| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
"They are nothing but traitors. This does nothing but give aid and support to the enemy," said Debbie Petee in San Francisco, who said she supports the president. source I submit a one Debbie Petee of San Francisco to the list of Ugly Americans who are in fact the problem more than the solution. Next. |
Excerpt from that page: "What is our basic view? We're for socialism. We think that ownership of the tremendous productive wealth built up by hundreds of millions of workers can't remain in the hands of a privileged few. The capitalist profit system is unplanned and irrational. It's wrecking the world. Improved technology brings layoffs and poverty, not comfort and lighter work. Booms lead to busts. The competition for markets produces devastating wars and environmental destruction. Fabulous wealth alongside deep poverty poisons all human relations, stimulating racism and other blame-the-victim ideologies. We put our ideas into practice. We are in the student movement, the labor movement, the women's movement, the lesbian/gay/bi/trans movement, the anti-war and anti-racist movements. We fight hard for a better life right now, but we know that nothing is secure--not our jobs, our homes, our health care, our pensions, our civil rights and liberties--as long as capitalism exists. So our goal is a society run by the workers, not just as pawns in a capitalist political game but as collective owners of the social wealth. This is not a new idea. Karl Marx put socialist ideology on a scientific footing a century and a half ago. The last hundred years have seen many revolutions--and counter-revolutions--all over the world. We try to learn from the successes and the setbacks. You might have read about Workers World Party recently. We've been attacked a lot in the big business media. So we know we must be doing something right. We don't fit Fox News's caricatures of us. We're independent Marxists who respect the struggles for self-determination and progress of oppressed nations. We try to understand their problems in a world dominated by Western imperialism. We don't jump on the bandwagon when Third World leaders are demonized. Our goal is solidarity of all the workers and oppressed against this criminal imperialist system. What do you want to know about Workers World? Ask us. Read our articles. This Web site has archives going back many years. You can see our views on many issues. Drop us a line or contact the branch of Workers World Party, listed below, that is nearest you. Isn't it time to take the step from activism to a commitment to change the world?" Marxism. Socialism. |
You've been singing their song the whole time. Some of your posts have been verbatim. |
the movement will take their money. fuck off ok? there's money coming from all kinds of sources trace. so what. this is meaningless. run along confused one. |
|
im not a marxists and have never advocated as such dickhead so run along. come back when you can actually make some sense. |
So, shut the fuck up. Unless you lied about that, and didn't really mean to abstain. That would be in character, just like your political heroes. Might as well abstain for the duration of the occupation, too. |
"Anyone in the military who has signed up to protect our country and now doesn't want to do so is doing a grave disservice to this country and to their fellow soldiers," says Jason Crawford, founder of Patriots for the Defense of America source hey dipshit, its a volunteer force. you don't sell your soul when you sign up. the term "conscientious objector" means you question the wisdom, morality and purpose of your service, a foundation of this country, and the very same thing we are asking of the Iraqi military. |
I am not arguing about the necessity of war. I AM ARGUING about the fact that I will not "run along" How can you refute what you refuse to read? And fuck off if you dont want to hear it |
i dont give a rats ass to read socialists propaganda because A)its irrelavent B)im familiar enough with Marxism C)it has nothing to do with my thread so what that a source of income for the peace movement is the socialist party. like this is news? the movement has many many many many sources of income, and many factions within it trace. so what. i...(can't speak for others) am asking you to run along because you constantly derail threads with illogical, inane and irrelavent bullshit. your a very confused man trace. |
hey, did i mention i'm becoming a socialist? my california unemployment benefit is $10K. |
Lots of good and intelligent people are socialists. Who funds pro-war rallies? Clear Channel, I hear. So who is surprised that capitalists are pro-war? |
Besides, If they were just taking the money, that would make them capitalists. You know what Stalin called the democratic party? Usefull Idiots. That is the origin of that phrase. Communism/socialism/marxism is the basis that the UN is run on today. To "redistribute" American wealth. Hell, the World Wide Workers have named that as a goal, to redistribute the wealth. That is the point behind raising taxes on the rich. The fair suggestion would be to make taxes a flat percentage. But that would not redistribute it. The organizers are not interested in the constitution or freedom or life or liberty. Why else would they rail on Bush so hard and leave dictators like saddam alone. He has murdered 2,000,000 people. He pays shit loads of money to have someone blow themselves up not at military or government targets, but civilians. You cannot preach to me about me being a dupe, when you are spouting the party line. Imperialism? Are you even aware of how the war is being prosecuted? Or invasion, whichever term you choose. Iraqi soldiers cleared mines out for the US ground troops. They cut the power on the electric fence between Kuwait and Iraq. Why would they do that? To end the hell that the last 1/4 century has given them. But somehow you are comparing Bush to a terrorist. Think about it. But you wont. I was not surprised when I saw you say the troops were going to plant wmd and claim it was iraq's. talk about conspiracy theory. Why? because your hatred for Bush runs so deep that you can see nothing else. And telling me to go away may make you feel better, but it will not change the truth. |
|
I've been away a year and the same people are having the same argument on the same board. Woof woof dogmatism. |
I hope none of you own guns. Be adults, agree to disagree and move on.. this is getting ridiculous |
Big Kev, I tried to get these guys to agree to disagree a LONG time ago and got fucking shot down over and over again. It will NEVER happen. On this we definately agree, which is why I don't post on these threads often. |
|
|
Some chanted, "Ameriki! Ameriki!" Many others in the starving town just patted their stomachs and raised their hands, begging for food. A man identifying himself only as Abdullah welcomed the arrival of the U.S. troops: "Saddam Hussein is no good. Saddam Hussein a butcher." An old woman shrouded in black — one of the very few women outside — knelt toward the feet of Americans, embracing an American woman. A younger man with her pulled her away, giving her a warning sign by sliding his finger across his throat. In 1991, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died after prematurely celebrating what they believed was their liberation from Saddam after the Gulf War. Some even pulled down a few pictures of Saddam then — only to be killed by Iraqi forces. Gurfein playfully traded pats with a disabled man and turned down a dinner invitation from townspeople. "Friend, friend," he told them in Arabic learned in the first Gulf War. "We stopped in Kuwait that time," he said. "We were all ready to come up there then, and we never did." The townspeople seemed grateful this time. "No Saddam Hussein!" one young man in headscarf told Gurfein. "Bush!" Listen to the winds of change |
