|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
he was easier then the rest!
How so? You've been insulting me all week. I through a little back at you. You still haven't addressed iny of the failings of you're argument, which is basically "BECAUSE I SAID SO". Tell you're mom I'm free tomorrow night. But ask her to douche, man. Last night I thought I was in a tuna packing plant. In a way I was! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
By that logic, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and any other president who served during a war (and all of whom took vacations while in office) was a dictator who sent his people to die.
by the above definition, yes they were.
But, how many vacations did FDR/Truman take during WWII? I bet they spent a hell of a lot less time "on the ranch" then Bush has.
And Kennedy never had a war.
Bay of Pigs, anyone? Good thing only Republicans support the idea of meddling with other nations' governments! 
Clinton was out and about during the operations in Iraq and in the former Yugoslavia.
Though I'm rather puzzled that you put going on vacation during a war right up there with decades of pillaging from your own citizens, causing your country to be placed under a suffocating embargo, or triggering two wars that laid waste to your homeland. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
he was easier then the rest!
How so? You've been insulting me all week. I through a little back at you. You still haven't addressed iny of the failings of you're argument, which is basically "BECAUSE I SAID SO". Tell you're mom I'm free tomorrow night. But ask her to douche, man. Last night I thought I was in a tuna packing plant. In a way I was!
Sixth grade is back in session!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,747
I've got more guns than you. 6000+ posts
|
|
I've got more guns than you. 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,747 |
"Ah good. Now I'm on the internet clearly saying I like tranny cleavage. This shouldn't get me harassed at all." -- Lothar of the Hill People
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Kennedy never had a war.
The Vietnam war, as we know it, for all intents and purposes, began under Kennedy, in 1961.
Furthermore, to expand on Sammitch's point, when you equate going on vacation during a war right up there with decades of pillaging from your own citizens, causing your country to be placed under a suffocating embargo, or triggering two wars that laid waste to your homeland, it tends to demonstrate nothing so much as your own desire to filter everything through some sort of false moral equivilancy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
he was easier then the rest!
How so? You've been insulting me all week. I through a little back at you. You still haven't addressed iny of the failings of you're argument, which is basically "BECAUSE I SAID SO". Tell you're mom I'm free tomorrow night. But ask her to douche, man. Last night I thought I was in a tuna packing plant. In a way I was!
this is why i'm semi-retired i didnt even have to try 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:You used perjoritives to describe the Iraqis for their lack of gratitude. That would be an indicator that you are prejudiced against Iraqis. Your first statement makes clear that at the least you harbour ethnocentric feelings toward Iraqis.
No.
I said that the insurgents were "idiots" because they failed to embrace democracy and, instead, chose to be terrorists against a country that would be happy to leave their nation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Not the same thing at all.
Colonial England never really wanted to let go of its colonies. All the "white man's burden" stuff was simply an excuse to keep the empire together in order to exploit it.
Bush and his supporters are not claiming, as did Kipling, that the Iraqis are not ready for democracy. Quite the contrary, Bush is the one pushing for free elections, constitutions, etc.
It's his detractors on the left who have adopted Kipling's quaint notion of natives who can't be trusted with democracy.
You used perjoritives to describe the Iraqis for their lack of gratitude. That would be an indicator that you are prejudiced against Iraqis. Your first statement makes clear that at the least you harbour ethnocentric feelings toward Iraqis. Your plea of innoncence puts your bigotry on display.
Paragraph 2, well, the last time there was a colonial England would be the Norman Conquest, circa 1260 AD. I think you mean Imperial England don't you?
Bush may want democracy, but do the Iraqis? I suspect that a Shia dominated theocracy is what the majority would fancy.
Quote:
It's his detractors on the left who have adopted Kipling's quaint notion of natives who can't be trusted with democracy.
I've heard no one on the left say this. Am I just supposed to take your word for it?
Quote:
Yes, when the "foreign occupier" would like nothing better than to see you idiots embrace democracy, so we can go home.
This is what you said G man. I don't see any referance to a subset of Iraqis called insurgents. In the context of the discussion it's reasonable to believe you are refering to ALL Iraqis. Your prevarications to the contrary, it remains a bigoted statement.
