quote:
So dont you dare say iraq needed to be saved over that.
Once again we did not go into Iraq to "saave Iraq" though that is a side effect. We went in to simply establish a democracy in the Middle East which will be a crucial part in winning the war on terror. See the 5th post in this thread, I explain it all there.

Quote:
And when you say all the soilders in iraq are supporting the war think again over 50 percent stated that we should not be there. In a war dont you think all the soilders should be agreeing that we should be fighting?
Nope, I honestly don't give a crap what the soldiers think. I care about what's the right thing to do and Iraq WAS the right thing to do and 10 years from now you will look back and say "Thank God the government didn't listen to me." And, btw, troop morale is very high, according too numerous studies by the coalition provisional authority.

Quote:
And michal moore is no idiot just because he is finding things wrong with your beloved dumbut bush.
Alright, let's get one thing straight, Bush is not a "dumbet". He scored better on his SAT's than Kerry, graduated Yale with honors and has been extremely successful in everything he does. His speech makes hiom come off as dumb but in reality, he is extremely smart.

Now, Michael "Krispy Kreme" Moore is not an intellkegent human being. He is a Socialist, and he has admitted so. And no socialist person is very smart. Michael Moore uses lies to get his point accross, like this example in Fahrenheit 911.

Moore implies that the African American inner city community is suffering the most in Iraq. In fact, 70% of the casualites in Iraq have been to white-males.

Moore says that the Bush family has strong connections with the Bin Ladin family along with the Saudi Royal family. In fact that is a completely false claim, shown by Bush's repeated pressure and threats of sending troops into Saudi Arabia. Bush has also authorized a ton of money to be sent to Saudi rebel forces.

Finally, Michael Moore makes that old claim that Bush "cheated" his way into office. He says that if there was a recount Gore would have won. Unfortinately Michael Moore overlooks the fact that numerous studies have been executed by newspapers and news stations and all have found that under any recount Bush would have won Florida.

So this man is a liar and, well, a Socialist. And I hate guys who are liars.

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 05:20 PM   #50
Shadowman17
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13
Democracy has been in the Middle East for around 80 years in Turkey.


Superior strategy will bring victory.
Shadowman17 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-19-2004, 06:30 PM   #51
PanzerTekk
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 96
One thing bush has done in my eyes that is an abuse of his power....
Start the development of a new class of nuke. (his mini nuke....bunker buster)
NO nation has produced a new class of nuke since the cold war.....until now.
All that nuke disarmament for nothing...*sigh*

and with all the WW2 stuff...its very likely that the books etc that I've read and the information it contained have not seen your eyes. Most people only know/are taught the mainstream causes/effects/events that transpired during that time.
I could go into a giant post about how the allies were given the exact date and time of the invasion of poland and did nothing.....but ya. If you wanna chat some time on msn give me a shout.
dfect_@hotmail.com

But anyways....some people may read this and see a heated topic...but its not. I'm not fuming on this end...actually.....I'm more frustrated at my allergies right now hehe. god damn sniffles...

We need some form of alien invasion to bring this damn wortld together and get rid of all this racial tension/infighting....BRING ON THE EWOKS FROM THE STARS!!
^^ cold medicine talking.

p.s I want a storm trooper armour set.
PanzerTekk is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-20-2004, 01:31 AM   #52
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally posted by PanzerTekk
We need some form of alien invasion to bring this damn wortld together and get rid of all this racial tension/infighting
That's weird, I had this same discussion with my father last night. The problem with humans is that we need a sense of community, a sense of belonging. And the way we DO that, is by creating an 'us' and a 'them' We've seen it in separation of the sexes, racial segregation, homosexual discrimination.

If anyone here is from a small town community, you probably know that there is almost always a fierce rivalry between your town, and the next closest small town. It's us versus them, but if both of your towns are together in an event that involves people from other states, you will group together, because now them is people from out of state.

I think the only chance humans have of surviving as a species is if we can finally put our petty differences aside and unite as a whole. And I think the only way that can happen is if we find or are found by an alien race, and we have a new 'them' to bind us together.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-20-2004, 08:10 AM   #53
PanzerTekk
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 96
I agree. Just the knowledge that we aren't alone in the galaxy may be enough to do exsactly that, but hey....this is just speculation.