i started a thread. im trying to stick to it. the same ding dong inserts his usual retardations and derails it to no end. trace if there is any connection betwen my advocations and whatever the socialist party spouts, its purely coincidence. i dont support the socialist party, never have, and have never entertained more than a philosophical interest in it in high school and college reading karl marx. ok? Im telling you to go away because you're4 a fucking retard trace. this has nothing to do with truth. this has nothing to do with you making me uncomfortable with truths or anything of the sort. simply because you dont make any sense. you are too dense to understand anything you speak of. you just don't get it and for that you constantly make an ass of yourself and annoy most, regardless of their opinion, to no end. continuing to talk to someone about the sky who insists the sky is red becomes old. this is why im telling you to go away. NOW GODDAMIT BACK TO MY LIST OF UGLY AMERICANS YOU FUCKS!!!! |
|
Now, if an army came rolling into your home town, there with the expressed intent to kill your leader, would you say "We love our leader! We want to kill you!" Uh, no. Trace, can you keep several possibilities in your mind at the same time, or do you only have capacity for one? Or, maybe 1/2? |
How does killing yourself to protest a war that *you* don't have to fight in do any good at all? Now that kid is dead, his family is grieving, the war will be over in, like, 2 days, and the kid will *still* be dead. What a waste. |
|
he was just capitolizing on the attention drawn. im confused...who exactly is appalling spider? Your cited article is a bit general. |
|
Way to promote peace, morons. |
|
|
|
|
*sniff, sniff* If I'm asked to go to one of our thrice-annual sales meetings in Atlanta, I'll be sure to let you know, so we can have dinner or something. |
Still, dinner is on. Same if you visit here. |
Vandalism for peace? Fighting for peace? Isn't that like prolifers killing abortion doctors? |
some advocate entire overthrow of the current system eri. thats what i was trying to explain to your husband. the protests have many components. some ruin it for the others. to judge a movement because *one* source of funding comes from point A, or violence comes from *one* source doesnt say much about the entire thing. |
I don't think what that guy did on that bridge has anything to do with you or your beliefs in particular. I was just pointing out the way many people's actions contradict their words. Supposed pro peace activists, anti abortion bombers. It goes for every single group. That guy on the bridge didn't achieve what he was trying to in either ending the war or bringing more poeple to his cause. He just killed himself and ended a life that might have been so much more. |
well no, thats what im saying eri, anarchists who fuck shit up are living right up to their words. you can be against this war and not necessarily support peace. |
|
|
There was nothing in that article that said that man was an anarchist. He could just have easily been pro peace and just fucked in the head doing exactly what I said, contradicting himself. "you can also support peace and understand that sometimes military intervention is necessary." This is exactly what I have been combatting within myself. I don't quite understand what you mean, though, by looking forward and holding the administration accountable for what happens next. Can you explain that to me please? |
|
Here, let me liberate you from this asshole and leave you to figure out the rest yourselves. Hungry? Get a job. Make money. Buy food. It isn't going to be that simple for them, and since we did this it is our responsibility to them to help them get on their feet again. |
im not talking about one man. you are confused as to how people can participate in an anti-war rally and then proceed to fuck shit up/ ive answered you. people contradict themselves all the time, thats not always the point. to the dumbass who hung himself....well, you know, Ghandi went on a hunger strike to protest British colonialism. |
I mean, while I think suicide is always bad, I can *understand* it when, say, someone who has been drafted and doesn't want to fight kills himself. Or someone whose country is occupied by barbarians kills himself. I don't understand why someone who gets to stay at home, is in no danger, is at no risk for conscription, but is upset about something his government is doing (something that, let's be honest, neither he nor I nor any one of us regular Joe citizens has any say or control over) would kill himself. As a matter of principle. I don't like what's going on in Sierra Leone. WTF will my death do to affect that situation? Like Kazoo said, there had to be something more going on. |
I was talking about how people contradict themselves when it comes to a specific statement they are trying to make publicly and how it's stupid to do that. You must not understand Patrick. I wasn't talking about how people can go to an anti-war rally and then fuck shit up. I was talking about people who do something of that nature (anti-war rallies just being the obvious example) and then not achieving what they are trying to. People who go to make a pro-peace statement and then use violence to try to get their point across. That's just one example. I was saying that it was stupid. I don't think that ALL pro-peace people do this, and I don't think that ALL pro peace people are stupid. I think those specific people are. That's what I was trying to say. That the idiots who fuck things up are stupid. |
Then, how can you support a war for peace? |
|
|
Please show me where I said I support this war. Stop it already. I only said that supporting peace and understanding that sometimes military action is necessary is something I have been really struggling with lately. Struggling with it because I am trying to understand it but am having major difficulty with it. Why should I understand why someone standing up for peace and a lack of violence would be violent? There is such a thing as a peaceful protest and we have every right to do that. I respect that, no matter what the view is. Hurting people to stop someone else from hurting people is nothing but hypocracy. If you truly believe in non-violence bringing peace then you should be non-violent in your actions trying to bring peace. It's not like we actually have a say in this anyways. It's happening whether we like it or not. All I am trying to do is deal with it and understand it. |
|
thanks for popping in. my comparison, was little more than an example of self-sacrifice for a just cause. it in no way compares the magnitude, importance or significance of the actions. whats become so terribly annoying is this notion, seemingly american notion, that the minute we start bombing we "rally" around the president, that we drop all logic and the ability to think freely and show blind deference to the asshole leading the charge. i support the troops. bring them home. |
i didnt listen to all of it simpyl because its an annoying clip, but what exactly is "ugly"? you DO realize that in my examples, and basis for this thread are Americans who advocate unAmerican ideas right? Just because you dont agree with the protesters doesnt necessarily make them "ugly" at least in the context of this thread. now if you'll excuse me, im, going to sit on my washer's spin cycle. god damn its shaking the whole house. |