It's okay G man. Everyone knows you're a bigot. Most of the posters here applaud your bigotry.
I made a number of statements here. You responded to one. Am I to assume then that you believe I'm correct in all my other observations?
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
I don't make a habit to respond to statements I don't consider worth a response.
In regards to your other points:
This message board is, at its heart, a dialogue, an exchange of ideas on particular topics.
As with any dialogue or exhange, a complete understanding requires that the listener or reader pay attention to context.
In our exchange, we were talking about the insurgents. In fact, a good chunk of thread is about them, and whether they and/or others like them are "terrorists", "freedom fighers" or both.
In fact, a plain reading of the thread reveals that very little, if any, has been devoted to the Iraqis (or any other nationality) as a whole. Instead it has been devoted to the insurgents.
As such, it should have been, and I would submit was, clear to any unbiased reader that the context made clear that I was referring to the insurgents, just as the rest of the thread was.
Finally, I would respectfully submit that your retreat to the classic "desparate liberal fallback position" of calling your appointment a "racist" is simply your way of admitting you can't argue the issue on anything but emotional terms.
Or, as BSAMS would say, I WIN.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
I snapped magicgay so bad even g-man has made him look stupid. lord what have i done.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
|
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64 |
Freedom Fighter:
Terrorist:
(Look away!)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] ![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/blogban3.jpg) [/center] [center] ![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/jlamiska.jpg) [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
I don't make a habit to respond to statements I don't consider worth a response.
In regards to your other points:
This message board is, at its heart, a dialogue, an exchange of ideas on particular topics.
As with any dialogue or exhange, a complete understanding requires that the listener or reader pay attention to context.
In our exchange, we were talking about the insurgents. In fact, a good chunk of thread is about them, and whether they and/or others like them are "terrorists", "freedom fighers" or both.
In fact, a plain reading of the thread reveals that very little, if any, has been devoted to the Iraqis (or any other nationality) as a whole. Instead it has been devoted to the insurgents.
As such, it should have been, and I would submit was, clear to any unbiased reader that the context made clear that I was referring to the insurgents, just as the rest of the thread was.
Finally, I would respectfully submit that your retreat to the classic "desparate liberal fallback position" of calling your appointment a "racist" is simply your way of admitting you can't argue the issue on anything but emotional terms.
Or, as BSAMS would say, I WIN.
Or as Magicjay would say, you made the statement. You have presented no evidence to back it up. The statement Iragis, insurgents or whatever are stupid is a bigoted statement. Do you have any evidence to support your conclusion, like the aggregate IQ level of Iraqi insurgents? No. Your only evidence is that they behave in a manner contrary to the wishes of the foreign occupation force that trespasses in their country. Then you pull out the L word and say that I have resorted to racism, despite the fact that Iraqis are not a racial group. Whether or not racism is the fall back of liberals has nothing to do with the argument. Even if it were, that doesn't make it wrong.
The statement you made was bigoted. You've done nothing to disprove that. Why don't you try using logic? Or is bluster and bullshit the fall back position of conservatives?
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
Freedom Fighter:
Terrorist:
(Look away!)
.
And your point is????????
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Jay, are you justifying the method of the insurgancy in Iraq?
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
Jay, are you justifying the method of the insurgancy in Iraq?
No, I'm saying that G-man is a bigot.
He made a bigoted statement that he can't support. So he's resorting to rehtorical tricks to make his point since the truth does not.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
|
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
Freedom Fighter:
Terrorist:
(Look away!)
.
And your point is????????
Uh...giving examples of a true freedom fighter, and a sick fuck who targeted civilans.
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] [/center] [center] [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
PenWing said:
Jay, are you justifying the method of the insurgancy in Iraq?
No, I'm saying that G-man is a bigot.
He made a bigoted statement that he can't support. So he's resorting to rehtorical tricks to make his point since the truth does not.
You should know that everyone is laughing at you.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Oh and for the record I am biggoted towards suicide bombers.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
This is what I'm seeing. It started with a comment by BSAMS: Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
I think if someone is fighting being oppressed they would be a freedom fighter, if they are fighting a democracy being formed in their goverment they would be terrorists.
So Jay responded:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Being occupied by a foreign military power. Can it get a lot more oppressive than that?
Then G-man replied:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Yes, when the "foreign occupier" would like nothing better than to see you idiots embrace democracy, so we can go home.
And then Jay accused G-man of being a bigot. And G-man responded that Jay was falling back on the "you must be a racist because I have nothing else I can say to prove you wrong" argument. (Just summing it up here.)
Now, as far as I can tell, all G-man was saying is that the "foreign occupier" doesn't want to be there, and the only reason the troops are still there is because there is an insurgancy, which relies heavily on suicide bombers, who are trying to prevent the formation of a democratic government.
I can see where the White Man's Burden argument comes into play. Who are we (the US) to tell the Iraqis how to govern themselves? But I also see the other side. I see a people who have been persecuted in ways I don't want to imagine, by their own government. I see a people who don't know how to fight back, because they don't have the will to fight after being subjugated for so long. I see a people who can be easily manipulated by the good guys or the bad guys (I guess who's who depends on you're point of view).
The other thing I see is a group of terrorists who will stop at nothing to kill American lives and their allies, including those the insurgents consider their own people. How can that be ignored? If the US were to pull out right now, what would happen to the people who aren't Muslim, or aren't of a strict religious observance? Who will protect them from oppression?
What the US is trying to do is guide all of these different groups (because not all Iraqis are the same) into creating one free government that allows everyone to live their lives in peace with one another. Sure, the US has ulterior motives here. A united democractic Iraq is more likely to cut the US a break on oil prices. It is also more likely to help the US by closing it's borders to terrorists. But all that aside, what's important here is a free Iraq.
Can that happen without the US? I'm not foolish enough to think so. Then again, I'm not foolish enough to believe it can be successful at all. But I hope it can.
In any case, I don't think G-man meant for his remark to come off as bigoted. It was poorly worded. Some people in Iraq probably do believe that the insurgants are fighting to free them from an invading force. But that's not why they are fighting at all. If a democratic government is successfully formed in Iraq, then the terrorists lose a resource. That's what they are fighting for. They are fighting against Western influence. And they're war is killing innocent Iraqis along the way.
Like G-man said, the US wants out, but as long as Iraq cannot defend itself, it will stay to defend the innocent people who live there. Would it be right for the US to pull out early and watch as the terrorists establish another Taliban?
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
thats what i was trying to say. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
Some people in Iraq probably do believe that the insurgants are fighting to free them from an invading force.
True. A notion I find idiotic. But not a notion I abscribe to the Iraqi people as a whole.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,993 Likes: 1
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,993 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
PenWing said:
Some people in Iraq probably do believe that the insurgants are fighting to free them from an invading force.
True. A notion I find idiotic. But not a notion I abscribe to the Iraqi people as a whole.
That is what makes freedom fighter such a situational term. G-man's idiot is another man's freedom fighter.
Reveling in the knowledge that Sammitch will never interrupt my nookie ever again.
112,000 RACK Points!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
This is what I'm seeing. It started with a comment by BSAMS:
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
I think if someone is fighting being oppressed they would be a freedom fighter, if they are fighting a democracy being formed in their goverment they would be terrorists.
So Jay responded:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Being occupied by a foreign military power. Can it get a lot more oppressive than that?
Then G-man replied:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Yes, when the "foreign occupier" would like nothing better than to see you idiots embrace democracy, so we can go home.
And then Jay accused G-man of being a bigot. And G-man responded that Jay was falling back on the "you must be a racist because I have nothing else I can say to prove you wrong" argument. (Just summing it up here.)
Now, as far as I can tell, all G-man was saying is that the "foreign occupier" doesn't want to be there, and the only reason the troops are still there is because there is an insurgancy, which relies heavily on suicide bombers, who are trying to prevent the formation of a democratic government.
I can see where the White Man's Burden argument comes into play. Who are we (the US) to tell the Iraqis how to govern themselves? But I also see the other side. I see a people who have been persecuted in ways I don't want to imagine, by their own government. I see a people who don't know how to fight back, because they don't have the will to fight after being subjugated for so long. I see a people who can be easily manipulated by the good guys or the bad guys (I guess who's who depends on you're point of view).