Hopefully we are going in the right direction with the euro. I wouldn't mind seeing us on the way to a world government in my lifetime.
PanzerTekk is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-20-2004, 09:57 AM   #54
B1GC
Rookie
 
B1GC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: US
Posts: 59
Yes I do wish we could all be united as one race, but it is against human nature. Even in an advanced culture such as Star Wars you will see seperations, such as the rich and poor. The Rich and Poor have always been seperated and probably always will. It is just a fact of life, a sad fact but one that exists.

The only solution was socialism, but as we all know it works better on paper then in reality. In my opinion the only way communism would have worked is if the whole world went to it at once. The problem is USSR could not keep up with capitalist prices and ultimatly failed.

- Just to comment a little on world history. History has seen many powerful nations. Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome, Mongolia, France, Britian, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Russia, India, China, Japan, US. During each nations most powerful times (the climax of their power) it seems they have been able to go to war with whomever they choose. War has been a factor of every powerful nation that ever was. For thousdands of years countries went to war jsut to expand their riches and land. Every nation in the world is responsible for doing this. Every country i mentioned did it. People for all those years fought and died for causes that were no their own. But this is the 21st century times have changed you say. Or have they? -

Regardless of whether the war in Iraq was right or wrong. The leaders wished to protect their interests, both personal and national.

Yes, I am for the war in Iraq. I think that the casues behind the war are good ones. Even if they are not I will put on my "ignorant happy american face" and say that if the war is not being fought for any d*mn good cause other than it is the American machine stretching its muscles and using its power. I mean countries did it for thousands of years so what the h*ll we can too. And I can say I dont care what any other country says about it I do what want and say it was for good causes.

Dont take this the wrong way, I do hope there were good reasons behind the war.
B1GC is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-21-2004, 05:26 AM   #55
PanzerTekk
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 96
Man....dont even call it a war. When you step on a few ants.....is that a war?
PanzerTekk is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 03:52 AM   #56
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,250
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally posted by B1GC
Regardless of whether the war in Iraq was right or wrong. The leaders wished to protect their interests, both personal and national.
fact is, leaders should protect our interest, and those of human race. but they don't, none of them does.

Quote:
Yes, I am for the war in Iraq. I think that the casues behind the war are good ones. Even if they are not I will put on my "ignorant happy american face" and say that if the war is not being fought for any d*mn good cause other than it is the American machine stretching its muscles and using its power. I mean countries did it for thousands of years so what the h*ll we can too.
err.. we used to burn witches. if you got my point. it's not our fault that the world is like our ancestors made it, but it'll be our fault if we don't change the things which are outdated. and war is a method we should not necessarily teach our children as a way to solve problems.

Quote:
Dont take this the wrong way, I do hope there were good reasons behind the war.
there are many american and iraqi people who lost members of their family, children lost their fathers and/or mothers, and parent lost their children. that is, i hope, any good reason against any war.


Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 11:56 AM   #57
Shadowman17
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13
Nobody is ever going to be able to stop terrorism. As long as human beings exist, then there will be those who have a complete disregard for the lives of other human beings. We can never banish hatred completely. So let us not blame any single person, Democrat or Republican, for not "stopping" terrorism.


Superior strategy will bring victory.
Shadowman17 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 02:02 PM   #58
VanLingo
Banned
 
VanLingo's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coronet
Posts: 411
But by the same token, you can't blame them for trying.

Whether or not we can stop it, the less there is, the better.
VanLingo is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 02:19 PM   #59
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
the best way to fight hatred is with kindness.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 02:34 PM   #60
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
no its not
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 08:50 PM   #61
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
sure it is, war only creates more hatred.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 08:54 PM   #62
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
but if you dont, then u get killed and eliminated.
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 09:07 PM   #63
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
if it happens it happens.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-23-2004, 09:12 PM   #64
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
? do u really beleive that is the way to go?
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 02:31 AM   #65
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,250
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
sure, why not? isnt it what 'god' tells you to do as well? being peaceful and kind?


Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 02:53 AM   #66
VanLingo
Banned
 
VanLingo's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coronet
Posts: 411
Absolutely not. Not in a situation like this.

Take Samuel 14 for example: God literally knocked down 20 trash-talking Phillistines, which Jonathan and his armor-bearer walked through and killed.