But comeone, you can't tell me skull face was cute? |
you welcomed this invasion. enjoy the results. |
Congrats! You're technically a seditious traitor! |
|
|
Rummy was talking about the footage of the executions. No, Patrick I did not. I asked for the security council to not provided a divided front for hussien to exploit. I asked for the fucker to do what he promised twelve years ago. Fuck you Patrick. I did not ask for this. Bush did not ask for this. Hussien asked for this. ***YOU ASKED FOR THIS*** So you could continue to vilify Bush instead of the murder in charge of Iraq. Your reaction is sick, cold and fucked up. Smoochie. |
um, ok trace. i know in your simpleton view of things it helps you to sleep at night knowing we're delivering "justice" to Saddam, much like you'd punish a child who has been warned about something and does it anyway, but the sooner you realize global politics are not handled in such a way, the sooner we might be able to have a decent conversation. maybe. if awe, saddness, anger, dismay, shame and resentment towards our government is "sick, cold and fucked up" so be it. there are muderers in charge of nations all over the world, with all kinds of weapons they are not supposed to have, stop using this as a rationale. it doesnt jive. its hypocritcal and it just doesnt float! i know it makes you feel better, but it has little to do with the truth. do you get it? the weapons issue, the threat issue, the UN issue, or the tyrrant issue in relation to Iraq don't justify our actions. There's is nothing you can say that will make this so. so stop it already. |
unless it is bush of course |
And we are going to take care of each one of them. Iraq is not the last stop. You and I both know this. "stop using this as a rationale. it doesnt jive" Does not jive to you, maybe, but September 11th made it jive with me. That were American Towers were brought down. "but the sooner you realize global politics are not handled in such a way, the sooner we might be able to have a decent conversation. maybe." No, probably not. We always will part ways at "global" part. I am not an isolationist. You cannot be a capitalist and be isolationist. But I do care far more about the US then global issues. We must protect ourselves. We made a mistake 12 years ago. We had no business leaving him in power. This is about Iraqi's, yes. But this is also about the United States. Wether you choose to beleive it or not, the troops have already found a chemical weapons factory. Not storage facility, but a recently used factory. And I know he has trained Al Queda, the CIA and NSA had proof of this as far back as 1996. Nothing on earth would have made saddam willing to get rid of this shit. Or stop making them. This is the only method that would work. The only other alternative would be to remove all restrictions and sanctions. |
|
thems 'Merican towers were brought down by a force having nothing to do with Iraq. It hasnt been proven, it most likely won't be proven, so stop using that as a carte blanche. If there was anything substantial connecting the two dont you think our government would have paraded that shit over and over? but they didnt because what little evidence they did have, was refuted by other world intelligence agencies, so they learned to keep quiet about it. Instead they have opted to continue to use the word "terror" and "Iraq" in the same sentence over and over that at this point,most of the public accepts it as fact. Idiots. A founding principle of our nation is innocent until proven guilty, and with support from 'Mericans like you that will slowly be erased. Yes, i have heard about the "chemical facility". Doesnt mean anything. A glue factory could be called a "chemical facility". we also bombed "chemical facilities" in Sudan too. Oh wait, that was a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant. Ooops! Its fucking ridiculous that after 4 months of inspections by professionals who are trained in finding such facilities and weapons turned up no such facility, yet our military, trained to fight wars not find weapons, came across one in a matter of days. Ohhhhh boy, big surprise. You didnt even think of that did you? You just accept it as fact which makes you trace, as a citizen, displaying such ignorant blind deference to whatever they say, much more of a threat to this nation than Iraq has ever been. |
i think i made the mashed taters too garlicky |
YOu just don't get it do you? We cannot wait for something to happen before we do something about known threats. That is what September 11 taught me. I have no comment about you accusing the US Military and a Highly decorated general of lying. |
|
|
just like the asshole who cuts you off in traffic because he forgot to merge in time to make his exit. you say something knowing damn well the driver wont hear it. "We cannot wait for something to happen before we do something about known threats" so we'll attack the first country that can fit into our scheme of "evil" fucking pussy. rewriting the books to suit your limited world-view. using a tragedy against our country to make a square peg fit into a circular hole. Presidents lie. No reason why a general can't lie. You comments continue to support my claim that you, not Iraq, not al Qaida, are the real threat to this nation. |
|
Wait a sec. Trace, did you even see that interview? |
"there are muderers in charge of nations all over the world, with all kinds of weapons they are not supposed to have" And we are going to take care of each one of them. Iraq is not the last stop. You and I both know this. ----------------- Scary, scary stuff. |
I can guarantee that both he and I have seen the interview. "Presidents lie. No reason why a general can't lie." Anyone CAN lie, but doesn't mean that they DO lie. I don't know whether or not this general was lying or not, but at the same time, I am not going to assume that EVERYTHING I HEAR is a lie. This is definately scary shit. |
|
"us against the world" Guess what? the most likely end result is the end of our empire. This is a very dangerous precendent we are setting here. Look at another "pre-emptive strike against a supposed threatening nation" - Pearl Harbor. Look what ultimately happened to the Japanese. This is not a wise course. |
Your source on that, spunk? "We cannot wait for something to happen before we do something about known threats. That is what September 11 taught me." I wonder what world war three will teach you. |
"We do know that the Geneva Convention makes it illegal for prisoners of war to be shown and pictured and humiliated. And it's something that the United States does not do. And needless to say, television networks that carry such pictures are, I would say, doing something that's unfortunate." Source Odd, though, that I saw CNN footage of Iraqi POWs not ten minutes earlier. Granted, it wasn't footage of a graphic nature, and they were not identified by name, but we did show them. |
Either way, all I was saying is that we saw it. Maybe we saw two different ones, but we definately saw one. Also, the news station we were watching refused to show the pictures at the time we saw it. I don't know if they did later, but when we were watching they refused to show the pictures and explained that they believed them to be too graphic. |
