For Everything Else, theres...


sorabji.com: The Stalking Post: For Everything Else, theres...
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By trace on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 12:17 am:


By dave. on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 02:23 am:

    my mortgage: $89,000

    $310,000,000 wasted on an assasination attempt: fuck you.


By Cat on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 08:24 am:

    My new lipstick - $25.

    Lending it to Trace - free

    Him using it to kiss Bush's hairy balls - $1,000 in therapy for me to recover from the ickiness.


By eri on Saturday, March 22, 2003 - 11:43 am:

    LOL. What shade?


By patrick on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 02:08 pm:

    like i needed to read "Bush's hairy balls" this morning.

    somebody scoop the cat box.


By patrick on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 02:26 pm:


By eri on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 03:35 pm:

    What is that picture from Patrick?


By patrick on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 03:53 pm:

    What? or Where?

    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/030323/168/3lley.html&e=4&ncid=996

    Baghdad.

    the body count continues.

    and the dumbass in the whitehouse says this may take longer than some originally thought.

    fucking liar.

    he gives you the feeling, like a contractor you just hired to build your house for 1 million, then says "oh you mean you wanted us to use wood....ohhhhhh thats going to be another 2 mil."


    just wait till we get to baghdad.

    then the bodies will really pile up.


    wmd's my ass.



By trace on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 04:28 pm:

    From Time Magazine:
    "Saddam had tailors stitch up 15,000 British and American uniforms so that disguised Iraqi troops could attack Iraqi civilians, allowing Saddam to blame the allies. The enormous antiwar demonstrations in the West prior to the fighting may have emboldened Saddam into thinking the Americans could be made to fold. "

    Also, know this for an absolute fact:

    The Republican Guard has planted explosives in the civilian areas and on bridges Iraqi civilian would use to leave an area that is under attack.

    The biggest weapon in Iraq's and America's arsenal is this: Propoganda.

    We have spent BILLIONS on making sure our missiles are guided, not just "dumb" bombs.

    Again you are proving your willingness to beleive what ever comes out against the United States.

    We are fighting him with convential weapons.
    He knows he cannot beat our weapons.
    So they use psychological warfare.
    They use propaganda.
    And it's working, obviously.
    They parade dead US soldiers, US soldiers being executed, little girls killed by who knows, honestly.


By Nate on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 05:11 pm:

    i hear american soldiers are anally raping iraqi children! the barbarians!

    down with bush!

    hooray saddam! praise saddam!


By Nate on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 05:14 pm:

    i heard on NPR that most of the civilian casualties in baghdad are from iraqi anti-aircraft fire fallout. ann garroll said that most iraqis in baghdad are not afraid of american bombs because of how percise the bombs have been.

    dirty lefty conspiracy! they are obviously being terrorized and destoryed by the tyranny of american munitions! evil empire, we!!!


By patrick on Sunday, March 23, 2003 - 05:41 pm:

    "We have spent BILLIONS on making sure our missiles are guided, not just "dumb" bombs."


    oh, arent we the happy, warm fuzzy invading forces.


    we won't really know the truth for sometime. so, you know, im not discounting what the Iraqi army has done trace. I would expect a portion of their populus, despite what we think of their living conditions, to fight the invaders.

    We are an invading force you'd fight too if you were being invaded. you use whatever you have at your disposal. its called guerilla warfare. whatever tactics necessary. its war. its ugly, people die. there is no more or no less nobility in using similar looking uniforms to gain an upperhand just as there is no more or less nobility than firing million dollar rockets from 100s of miles away and calling your actions brave

    "Again you are proving your willingness to beleive what ever comes out against the United States."

    um. no. but rather my willingness to disbelieve whatever is fed to us from the mothership. its not like they've earned my trust or anything.


By semillama on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 11:58 am:

    Tonkin gulf, for example.

    Plus other examples from Vietnam of government/military lying to the public.


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 12:28 pm:

    No, we arent bombing Cambodia.


By semillama on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 01:01 pm:

    What inflated bodycounts?