Or in Second Kings 2: Children of the city of Jericho mocked Elisha's bald head. And just for making fun of a priest, God caused two bears to come out of the woods and eat 42 little kids!

Killing for spite, hatred, or judegement is not what God ever intended. However, killing out of service to another -- be it God, your country, or in defense of another human -- is not only acceptable, but condoned.
VanLingo is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 05:26 AM   #67
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
didn't jesus teach turn the other cheek? Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's what I remember after you know... reading the bible.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 05:42 AM   #68
Lord Blackadder
Rookie
 
Lord Blackadder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mrs Miggin's pie shop (England)
Posts: 94
I've got a great idea, how about we leave all the undeveloped and uncivilized countries to their own devices and if any of them start showing aggression to anyone outside their own borders we wipe the whole of their country off the face of the planet? I mean let's face it, most of them have nothing to contribute to the world and are a drain on money and resources. Then we can end wars and concentrate on more important things like exploration and research in to new technology.


'They do say, Mrs M, that verbal insults hurt more than physical pain. They are of course wrong, as you will soon discover...when I stick this toasting fork in your head'
Lord Blackadder is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 06:48 AM   #69
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,250
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
is peace the message of your religion or is it war and hatred?

different opinions and views will never come together if violence is involved.

i can see a very reason a "hurt me and i hurt you" behaviour. but war just doesnt works like that.
war is killing more people than necessary. war is killing innocent people. war is killing our children. and i dont mean american or iraqi people. i dont speak about american or iraqi children. i mean HUMANS.
and war destroys our nature. war influences our climate. starting a war is plain just not the proper way to solve problems in the year 2004. of course starting a terrorist attack isn't much better either. but this is not a reason for killing many innocent people who wouldnt even support any terrorist attacks, just like a terrorist attack kills innocent people, who not necessarily are the terrorists main target.

the problem of terrorism is not solvable with war. you go in with bombs and whatnot. but have you ever thought about that there is no terrorist where your bombs are? the terrorist is somewhere else. he is thousands of miles away and blows up a train in the rush hour with hundreds of righteous people on their way to work. mamas and papas on their way to work. whole families. is it that you want to hear? "hey, sorry pal, but.. your mom was blown up this morning" or "sorry, your wife is dead.", will you love it to explain this **** to your kid? where mama is? and isnt it the same thing as if american bombs kill innocents? have you ever thought about that? have you ever REALLY thought about what should all this give to anyone of us? do you really feel safe where you are just because there are some soldiers somewhere on the other side of the planet?

also if you support a war outside of your country you must support a war inside of your country too.



Last edited by RayJones; 07-24-2004 at 07:07 AM.
Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 12:21 PM   #70
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
Our religion isnt about peace as much as it is do whats right. I mean, there will be eternal peace in Heaven, but on Earth, there isnt, so we have to do whats right. It is a tradegy when people when they didnt need to. They are called collateral damage. It's a terrible thing, very sad. But what you're sounding like is justto let the terrorists carry on with their way and to stop fighting them. Thats just sick. We may not be able to stop it completely we can greatly diminsih it.
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 04:08 PM   #71
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,250
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
i just have to disagree. and i dont say let the terrorists do their stuff. i basically say "dont do it like the terrorists and kill innocent people". and i give a rats ass what you may call it, although i am well aware of what it's called. it's killing innocent people.

and if it's that what your religion says then it is pure crap. it isnt worth anything because it doesnt gives a **** about human lifes. innocent lifes. lifes from here and now. not somewhere sometime in heaven or hell. right now here on earth. this is where we live. get that. and basically, what you sound like is, do what's right and kill innocent people? how's that supposed to be "right", not to talk about being morally arguable.



Last edited by RayJones; 07-24-2004 at 04:51 PM.
Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 07:44 PM   #72
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Time to jump back in.

Quote:
Regardless of whether the war in Iraq was right or wrong. The leaders wished to protect their interests, both personal and national.
Really? I guess that risking the chance of not being reelected is a personal interest for Bush? It was known that the War in Iraq would most likely hurt Bush more than it helped him and that has been the case. If Bush loses the election it will be because of Iraq and nothing else.