eri, i dont assume everything i hear is a lie. consider the source. consider history. consider precedent. i refer you to my previous remarks about inspectors not finding this place and all of sudden we come across it and our so called citation of that chemical factory in Sudan. History, logic and intelligence demand you view this "discovery" with extreme prejudice. Extreme prejudice. Of course we arent alone in our lies. Saddam lies to. I think its hilarious to even think that an AK could have brought down that Apache. HA! Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of that craft know that shit is so solid, no AK bullets from a bunch of fucking dirt farmers is going to bring it down. |
The United States can definitely be viewed as the invader or aggressor in this instance. Because we are. One can even find having Iraqi military dress in civilian clothing, or pretend to surrender, as valiant efforts to protect their country. If the country was one like Britain or Canada. But Iraq is not Britain or Canada. Hussein is not an elected leader chosen by the population, nor is Hussein protecting the security of his population. I again say to you that September 11th, 2001 did indeed change the world. It changed the way America, indeed the world, treats countries like Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, N Korea, etc. No longer can we afford to wait until after a tragedy like 9/11 to act. Iraq has a history of aggression and use of CBW on it’s own population and it’s neighbors. We have solid evidence that Iraq is still producing these weapons. We have solid evidence that Iraq has given aid, comfort, and assistance to terrorist originations. We must rid the world of the cancer of terrorism, and we must do it at the source. You cannot hope for peace, or hope that they will lay their arms down and walk away from it all, but it just does not happen that way. Not in the real world. This is not a desirable thing we do. It is not an easy thing to swallow. And you will not be able to accept this if you do not believe in the United States as a whole. If you do not believe in our convictions and our goals, and you do not trust our Government. Or it’s right to defend it’s self. This is also NOT a war against the Iraqi’s. I cringe every time I hear the phrase “Target Iraq”. It is actually “Target Saddam”. It has been correctly characterized as the next phase in the war on Terrorism, which is a war to defend ourselves. You and I will never agree. My point of view stems from the fact that my job is all about National Defense. Defending the United States, not the world. There must be people who look out for the entire world, but I would argue that that type of person should NOT be in my position. I do not beleive this is an imperialistic action. We do not seek to colonize Iraq, or posses the land that belongs to the country of Iraq. We do not seek to profit from this conflict. |
At no time did he EVER say there was no dissension. At no time did he attempt to suppress it. |
But, what about all those around him, especially the unelected advisors like Richard Perle? And why do you trust the government so much now, when two years ago you did not? |
None of these countries had a god damn thing to do with who attacked us. Stop lying. "Iraq has a history of aggression and use of CBW on it’s own population and it’s neighbors." Fine. They attack their neighbors, then we can talk. They haven't in 12 years and last time they did, they wer're repelled. You have no point here. Moving on. "We have solid evidence that Iraq is still producing these weapons. " No. We dont. If we do, we havent made it available, and if we did we didnt make it available to the inspectors, and one is left with the only conclusion we had a hard on for war. Shame! "We have solid evidence that Iraq has given aid, comfort, and assistance to terrorist originations." So what. So has the US. We've supported terrorist organizations, but when we do, we dont call them that, we call them "freedom fighters" right? Bullshit. "We must rid the world of the cancer of terrorism, and we must do it at the source" You mean the US? Yes, the US is a fantastic cancer/source for weapons (we are the largest dealer you know). The CIA are professionals at training "freedom fighters". We ARE an integral part of the problem trace. God damn, wake up. "You cannot hope for peace, or hope that they will lay their arms down and walk away from it all, but it just does not happen that way." I dont just hope for peace trace. I hope the US pulls its collective head of out its, realizes our contribution to the problem and subsequently modify our outward behavior. "We do not seek to profit from this conflict." Lets talk those American firms who already have contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq. Oh, wait, they're just prudent planners. So organized. denial denial denial denial denial denial denial. god damn i wish this baby would come, because im not in the frame of mind to work so im left just to float around aimlessly and respond to your absurdness |
|
YOu really do hate the United States. You do hate the fact that we are the most powerful, with the best economy. You cannot stand it. There is noting anyone can tell you to make you think that the United States is worth anything. You are blind to reality. You have been brainwashed |
in fact, one could conclude id put greater value on my country than you because you lack the ability and forsight to see the danger of our actions, completely ignoring history. i think you're funny trace. you're such a funny little military stool pigeon. dangerous with your advocations, but funny. back to the ole "America-hater-firsters" argument. like a dog chasing his tail. |
It's like this -- my dad was always on my case when I was in high school, because he thought I wasn't doing well enough. He was one of the classic "A? Why didn't you get an A+?" kind of dads. I resented him for that immensely, and I felt like *nothing* was ever good enough for him. Now, I realize that he was so disappointed in my performance because he thought I was very intelligent and talented, and he couldn't understand why I was just sitting on my hands rather than use my gifts to their full extent. It's the same thing with Patrick and those of us who have the same ideas. This country could be so great...it's frustrating and disappointing when our strengths are misused or not used or misinterpreted as weaknesses. And it's the people who recognize and publicize our country's flaws who find the ways to improve this country. And since, I'm here, let me point out that, no, we do not have solid evidence that Iraq has given aid, comfort, and assistance to terrorist originations. There is no such evidence. |
spunk, if that's your best shot at understanding someone else's point of view and motives, it's pretty sad. You went from "considerable soul searching" at 1:36pm to giving up at 2:00pm. Is your soul so shallow that it only takes 24 minutes to exhaust? |
i have seen absolute proof positive linking Iraq to terrorist groups. I thought maybe the fact that they have paid millions to hamas would be links to terrorists, but hey, i guess since hamas is just blowing up isreali's they don't count. |
His continuous blaming of the administration, accusation of the military, and refusal to see this from a national standpoint instead of a global stand point has made me realize there is no reasoning with him. He blames america first, then cusses at me when I point it out. |
Just as there is reason to listen to you. Never stop trying to listen. |
hamas did not blow up the twin towers. hamas has had little to do with affairs outside the Israeli/Palestinian matter. |
|
I never set out to accuse you of being an "blame america first" or anti-american or any of that horse shit, but sometimes that is all i can see you saying. It's the administrations fault, it's the military's fault, etc. My view is from a different angle. I blame the 19 that flew the planes and anyone that had anything to do with that organization. I have seen evidence that points directly to iraq, iran, saudi arabia and iran. Yes. The US did indeed send cbw to iraq in 1979. It was in the form of 3 vials. Some University in the states shipped it to the Ministry of Education in Iraq. That is the only thing I can dig up so far on the US sending that shit over there |
no. sorry. you can just wrap that statement up with "but its all linked". No. sorry. doesn't hold water. Iraq and al Qaida are as different as you and I. the 19 that flew planes on 9/11 had just as much to do with the US as they have with Iraq, maybe more. why don't you read this about our connections with Iraqi WMDs. We were supplying them directly as late as 85-89, when they were fighting Iran. Not in 79. |
I know we sold them hardware, and evidently some to iran as well (hence the iran contra scandal)... bear with me |
|
if you click at the bottom the second part of the story, you'll note right off the bat, that those products cant leave the country without export licenses. there is strong evidence that the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations knew what the fuck was going on. who's in the white house now? many of the same players. even fuckwad criminals like Poindexter. how you can overlook any of that and continue to stand on swiss cheese is amazing. |
i cant take the time right now, I really have to get back to work... |
Blams Iran twice? They must be really evil. :) Spunky, do you believe it is our patriotic duty to ensure that the government is honest? |
"Alcolac was one of a handful of corporations prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department (news - web sites) for illegal exports. Although Alcolac allegedly supplied its mustard-gas ingredient to Iraq and Iran, the Justice Department indicted the company in 1988 only for its illegal exports to Iran, via a German company, Chemco. A Chemco executive, who arranged the sales, was convicted of violating export laws. Alcolac’s chemicals allegedly made their way to Iraq through Nu Kraft Mercantile Corp., via Jordan. In 1989, Alcolac pleaded guilty to one count of violating U.S. export laws." Source is the Yahoo News article patrick linked above. |
|
Isn't that exactly what Patrick is doing to any information provided by Trace, claiming it to be Pro-Bush propaganda, claiming not to trust it? Exact same thing opposite end of the scope. It's a game often played by almost all people in here and is crap. |
|
Maybe if patrick stops cussing at trace and trace stops telling patrick he hates America, also. Trace, i probably don't agree with you on many things, but as someone who works for the military quite often, I understand where you are coming from. The mission over every thing else. As a former screaming pinko liberal running dog ;), I also understand where Patrick is coming from. I think in the end, the main goals of each of you aren't that much different, you just disagree on the best way to get there. |
make up your fucking mind. I remember the first time I posted here you attacked me saying I hate the US and said that at least patrick "loves the US" |
he has no problem posting info from rightwing.com sites and think tank groups that are bluntly conservative. the heritage foundation? gimme a break. i consider my sources, because i want to minimize any shot to my credibility. my biggest source of news is yahoo. you know why? because they link numerous stories from many outlets and have Reuters and AP stories readily available. you can often read 5 different headlines for the same story and see the slant before even opening it. I dont post left wing propaganda. i dont read socialist websites, I don't support liberal think tank groups and i generally avoid linking them here, because they just arent in my realm. So, you know....i indeed scour stories to support my argument but i wont post just anything. i could have posted all kinds of shit citing bush sr. knew of the kuwait invasion in advance but i didnt because of credability. instead I linked a bbc article that posed some interesting ideas rather than taking one side or the other. |
|
|
San Diego Paper, NOT rightwing.com |
stories that would have hurt the US' "case" and turned more people against war.... and right now, those POWs... most US stations arent showing the pics, but I see every other country is, putting it on the front page, graphic and bloody. And honest. if the American people can't take these images, if they cant bear to see what the costs of war are, they have NO BUSINESS GOING TO WAR. period. |
so, you know. whatever. so what. we could "liberate" myramar tomorrow and there would be similar reactions. justify a war does not. |
..and then theres Tibet, but I dont see the US too eager to go after China... its sad how all the money thats "paying" for the war could be going to eliminate AIDS in Africa... |
|
Uncensored by Al-Jazeera More You want more? |
Al-Jazeera is not exactly what you would call un-biased, fair and balanced reporting. |
Yeah, I was wondering about that too, why it was ok that we were showing Iraqi POWs being frisked by US soldiers, but our POWs can't be shown by an Arab independent news source. Rowlf's got it right -- if the American people can't take these images, if they cant bear to see what the costs of war are, they have NO BUSINESS GOING TO WAR. |
We did show them with their hands up while we made sure they did not have any other weapons. Then we sent most of them HOME. We did not shoot them in the back of the head and smile for the camera. I think this puts it in very good perspective AGAIN, NOT RIGHTWING.COM |
|
|
|
I'd tend to agree with you there, spunk, but I wouldn't use the phrase "fair and balanced." FoxNews has made that phrase dirty. I rarely get mad at news reporting, but I did on saturday. I was watching FoxNews war coverage, and in the middle of supposedly "fair and balanced" war coverage, there was a commentator talking who called war protesters stupid. He used that word, "stupid." Now, you probably agree with that sentiment, but that's not the point. The point is that I expect that kind of talk on Fox from Hannity or O'Reilley, but not during supposedly "fair and balanced" news coverage. Ah, well. What did I expect? Rant over... |
And I really do not agree with news anchors calling them anything. Hannity and O'Rielly really are not news casters. They are commenterians (is that even a word?) Eri and I were pissed last night when we saw a guest ex-officer show the route the troops were likely to take into Baghdad. |
|
I don't think war protesters are stupid and I think it is ridiculous that anyone would say that they are. That was just plain wrong. I don't really watch FOX News, though I don't know why. I guess it just never gets my attention. |
|
That way when we re-classify those buildings from non-combatant to military target, they can caim we bombed little school children or hospitals or milk formula factories. The best weapon in Iraq's arsenal is propaganda. |
I have to say though that they are revealing some real things that should not be |
|
|
But what happened to "loose lips sink ships" and all that? I don't know. I do know that I am psyched to be getting Larry Burrows' fabulous book of photographs of Vietnam on sale for $35 from Amazon. Whoo! |
|
The pictures of the Iraqis show them surrendering or just after surrendering and weighting for transport. The US prisoners were specifically placed in front of the cameras and interogated for the purpose of humiliating them. Ther is a BIG difference. |
They weigh prisoners? Wouldn't that be humiliating, if they're self conscious? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They just gotta back out of turkey first |
Its really stupid how CNN calls itself your "most trusted name in news" when its more "the most convenient name in news" - Its McNews.... Its kinda wrong how people rely on stations run by major corporations for their information. You have to agree it really slants everything, it affects who they hire and what does and does not get on the air.. These companies get a lot of money and so they start looking out for their own interest, dumb it down again and again to reach the most people, instead of sporting any resemblence of journalistic integrity or honesty. |
|
Sloppy, people, sloppy! |
wait...global standpoint = bad? Don't piss in the pool. It's that simple. also, i stand by the notion that the only reason the US gov and army makes such a fuss about some of Saddam's more effective combat moves is because they didn't do it first, and they're so jealous. Like dressing up Iraqi military people as civilians, or using a hospital as an army base. that's fucking BRILLIANT! |
|
|
Using hospitals and elementary schools as military bases is fucking smart too, fucked up, but smart as hell. |
its sad that i didnt know about Haliburton being involved in dividing up the goods until last night on Jon Stewart... |
I was thinking about how biased media coverage might aid (not cause, but aid) in violence breaking out at protests... think about this... trace makes a good example of this theory when people feel they arent being listened to or respected, they get frustrated and try even harder to get their message out (protest, these pointless internet battles), they fail again and again and keep getting pushed aside, and their frustration turns to violence at a breaking point, like police getting in their face. that lack of choice about what to do when a police commands you something really messes with people, it pushes em over the age. my uncles a cop and says the same thing, that people arent so much truly violent with them so much as they cant deal with the fact that they have to listen to them... ..and then the violence gets the news instead of teh other protesters, which makes everything worse for everyone else, causing more frustration... its a dangerous snowball, and something bad could happen... I also think this because I notice in other places where the coverage is more balanced or leaning towards anti-war sentiment the protests have caused a lot less problems and arrests... and I dont believe its because cops would be more lenient and tolerant in other places in the world... |
|
Bear with me a moment here... I've done a lot of reading about PTSD in Vietnam veterans, and one thing that comes out in many of the accounts I've read is that the "dirty tricks" of the Vietnamese enemy (e.g., booby-trapping dead US soldiers, the VC spies acting as washing women on the US bases, etc.) significantly contributed to the US soldiers' conception of the Vietnamese as inhuman, bestial, etc. etc. Because they didn't play fair, you see....they weren't honorable soldiers. And there is a high correlation between vets who thought of their enemy in these terms and vets with severe PTSD. (The paper I wrote in college about the likely reasons for the correlation was ~15 pages long, so I'll spare you. Read Jonathan Shay's "Achilles in Vietnam" if you want more details.) Anyway, I guess what I want to say is that knowing that unfair fighting on one side really fucks with the other side's heads makes me very nervous for our troups. Clinical psychology just saw a growth in patient base. |
what effect do you think those super huge Daisy Cutter bombs had on the folks in Afghanistan? In Vietnam we firebombed them with napalm. What is PTSD? |
|
Got married to this woman, made the best living he could (not all that, but they didn't starve), adopted his wife's grandson and did his best to be a father to her kids. Then his wife went through all of his money and had an affair with some guy she met at a bar, left him and moved in with the guy at the bar. That just made things worse for him and he didn't know how to deal with it. He started having delusions. It was sad to watch him. We went over one night to visit him, make sure he was doing allright. That was when the delusions became apparent. My mom was worried about his mental state in all of this, considering he was alone and penniless, facing losing his house. He talked with my mom and started working through it when his ex pulled outside the fence with her middle daughter and her daughters boyfriend and they just started throwing things at him and shouting obsenities at my mother and myself. He felt so threatened and didn't know how to cope with it. He almost lost it. Started having flashbacks. It was scary. Fortunately my mom found his traquilizers before he got so lost we couldn't bring him back. I felt so sorry for him. War is ugly. I don't think there is anyone out there who would deny that. It's uglier than how many casualties there are or which building gets blown up. That's bad, but it is still a hell of a lot worse than that. I just hope that everyone finds their way home safely and sanely. I doubt it will happen, but I will still hope so. |
War in general damages your psyche, but the Vietnam War was particularly brutal because of the way it was run, the methods of fighting, the landscape, the lack of support from home, and on and on and on. Patrick, I wouldn't consider any of your examples dirty fighting. We try to scare our enemies and persuade them to defect, but we don't play/prey on their human feelings in the ways displayed in my examples. #1 - We don't use human shields. Others - We don't rig our enemy's dead with explosives. We don't use weapons that will blind people on purpose, like laser weapons. We don't use gas warfare. We have standards, goddammit! Seriously, though...we have certain rules and we follow them (officially...individuals are always going to go off on their own and commit some atrocity or another). Side note: I was reading about the use of gas warfare in WWI....they used 4 different types of gas. One was non-fatal but highly irritating of the eyes and respiritory passages -- the Germans would send this gas over the line in artillery shells, so there would be no warning before it struck. The British or French (or whoever) soldiers would then put on their gas masks, but only for a moment, because their eyes and throat would become more irritated in the confines of the mask. So they would take the masks off. And then the Germans would hit them with mustard gas, which was fatal. And for some reason, when I hear about this, I think, "That was *dirty*...but that was *smart.*" But when I hear about Iraqi soldiers stockpiling weapons in hospitals, I think that's just dirty -- they're banking on our good nature not to hit their innocent sick. And if I were in the field, I'd probably become totally, wildly angry and want to bomb their hospitals anyway. But I'm weak like that. |