The other thing I see is a group of terrorists who will stop at nothing to kill American lives and their allies, including those the insurgents consider their own people. How can that be ignored? If the US were to pull out right now, what would happen to the people who aren't Muslim, or aren't of a strict religious observance? Who will protect them from oppression?
What the US is trying to do is guide all of these different groups (because not all Iraqis are the same) into creating one free government that allows everyone to live their lives in peace with one another. Sure, the US has ulterior motives here. A united democractic Iraq is more likely to cut the US a break on oil prices. It is also more likely to help the US by closing it's borders to terrorists. But all that aside, what's important here is a free Iraq.
Can that happen without the US? I'm not foolish enough to think so. Then again, I'm not foolish enough to believe it can be successful at all. But I hope it can.
In any case, I don't think G-man meant for his remark to come off as bigoted. It was poorly worded. Some people in Iraq probably do believe that the insurgants are fighting to free them from an invading force. But that's not why they are fighting at all. If a democratic government is successfully formed in Iraq, then the terrorists lose a resource. That's what they are fighting for. They are fighting against Western influence. And they're war is killing innocent Iraqis along the way.
Like G-man said, the US wants out, but as long as Iraq cannot defend itself, it will stay to defend the innocent people who live there. Would it be right for the US to pull out early and watch as the terrorists establish another Taliban?
You had me going until you started assigning altruistic motives to the US Government. I'm sorry, but I think it really has more to do with money, the value of the dollar and control of valuable resources. Our prior support for Saddam was motivated by the money. Not anything new. Rome was not a philathropic enterprise and neither is DC.
You should be a diplomat, though. 
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Oh and for the record I am biggoted towards suicide bombers.
Really! You have so much in common! According to G-man 'they're idiots' and so are you!
Have another banana! 
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 Likes: 2 |
im really sorry guys i didnt know it would be this bad when i schooled him.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
im really sorry guys i didnt know it would be this bad when i schooled him.....
What are you talking about?
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Dude, if you're gonna knitpick, do a better job.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Oh and for the record I am biggoted towards suicide bombers.
Really! You have so much in common! According to G-man 'they're idiots' and so are you!
Have another banana!
Well, we can't all support the insurgents who are blowing up inocent Iraqis and US servicemen as vehimenntly as you do. I still think the insurgents are idiots.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
im really sorry guys i didnt know it would be this bad when i schooled him.....
What are you talking about?
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
You had me going until you started assigning altruistic motives to the US Government. I'm sorry, but I think it really has more to do with money, the value of the dollar and control of valuable resources. Our prior support for Saddam was motivated by the money. Not anything new. Rome was not a philathropic enterprise and neither is DC.
While I have no doubt the dollar signs are what motivated the administration to go into Iraq in the first place, it is that altruistic motivation that forces the US to remain there.
The fact is that this country is being run by business men. When a business venture goes bad, the correct course of action is to get the hell out taking as little of a hit as possible. The problem here, and this was a big oversight on the administration's side, is that when you start messing around in other nations, you can't just take a small hit and bail when the going gets tough.
The US has no choice but to stick around, or someone else will pick up the pieces, and two things will happen. One, the Iraqi people will be subjugated again, and that is unacceptable. Two, and this probably hits closer to home with the administration, but I can't and won't say for sure, someone else makes a prophet on that oil.
I am not saying the US isn't in there for the money. What I am saying is that money isn't the only reason the US can't just pull out and cut it's losses. At this point, there are still enough people in this nation who care if the Iraqi people are subjugated. The US started this mess, and it has lost too many lives to not finish it.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
You should be a diplomat, though.
Thanks, but the world frowns upon people who make sense.
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
While I have no doubt the dollar signs are what motivated the administration to go into Iraq in the first place
As noted in the "Oil or Iraq" thread some time ago, I must respectfully disagree.
If our motivations were monetary, we could have gotten all the oil we want by simply declaring that Saddam was complying with our inspections, agreeing to lift the UN sanctions and cozying back up to him.
Sort of like we do with Saudi Arabia.