Quote:
I mean countries did it for thousands of years so what the h*ll we can too.
Because we're above all those other "great nations." We don't build empires, we don't enslave people under our rule. Unlike the empires that you mentioned the US helps its neghbors more than it hurts them. How much money did the British Empire give to Ireland to help stop the potatoe famine? None. How much does the US give to Africa a year to help fight AIDS there? Billions. In all fairness Canada give 250 million.

Hmm, I wonder how many Roman soldiers died trying to bring peace to Persia during one of its many civil wars? Maybe one drunk soldier who wound up in Persia when he took a wrong turn at Arabia. How many Americans died in Somalia? How many died in Bosnia? Hundreds.

Hmm, I wonder how many Soviet soldiers died in the Korean War? Hmmm... none! How many American soldiers died defending Europe's butts in WWI, WWII? Hundreds of thousands. And what does the US get in return? Anti-Americanism!

Quote:
fact is, leaders should protect our interest, and those of human race. but they don't, none of them does.
They don't? I guess fighting terrorism isn't in our interests and isn't in the interests of the human race. Like I said earlier, we went into Iraq for one simple reason: To establish a democracy in the Middle East. Terrorism cannot thrive in a stable democracy. Like I explained earlier democracy will spread once Iraq is a stable one. Iran and Saudi Arabia are already beginning to rebel while the Syrian government becomes less and less popular.

Quote:
err.. we used to burn witches. if you got my point. it's not our fault that the world is like our ancestors made it, but it'll be our fault if we don't change the things which are outdated. and war is a method we should not necessarily teach our children as a way to solve problems.
OK, I give in. You're right. Here is how we should have treated Iraq. Bush and Blair should have invited Saddam to a nice tea party with lots of pink flowers. There President Bush should have asked Saddam to give up his WMD's. Remember Mr. President, you have to say please. That very nice gentleman Saddam would have then said "sure, OK. Here they are." Then, Mr. Blaire should have politely asked very nice man Saddam to stop harboring terrorism. Nice man Saddam would have then said "OK". Then, President Bush should have asked Very sane Saddam to make Iraq more democratic. Mr Saddam would have then said "OK". And there you have it, the problem is solved.

Quote:
there are many american and iraqi people who lost members of their family, children lost their fathers and/or mothers, and parent lost their children. that is, i hope, any good reason against any war.
Hmmm, even when we aren't at war we seem to lose quite a few people. Terrorist attacks during the CLinton administration against innocent Americans resulted in thousands dead. 911 resulted in 3000 deaths. In Iraq over 500,000 people died for no reason under Saddam. All of this to innocent people who have done nothing wrong.

Quote:
Clinton COULD have stopped terrorism.... but he was too busy getting his "you know what" sucked.
I hate when people say that. That is not the case at all. Clinton couldn't have stopped terrorism, nobody could have. Was there things he could have done to prevent 911? Yes. I don't think launchiong a cruise missile at an abandoned Al Queda camp will teach anybody a lesson. I'm no Clinton fan, however I don't blame him for the situation we are in now.

Quote:
I've got a great idea, how about we leave all the undeveloped and uncivilized countries to their own devices and if any of them start showing aggression to anyone outside their own borders we wipe the whole of their country off the face of the planet? I mean let's face it, most of them have nothing to contribute to the world and are a drain on money and resources. Then we can end wars and concentrate on more important things like exploration and research in to new technology.
Ughhh. (Shakes head). Let's see here, what will help the world more. Stabalizing and reforming the third world so that trade increases, humanity flurishes, the environment is saved and so forth or will landing 4 guys on Mars to put up the American Flag be better?

Quote:
Is it just me or is everything black and white to Republicans? It's like there is no gray area. Abortion is murder period. War is alright period.
Republicans think war is alright period? Let's look at the rundown of who started all of our major wars here. (Stars mean preemptive wars)

Tripoli: Thomas Jefferson (Democrat)
War of 1812: Madison (Democrat)*
Mexican War: Polk (Democrat)*
Civil War: Buchanon (Democrat)
Spanish-American War: McKinley (Republican)
World War I: Wilson (Democrat)*
World War II: Roosavelt (Democrat)
Korean War: Truman (Democrat)
Vietnam War: Kennedy (Democrat)
Persian Gulf War: Bush (Republican)
Somalia: Clinton (Democrat)
Bosnia: Clinton (Democrat)*
Kosovo: Clinton (Democrat)
Operation Enduring Freedom: Bush (Republican)
Operation Iraqi Freedom: Bush (Republican)*


Seems the Democrats have quite a history with starting wars.

Quote:
If the fetus is terminated before it has a chance to develop a nervous system, then I don't think it's any more murder than using a condom during sex. All you're doing is stopping the growth of a group of cells that may or may not become a human being, but at the time, I don't believe it IS a human being.
Within two weeks of the union between sperm and egg you have a human being with a heart-beat. Once the heart beats, it is alive and is a human. Abortions usually take place well after that time.

Quote:
I don't condone it as an act of birth control, and mothers deffinately need a limit on how many abortions they are allowed to recieve, but overall I support choice.
Understand that only 2% of all abortions are done because of rape or when the woman's life is in danger. Only 2%! That means 98% of the 2 million+ abortions every year are done as a form of birth control. Murder is not birth control!

Quote:
What would you do, assuming you're old enough to be able to think about this, if you had a daughter who was 16 years old. Still in high school, planning on college and a good career. Suppose she gets knocked up by a guy who doesn't want to be a father, and will probably leave her when she has her baby. Having that kid could very well ruin her life. High school won't be easy, having to manage a kid, she'll probably drop out. She won't be able to have the normal life a 16 year old girl should have, she almost certainly won't be able to go to college, and the financial strain will probably reach all the way to you. What are you going to do? Force your daughter to carry and birth the child to uphold your set of morals? Or give her the choice to make with her life. Assuming you're old enough to understand what it would be like to have a daughter whom you love unconditionally, that's no black and white situation.
Think about these things ET.

1.) She had a choice of whether or not to engage in sexual activity with that man knowing the consequences that may happen because of her actions.

2.) Under federal law the father must pay up some cash. The father is as equally responable as the woman in this.

3.) Like I said, the girl knows the consequences of her actiuons. She knows that having a child will put a strain on your life and may in fact ruin your future. Therefor, she should have waited to engage in this kind of activity until she was truly ready. She must now accept the consequences just like murderors do when they kill someone.

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 08:03 PM   #73
Shadowman17
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13
First of all, up until around 1930 or so, the Democrats were the right wing party, and the Republicans were the left wing. F.D.R. was one of the first liberal Democrats. Second, the election of Lincoln was what caused many states to secede, and Buchanan wasn't even in office when the confederates fired on Fort Sumter. Third, Wilson did not 'start' WWI, he only intervened after it became appperant that the Allies would not win against Germany on their own.

Might as well have all of the facts.


Superior strategy will bring victory.
Shadowman17 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 08:11 PM   #74
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Quote:
First of all, up until around 1930 or so, the Democrats were the right wing party, and the Republicans were the left wing. F.D.R. was one of the first liberal Democrats.
That's a very incorrect statement. The period between Lincoln and the end of the Taft administration has been known as "The age of the conservative Republicans." Roosevelt was definately liberal, but so was Wilson, Cleveland and other Democtats. Don't try to rewrite history plz.

Quote:
Second, the election of Lincoln was what caused many states to secede, and Buchanan wasn't even in office when the confederates fired on Fort Sumter.
During the last days of Buchanon's administration the south seceded. Buchanon did absolutely nothing other than condemn the war. Regardless of whether Linoln or Douglas won the election the couth was going to secede because of Buchanon's disasterous policies.

Quote:
Third, Wilson did not 'start' WWI, he only intervened after it became appperant that the Allies would not win against Germany on their own.
I was referring to bringing the US into the war. Wilson did it for absolutely no reason other than personal gain. The guy tried to paint the Germans as "evil imperialistic huns who want to take over all of us" which was not the case at all. An intellegent person would have kept us out of the war. A German victory actually would have resulted in a much better world after WWI.


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 09:03 PM   #75
Shadowman17
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 13
From the Wilson biography on http://www.whitehouse.gov:

"His growing national reputation led some conservative Democrats to consider him Presidential timber. First they persuaded him to run for Governor of New Jersey in 1910. In the campaign he asserted his independence of the conservatives and of the machine that had nominated him, endorsing a progressive platform, which he pursued as governor.

He was nominated for President at the 1912 Democratic Convention and campaigned on a program called the New Freedom, which stressed individualism and states' rights. In the three-way election he received only 42 percent of the popular vote but an overwhelming electoral vote."

Wilson was indeed a conservative Democrat. Also, the KKK, a right-wing extremist group, was at one time associated, however unofficially, with the Democratic Party.

Lincoln, was in fact, a liberal. Douglass wish to negotiate a way for states (new and old) to determine for themselves wether or not they would be slave holding states. This follows the classic, conservative, states rights formula. Lincoln, on the other hand, said that slavery would not extend beyond its current bounderies, the classic, liberal, Big Government formula.

The southern states were worried that the election of Lincoln would be the end of their 'noble institution' of slavery. The election of Lincoln, then, sent them into an uproar. Almost immediately, South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas seceede from the Union.

On another note, I have said this before, but there has been a stable democracy in the Middle East for 81 years now, and it is Turkey. Just because it is a Muslim state does not mean it is a monarchy, dictatorship, or oligarchy. Just in case you are, for some reason, of the opinion that Turkey is not in the Middle East, then I turn your attention to a map of the world, which shows that Turkey is right above Syria and Iraq, and part of its eastern border with Iran.


Superior strategy will bring victory.
Shadowman17 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 09:46 PM   #76
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Quote:
Wilson was indeed a conservative Democrat. Also, the KKK, a right-wing extremist group, was at one time associated, however unofficially, with the Democratic Party.
So what you are saying is that the KKK is a conservative organization? Are you implying that conservatives are racist? If so then I don't know what planet you're on.

Quote:
Lincoln, on the other hand, said that slavery would not extend beyond its current bounderies, the classic, liberal, Big Government formula.
Then again conservatives today want a constitutional ammendment which defines marriage as union between man and woman. That is a very similar thing to the Republican's stance on slavery and the territories. Now, Lincoln is very hard to measure simply because he was a war-time president. As a war-time president like he was you don't get to see his stances on economic issues and so forth.

I look at his successor Andrew Johnson, a Democrat. Johnson was a liberal for his day and age. If you look at the Republicans who followed Johnson: Grant, Hayes and so forth you will see pure conservative stances on issues.

Let's diuscuss this somewhere else say... on AIM or MSN Messenger. I have both.

Quote:
On another note, I have said this before, but there has been a stable democracy in the Middle East for 81 years now, and it is Turkey. Just because it is a Muslim state does not mean it is a monarchy, dictatorship, or oligarchy. Just in case you are, for some reason, of the opinion that Turkey is not in the Middle East, then I turn your attention to a map of the world, which shows that Turkey is right above Syria and Iraq, and part of its eastern border with Iran.
Turkey is no democracy! Turkey's military runs politics. Any attempts at democracy are that the military disapproves of are simply "rid of". The "democracy" in Turkey is powerless and a puppet with the military pulling the strings.

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 10:00 PM   #77
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/tu.html

scroll down until you get to the government section and you will find that Turkey is in fact a democracy. It has a parliament. You are incorrect, Boran.
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 10:17 PM   #78
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
Of course Turkey has a parlament. But so did Iraq during Saddam. Look up Indonesia. Indonesia has a brutal dictatorship and yert it says "republic". Look at Bagladesh, Parlamentary democracy. Bangladesh has a very brutal regime with central authority with a puppet parlament. Turkey is ruled by the military, the parlament is for show.

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 10:35 PM   #79
yaebginn
Banned
 
yaebginn's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The jumble of incoherent thoughts that is my mind.
Posts: 1,864
But officially, Turkey is a democracy. Accept the facts.
yaebginn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 07-24-2004, 10:43 PM   #80
boranchistanger
Junior Member
 
boranchistanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Death Star
Posts: 281
And "officially" so is Iran, Indonesia, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Brazil, Argentina and many other puppet "democracies". They are not true democracy's Yaebginn. Turkey is not a democracy, it is under military rule. It has a puppet parlament, just like Saddam had. And was Saddam's regime a democracy?

-Boran


Leader of the Imperial Expeditionary Force, the first clan created for Battlefront.

www.eforceclans.com
boranchistanger is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > The War in Iraq

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:55 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.