    Vietnam is also a great supply of Newspeak:

    "we had to destroy the village in order to save it"


By Nate on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 01:09 pm:

    if the government didn't lie to the people, democracy wouldn't have a chance in hell. you guys are smart enough to realize this.

    i'm not defendeding any action, but really- focusing on the honesty of the government as proof of anything doesn't make sence.

    do americans eat healthy diets? do americans manage well their personal finances? where americans have all the information and full choice, they make wrong decisions all the time. they are incapable of understanding simple concepts, so why should anyone assume they'd make right decisions on anything a complex as geopolitical relations?

    add further that due to national security there is definitely information that cannot be broadcast to the general public. how can you expect americans, who in the general case cannot make good decisions when given all the information, to make good decisions given a fraction of the information?

    one of the fundamental purposes of government is to protect the interests of its nation- safety and freedom. the public cannot always understand or even know the reasons behind actions the government must take to accomplish this.

    this why we have a representative government. you elect someone to make these decisions for you. you elect them for their character, and you expect them, once in office, to make these decisions for you.

    does this always work? of course not, because we have the same group of americans deciding who to elect as we do running their creditcards into the ground and eating value meals six days a week.

    but shit, where's the alternative?


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 01:31 pm:

    so we have an education problem?




    maybe if we spent less on bombs used in wars built oh a foundation of lies and more on education, we might have a public that can eat better, finance better and understand geopolitical situations better.



    you know this isnt about sensitive information that could compromise security.

    this is about forgeries, lack of evidence and mistruths about who has committed what to the US used to propel and justify our actions. i dunno, when handing out ultimate fates to our troops, their troops and innocent civilians, i would expect the high rope to be walked. it seems we've reached a new low in actually justifying our aggression.


By Nate on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 01:56 pm:

    no, i don't know what all this is about. i know what the media tells us, what the government tells us.

    sometimes you need to tell children about santa to get them to be good for a few weeks. the american people are children.

    frankly, most of us don't want the burden of knowing what is really going on. i sure don't.

    it isn't about education. find me someone who doesn't know a big mac a day isn't going to do you well. i can definitely find you five who do know and eat greasy crap daily anyway.

    the average joe is an average joe. you need public support, you need to give the average joe something he can get behind. this is what happens. no amount of education is going to change the inherent ability of average joe to understand.

    this war isn't built on a foundation of lies. public opinion of it might be.

    utopia isn't possible. evil exists.


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 02:16 pm:

    trace, take note.

    a compelling argument for what is happening.




    this war IS built around lies but you know what id say, so I wont bother.

    when it comes to the big mac juxtoposition you pose, the *pleasure* derived from the meaty goodness and special sauce override the rationale that says this isnt good for us.

    what exactly is "tasty" about this war? Are you saying average joe's desire to rally around the god damn flagpole is it? there is no satisfication such as that of a new credit card or a super-sized meal from what is happening, or if there is, Its completely foreign to me.


    i dont deny that i lack the forsight to the burden of truth but still...


By eri on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 02:24 pm:

    That was nate silly


By Nate on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 02:53 pm:

    naw, patty was talking to trace.

    patty-

    the big mac isn't an analogy for the war. babyfood is an analogy for the war- babies don't understand that they need what's in the baby food. hell, they can't understand. it is beyond a baby's comprehension that a variety of less-than-tasty mush is the best thing for them.

    and yea, that analogy falls apart, but you get the idea.

    the big mac is proof that people aren't smart enough to think for themselves.

    i think this war is important for the economic security of the US. i think this has many facets, and i won't pretend to know any of them.

    would you have been pro-nuking japan in WWII? would anyone who is protesting this war have been?

    yet, those bombs and those casualties saved many times more lives.

    i wouldn't have understood the all the elements of the situation at the time. i would have been against nuking japan. i would have been wrong.




By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:06 pm:

    no, i wouldnt have supported using such an indiscriminate weapon of mass destruction.


By Spider on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:08 pm:

    "yet, those bombs and those casualties saved many times more lives."


    Well, since we can only speculate the cost in lives of a ground war in Japan, we can only guess at how many lives were saved by using the bomb. (Unless you're talking about American lives only. Obviously no Americans were lost in the blast [though it did destroy the lives of the men who dropped the bomb, in another way].)