After all, half of Europe, as noted in the UN Corruption thread, was violating the sanctions anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
I don't know. I think there was a bit of personal vendeta mixed in there from the administration's stand point. There were death threats on both sides of this, before the US finally went in. Whatever the true motivations, it's a lot more complicated than most people credit it.
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
I could more readily accept the "personal vendetta" angle, at least insofar as everyone, including a president, tends to be more suspicious of a guy who allegedly threatened his family.
On the other hand, I am loathe to discuss this too much at length here, lest this thread be derailed into yet another "reasons for the war" thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Being occupied by a foreign military power. Can it get a oppressive than that?
Sure...the Iraqi's could have a dictator who slaughters, tortures, and starves their own people to death, while said dictator enjoys a life of luxury at the expense of the very people he oppresses.
You've presented a false dichotomy. Hussien is in the prison of a foreign power. The probability that he will die in prison is high. He is not a viable alternative for leadership in anyone's mind but your own.
So try again Little Mister. Use your words this time!
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
You've presented a false dichotomy
No he hasn't.
The Iraqi people had a dictator who slaughtered his own people, etc. If the "foreign occupiers" leave at the wrong time, they could easily see the rise of another.
For example, the removal of the Shah led to the as repressive, if not more repressive, Ayatollahs. The people of East Germany went from Hitler to the Communists.
As discussed above, the US wants out of the country at the appropriate time. That is quite different than either a colonial policy or abandoning the country to a potential new dictator who wants to stay for life.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,289
2000+ posts
|
|
2000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,289 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
The Iraqi people had a dictator who slaughtered his own people, etc. If the "foreign occupiers" leave at the wrong time, they could easily see the rise of another.
For example, the removal of the Shah led to the as repressive, if not more repressive, Ayatollahs. The people of East Germany went from Hitler to the Communists.
As discussed above, the US wants out of the country at the appropriate time. That is quite different than either a colonial policy or abandoning the country to a potential new dictator who wants to stay for life.
Agreed.
While I think oil interests are a big part of the reason why the West has fucked around with the Middle East over the last century, I don't think they are the driving reason behind Iraq (though I do think that the oil industry has a lot of influence in the US government due to the history of many of the people at the top, and while people might be paying record prices, Oil companies are making hefty profits )
The sad thing is, Iraq may well vote itself into chunks so that can have lots of dictators. The people there don't especially get or care about the concept of democracy and may well be registering purely to ensure their Religion gets in rather than based on political beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
|
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Being occupied by a foreign military power. Can it get a oppressive than that?
Sure...the Iraqi's could have a dictator who slaughters, tortures, and starves their own people to death, while said dictator enjoys a life of luxury at the expense of the very people he oppresses.
You've presented a false dichotomy. Hussien is in the prison of a foreign power. The probability that he will die in prison is high. He is not a viable alternative for leadership in anyone's mind but your own.
So try again Little Mister. Use your words this time!
You were asking a question: 'what is more oppressive than a foreign military's presence in Iraq'.
I showed you an image of the guy in charge before we got there...he was a Hell of a lot more oppressive then we could ever be.
If we never would have went to war, he'd most likely be there, oppressive as ever. If we leave too early, chances are another like him would assume control.
So, no...I don't think our presence is the worst option for the people of Iraq.
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] [/center] [center] [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
You've presented a false dichotomy
No he hasn't.
The Iraqi people had a dictator who slaughtered his own people, etc. If the "foreign occupiers" leave at the wrong time, they could easily see the rise of another.
For example, the removal of the Shah led to the as repressive, if not more repressive, Ayatollahs. The people of East Germany went from Hitler to the Communists.
As discussed above, the US wants out of the country at the appropriate time. That is quite different than either a colonial policy or abandoning the country to a potential new dictator who wants to stay for life.
We're talking about different time frames. You're talking about the past. My statement is about the future. Saddam is not a viable alternative for a future leader. So the choice is false. One of the alternatives is highly improbable. As such, the statement will not stand. It is a false dichotomey as relates to future possibilities.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
|
|
"Hey this is PCG342's bro..." 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 34,507 Likes: 64 |
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
If we leave too early, chances are another like him would assume control.
"Are you eating it...or is it eating you?" [center] [/center] [center] [/center]
|
|
|
|
|