Uhhh. what do you think a concussion grenade is? Its grenade that creates a huge flash of blinding light and bang so loud, you shit yourself. Hell, even our swat teams and police forces use these devices. The Daisy Cutter, next to the recently test MOAB, is a bomb used in Vietnam and Afghanistan that is the largest bomb short of nuclear in terms of power. How thats not a weapon of mass destruction I dont know, but they cited its use in Afghanistan as psychological because the concussion was so fucking loud. Napalm is pretty nasty. We've used fuel-air bombs that are just as terrifying as gas. If anything, more so, because you see fire. you dont see gas. I really dont see how one measure of warfare can be any more brutal than the next. Preying on our goodwill or preying on their lack of weaponry its all bad. |
------ THE STERNUTATOR gases...were nonlethal. They were capable, however, of producing extreme irritation of the nose, throat, and eyes, caused severe headache and nausea....The inhalation of these gases before the application of the mask made mask wearing very uncomfortable and was apt to cause its premature removal and thus to subject the wearer to the effects of more important gases which usually accompanied or immediately followed the use of the sternutators. This type of gas usually arrived in the nature of a surprise, since it was used in high explosive shells. Because of this it was difficult for the troops to recognize immediately the presence of the gas. ------- |
|
|
|
land mines, which are considered a fair tactic have a habit of taking legs off. are you saying eyes carry more ethical weight than legs? to my knowledge no one has used laser blinding weapons so thats kinda moot right? |
|
|
What if they held a war and nobody showed up? (*cue Theme from A Summer's Place*) |
source: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/blu-82.htm Land mines are bad, yes? Bad enough for most nations to sign an agreement saying that they wont use them anymore... But not America. Besides isn't all fair in love and war? |
Now I'm depressed. |
we never said we would not use them. at least we are honest about that. |
I also never belived that the Geneva convention would civilize war. I also dont belive that any country wholly adhears to said conven. but they all pretend they do... As far as I'm concerned, I dont belive anyone, ever. unless i've gotten to know you and trust you and your word. But i've not met 99.99999999999999% of the worlds population, sooooo.... |
another Bush basher! |
|
but i do understand why patrick has been getting so frustrated talking to you. consider this my last visit to this thread |
|
So, when he says you hate America, you do. Why is that so frustrating? |
did balloons drop from your ceiling? |
I can't stand this lady. |
sheen is a patriotic american, expressing his constitutional freedoms. you see? my thread was started with an example of a women, like you, condeming those who were expressing their 1st Amendment rights. she was infact spouting unAmericanism. Same for the fuckwad condemning consciousness objectors. so, while I thank you for your submission, despite its incontinuity to the thread, its rejected. but have a cockmint on your way out. |
|
|
heinous bitch is the only words that come to mind. |
Does Michael Moore irritate right-wingers as much as Ann Coulter does left-wingers? Fuck, now that would be an Ultimate Fighting Match I would pay to see. |
|
|
I rank her with Her |
|
"as long as it takes. ok? thats all you need to know. as long as it takes." to this one reporters question. the silence is deadly. you can hear blair squirm in his loafers. he sounds like a cranky dick this morning. |
So, anything important happen? |
|
|
|
Hmmm...."However long it takes to win. However long it takes to achieve our objective. However long it takes. It's not a matter of timetable, it's a matter of victory." vs. "It's not set by time, it's set by the nature of the job." See? Humility and propriety. That's what I'm sayin. |
|
|
See, he knows he cannot win militarily, so he is waging a phsycological battle. And the Washington Post "article" (commentary is more like it) is the fruit of saddam's labour. Saddam thinks that America and the UK will not tolerate casualities of iraqis, civilian iraqis or coalition forces. There are a few people at the pentagon who did not get what they wanted, so they have a serious case of sour grapes, and Thomas E Ricks was more then happy to convey that individual's message. Most of the "main stream press" picked it up and ran with it. He's not arrogant, but he is pissed off. And rightfully so. Hell, I was listening to the centcom briefing today and a reported stood and and whined at the Brig. General (one star) that they wanted someone higher to brief them, and if they did not get one why should they stick around. He told them "Go home if you want to". The media is having some real problems right now. This war is only 7 days old, and is still progressing faster then anticipated. The sarcasm is a direct response to the tone of the media, which is producing saddam's PR horse shit |
If so, please quote the phrases you object to. |
and "because he's an arrogant hillbilly dick. he's the furthest thing from statesman we've ever had for a president." |
|
|
|
"One senior general at the Pentagon, listening to both sides of the argument, said he thinks that in short term the pessimists will look right, but will be proved wrong by mid-April." Golly, sounds awfully liberal to me. |
|
this whole thing was delayed at least 3 months. |
If anything, Bush sounded a bit defensive, like Rummy with the questions that have been put in their face as to how this is playing out. And anyone can see its not playing out like that had hoped and they are defensive because of it. The civilian population isn't exactly as thrilled as they had hoped. The Iraqi military hasn't defected like they had hoped and the guerilla tactics are proving to be a problem. The war strategy seems one step behind political strategy and they are paying a price. the real bloodbath, on both sides will begin soon. They know this, the media knows and damn right the likes of Rummy and Bush should be grilled. this has nothing to do with supporting saddam. we wont tolerate high casualties, because this war is too fucking stupid to allow it. we were'nt invaded, and we werent even directly threatened by Iraq. should the death toll reach 4000, that is US and British dead, you can expect all of their careers will be over. Hell, maybe even 2500. Public opinion will teeter out and they'll find themselves in a Vietnam like quagmire. |
Let me make one thing perfectly clear. I deeply regret one life lost on any side of this mess. There is absolutely no reason what so ever that we should be in Iraq right now. I mean it. |
Except that Jackson threw better parties. |
|
|
|
|
I think we stopped to early 12 years ago. Look, we saw what a horrid mistake we had made in support saddam earlier when he invaded kuwait, regardless of any conspiracy theory that suggests we urged him to do it. He did it because he owed russia so much from the iran-iraq war and he thought Kuwait was underpricing their oil, so he was not able to sell enough to pay his debts. he then got all coked up and ordered the invasion. which was not unlike his order to invade iran. Russia and america got involved because we saw our oil prices sky rocket. these two countries were sinking each other's oil tankers. The europeans, russia and the us were experiencing a huge rise in the cost of energy as a direct result. So getting involved at that time DID make sense because like it or not, oil supplies do have a direct impact on our national security. so we got involved. we helped saddam beat iran. we did trade some chemicals and biologics durring this period. the main reason was so that they could develope an anti-serum for the viruses. It was a condition of the trade that he not use them as a weapon. then he invaded kuwait. We realized what a mistake we had made with this man, so here comes gulf war 1. the UN gave a strict objective, removal of saddam from kuwait. We had saddam in our cross hairs, but powell told the president it was time to stop. We pulled back, he signed a cease-fire agreement. we told the iraqis to revolt against hussein and we would help. We stood back and watched hussein masacre the ones who did uprise, using the very gasses he was ordered to dispose of. I think GWHB should have finished it. We should not be in the position we are in today. I hold bush sr, powell, and clinton responsible. the first two plus saddam of course, have the iraqi civilians blood on their hands. Clinton did not do a whole hell of a lot about it for the 8 years he was in power. Bush Jr made the mistake again of listening to powell and letting us get stuck in the quagmire of the UN. If we had gone in 3 months ago, we would have been finished about a month ago. with far less casualties on any side of the fence. Not to mention, i really have a problem with him wanting to instill a "democratic" government in iraq. or any muslim country. Muslims beleive that Islam is a rule by God and God's laws. Democracy is a rule by man & man's laws choosen by man. Muslims do not beleive such a government should exist because it spits in the face of god. They will never be able to accept that type of government. We will always have this struggle until one day MANKIND learns for sure that there is or is not a god. Just like palestine and isreal. There will be no peace until someone wins militarily. |
second, if you listen to Bush's speeches, he cites a divine right of intervention (though he doesnt say it remotely as eloquently). he cites God's will way too often. our republic, at least in Iraq, is fueled by God's will. we will win with God's blessings. Just the other day Fl he said : "The freedom you defend is the right of every person and the future of every nature. The liberty we prize is not American's gift to the world; it is God's gift to humanity." Bush senior would have been in UN violation going after Saddam. It was not in our best interests. We would have disrupted the entire coalition. It would have been illegal. We are not where we are now because Bush Sr. chose to stick to the UN mandate as much as we are in the situation now because of...well...you know what i think. Bush did finish the mission as outlined by the UN. What he didnt do was violate the UN (and US laws if Im not mistaken) on targeted assinations. Whether we are in the situation now because of his would-be illegal action or other reasons is a vast subject, but i dare so its so cut and dry. |
just because the UN did not sanction the removal of saddam hussein does not mean we should have left him in power. |
|
|
And I disagree with your assessment of Islam and democracy. Patrick alluded to it, but you can make that argument about any religion, really, and see how well it holds water. Just because a lot of Muslim-dominated nations are theocracies, doesn't mean they are incapable of becoming democracies. After all, Turkey is a democracy. |
you can have a Islamic Democracy. The UN is chaos. We have plenty of forums for endless debate. We need a body that is going to enforce it's own resolutions instead of just make new ones. The mere absense of fighting does not mean peace. |
Is the UN vulnerable to bullying? You bet. We do it all the time, even threaten our dues if they don't give us what we want. |
they may be usefull in the case of natural disaster releif, but as far as being a peace keeper, the record speaks for itself. |
that was not necessary |
I think most of it's environmental resolutions and "treaties" are not based in true science, and are aimed at moving money from the treasuries of the wealthier nations and resdributing it to the poorer nations. The war crimes court was set up for the express purpose of invoking global law over national law and does infringe on national sovereignty |
Geez. |
its a baseless point used by right wing pundits, without actually addressing the issue, to make their point and ultimately justification for this war. its pussy because it just sorta negates everything the UN actually does. since when did you become concerned about the idea of sovereignty? i will agree they are an ineffective peace-keeper but is that due to the UN or too arrogant member states who completely disregard it. |
|
i cannot check my email from here |
I think Patrick is referring to both, if I had to guess. |
|
|
I am going to want to consume mass quantities of alcohol tomorrow...probably starting around noon. |
|
|
arent you listening to trace, patrick? Dont you understand that diplomacy means getting exactly what you want, and if you dont get exactly what you want, diplomacy has failed? Maybe I need to define diplomacy for you, so you understand... Diplomacy (n.) - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons Oh wait, thats the definition of terrorism... wait, so which approach did the US use? |
|
|
|
|
|
http://subgenius.com/ts/hos.html the latest show. |
|
Caption: Dig up your rubbish. It's fouling our soil. |
The showpiece cenotaph at the graveyard in Northern France was smeared in red paint with the words: “Dig up your rubbish. It’s fouling our soil.” Other slogans at the Etaples cemetery near Boulogne included “Death to the Yankees” and “Saddam Hussein will win and spill your blood.” And the vandals wrote “Rosbeefs go home” — the French insult for Brits is roast-beefs. Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George Bush were also branded war criminals. The graffiti was discovered by a shocked gardener and spotted by around 80 visitors. It was cleaned off the same day. Roy Hemmington — spokesman for the Commonwealth War Graves Commission — said: “We are deeply offended. This is the strongest language and most vile graffiti I have witnessed at a war graves cemetery. “The suggestion that the bodies of soldiers who died for France should be dug up is particularly foul.” Most soldiers buried at the cemetery were defending France at the Somme and Ypres during World War I. Another 122 are troops who died fighting the Nazis in World War II. Among the dead are a winner of the Victoria Cross, 217 holders of the Military Medal and 69 holders of the Military Cross. A number had been awarded France’s top military decoration, the Legion d’Honneur. Roy added: “Almost every British regiment has war dead here. This insults just about the entire British Army.” Anti-British feeling has been whipped up in France since President Jacques Chirac refused to let the UN back action against Iraq. Last night Jim Kelleher, chief clerk to the Royal Fusiliers Association, said: “No sane person would do this. It is a disgrace. I have family buried in France and if I could get my hands on whoever did this I’d bury them too.” Jeremy Lillies, of the Royal British Legion, added: “It is distressing.” The Sun’s Military Adviser Major-General Perkins said: “It is despicable.” Appalled local MP Jacques Lang said: “It is an attack on the memory of the British and American soldiers who contributed to the liberation of our soil.” Police captain Thibault Martin added: “It is sick and cowardly.” The shocking news comes as a new poll reveals that a third of the French want SADDAM to win the war. A massive 78 per cent of 1,000 people in the poll by French newspaper Le Monde disapproved of the Allied action. But 16 per cent “really wish for” a Coalition victory — while 37 per cent said they would prefer one. |
|
|