    Furthermore, the bombs killed and injured nearly 100,000 civilian men, women, and children, while a ground war would have targeted mainly those men on both sides who had signed up to be there.

    So, basically, I would have protested the use of the A-bomb before the war, and I still challenge the ethics of its use ~60 years later. History doesn't always lift the veil over the implication of events.


By J on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:17 pm:

    Through the 1990's the Serbs killed thousands of Muslims in Bosnia. The United Nations passed resolutions and sent food.But still Bosnian Muslims and Albanian Muslims died. Finally in 1995 at considerable political risk,Clinton and NATO finally authorized air strikes,Americans fought and some died,to save and protect Muslims from genocide.Americans went for humanitarian reasons,in a land where U.S. strategic interests did not lie. We should have finnished what we started with Saddam 12 years ago.


By trace on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:28 pm:

    "We should have finnished what we started with Saddam 12 years ago."

    Amen


By trace on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:29 pm:

    i wish we had.
    The struggle you see us in now would probably have been much worse then.
    There would be more US and Iraqi deaths, including civilians. But fewer would have called it an Unjust war.


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:30 pm:

    what we started?

    you mean the thumbs up to invade Kuwait? Because thats what happened. Its been well reported we knew he was going to invade, that we would allow him to invade.

    So what exactly did we start 12 years ago?


By J on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:41 pm:

    In 1991,the United States led a coalition of nearly three dozen nations to liberate Kuwait from the invasion of Suddams troops. Kuwaitis are also Muslim.Americans fought,and died to extricate them from Suddam.


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:46 pm:

    but im saying, there is considerable evidence to say that we allowed him to invade.

    so did we start the "liberation" or did we actually start the invasion by allowing it to happen only to act like we were caught off guard to and lead such a noble coalition of liberation.

    are you telling me you believe that we had no friggin clue that Iraq was massing 100s of thousands of troops on the border and we didnt know about it?

    c'mon. we knew. we allowed it. we gave saddam the double cross. in the end, America has since had a solid concrete military footing in the middle east.


By trace on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 03:52 pm:

    now you are blaming the US for Iraq invading Kuwait????
    Um, see. Blame America First.
    OK...


By J on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 04:16 pm:

    What we did was give hope to the Muslims there,then left without taking down Saddam. I wish Marcus was here.


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 04:17 pm:

    look trace. step out of your black and white realm for a minute.

    there has been discussion over the years, granted outside your CNN world of things, that Bush Sr. knew what was going on.

    im posing questions, not necessarily making statements.

    i have a hard time accepting we didnt know his intentions. i have a hard time accepting that we saw his build up on the border and then acted entirely caught off guard when he did invade.

    by saying "blame America first" you imply that i rule without even considering the alternative which is entirely not the case. Please. Give that angle up. Its unfounded, you sound stupid using it and it just has no bearing.

    Some interesting ideas on the Kuwait invasion


By eri on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 04:17 pm:

    Patrick, you complain that we invaded Iraq this time without a clear threat from Saddam. If we had invaded Kuwait to liberate those people before Saddam had invaded wouldn't it be the same thing? It would be pre-emptive war, which is one of the things you are saying you are against with this war. So maybe they waited until he was actually in Kuwait to liberate them to prevent this stuff on pre-emptive war?


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 04:20 pm:

    Really J?

    cause its been said many Muslims didnt want us there, they wanted to fight their own battles, at least on the Saudi side of things.

    where do you think a major source of contention against the US (outside the Saudi oil business) lies?




By Nobody on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 04:36 pm:

    San Fransisco, LA & NY.
    Oh, and France and Germany.
    And Baghdad


By semillama on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 04:47 pm:

    Actually, American POWs were being held near Hiroshima, I believe, so Americans were killed.

    Otherwise, I'm with Spider. The use of nuclear weapons was a horrendous act and nothing will ever make it anything but.


By patrick on Monday, March 24, 2003 - 05:04 pm:

    um no nobody. trace.

    try US airbases in Saudi Arabia, some the most revered land in the Muslim.


By RANDOMPERSON2 on Saturday, August 9, 2003 - 02:55 am:

    blah... ?


By jack on Saturday, August 9, 2003 - 03:00 am:

    yes, blah. you are correct.


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact