To all you ignorant...

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 05:07 AM
link   
"And you believe that it will work with Saddam ?"

yes.
Contrary to popular belief Saddam has stated time and time again that he wants nothing more than the west to lift sanctions on his country and allow him to get his finances back in order.

In the west he's potrayed as a maniacle mad man. This simply isn't the case, he's not a nice man, but he's not a stupid man.

He knows that a peacefull solution to this conflict is his only real chance and He'd like nothing more than to be accepted by the west and enjoy the benefits that grants.

Our basic pig headedness prevents this.

Helping him re forge his country would have massive benefits not only for Iraq but also for us, we'd be able to monitor him more closely, we'd be able to instigate political control over his movements, hell we could turn him into an ally, problem solved.

fact is no one in the west would ever dream of accepting this.
It would sure as hell bring stability to the region though.




posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 05:40 AM
link   
I don't know if you did a point or not, lupe.


But I know that tyrans are tyrans, and that dealing with them will never be the good solution. We tryed many time in the past,and each time,we've been screwed by them. Those tyrans understand ONLY one thing : THE POWER ! When you are strong with them, they don't play with you.

If Saddam was really thinking about his country and peoples, he would resign, and the problem would be fixed, definitively !

I don't understand why you want to deal with tyrans. Me, I don't like them and I know that they are dangerous, even for you. You are not stupid, and you know it.

So why don't you have a strong attitude against them ?

Why do you want to deal with those tyrans, who are all mass murderers,cheaters, liars and twisters ?


[Edited on 21-1-2003 by ultra_phoenix]



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 05:54 AM
link   
its "tyrants" and the reason I want to deal with them is that the alternative is to blow them up, and blowing them up usually results in lots of people dying.

I don't give a crap what he did in the past, all our historys are littered with the barbaric actions of our governments.

all I care about is averting a war and getting the people of Iraq Back on their feet.

I don't see how bombing their crumbling citys back past their present situation in the stone age through to the jurrasic will achieve this.

Dealing with saddam might.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 06:07 AM
link   
Ok, I see.

We want the same thing ( that's good ), but we don't agree on how to do it.

But who told you that I want to " bomb them all " ?


I sayed that we had to remove Saddam ( and all the tyrans too, not just him ). I never sayed that we had to kill 1 billion peoples to achieve this goal.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 06:15 AM
link   
You won't kill a billion people, but if you go to war with saddam there will be thousands of civillian casualties, maybe millions given the state of the country.

Saddam also has a habit of using civies as human shields, sure thats his fault not ours but it amounts to the same thing.
lots of innocent dead people.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 11:46 AM
link   
With your POV, lupe I can write this :

We are in 1935.

The nazis still can be defeat,cuz they are not enough powerfull, and " all we have to do ", it's attacking them.

I want to attack them, you don't want. We know all the result of your POV.

We are in the same situation now. Of course, Saddam will not try to overrun the world ( for a simple reason, he can NOT do it. Otherwise... ), but this guy is a tyrant like Hitler was a tyrant.

And if we remove Saddam from power, how many Irakians lives will be saved ???? Much more that if we attack Irak and have to kill some Irakians ( most of them will be soldiers, and not civilians ).

If Saddam is not removed, he will not change and he will kill many others Irakians.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 01:20 PM
link   
To invoke images of 1935 Nazi Germany is a dangerous one as the situations have only the slightest similarities. The results of a mobilisation against Germany could have been seen as being too fast, too forceful, especially considered what the whole disarmament angle which the League of Nations had pushed in the post WWI period.


TN1

posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 01:21 PM
link   
I have to agree with the person created this subject!!
Indeed ,you are living in a 'dream'!!
No other country than the USA has been involved and attacked so many countries outside US!!
They have also supported illegal goverments like Saddam Housein's in the Iraq-Iran war,and for the persons that they don't know history ...Open some books !!!
Another example is the dictator Augousto Pinoset ,that has been supported throughout his 'career' in crimes!!
Against the legal-elected president Alliende(Salvador)
Since when Iran is your friend ???A question to someone posted before ....
You have no friends !!!NOTHING !!!EXCEPT WHAT YOU CAN GAIN IN MONEY &ENERGY ,STEELING FROM OTHER COUNTRIES!!!!
Against USSR ,Bin Laden was very welcome from your goverment!!
But life has many faces (11th of September) and so on..)
Was it a murder??Yes it was !!
But how about the every-day killings in Iraq since the end of the gulf-war???The americans have never left !!
Why no other country except the miserable UK is not taking part ???????
Finally there are Brutal goverments in the world trying to introduce a new world order!Did they asked us??
Killing ,murdering ,taking lifes legally in the form of the death penalty ,LET'S SAY!!!
China for example ,Iraq,Iran ,Saudi Arabia ,NOT EUROPE,NOT EVEN RUSSIA,!!!!But guess where else ...
In the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!!And these have been increased by the illegal goverment...
Life has many faces,my friends !!
And by the way , some of the posts qualify for the second moron award!!!!!!
Becarefull ,especially those who are coming form the other part of the ATLANTIC!!!!!



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 02:08 PM
link   
A small quiz to Mad scientist: N29 14.44' E47 59.02' when you are done, talk to me.

Now for the rest. Saddam IS a tyrant. We do agree to that. But don't you think that our government uses most of the times ways that are bearly legal. To every respect. And don't give me the "it's for our safety" bs. Don't you know that a certain quantity of the emails that you send and receive are intercepted? Don't you know that the movies that you watch have always a certain hidden message. Anybody knows anything about those flashes in the tv during the programs. Ultra you mentioned Hitler and WWII. Great. I will ask you then about the ministry of propaganda in the 3rd rich. Gebels was his name? The job he had was to inform (or misinform for us) the axis citizens. Right? What is the job of all the big networks? More or less the same thing. And they can be control by governments. Can't they? Let me remind you of a movie that I saw last week "wag the dog". If you haven't seen it watch it. And you might like it.

What about credit cards? Don't THEY know where you are? Why all this Big Brother thing? Let's say that everybody who is not a US citizen is a possible terrorist and has to be monitored. OK acceptable. What about the US citizens? Are we possible terrorists?



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 02:27 PM
link   
And one more thing as I said before:

"HISTORY IS WRITTEN FROM THE VICTORIOUS SIDE"

and one more, when there is a war look for the actual causes not what the media offer you. Hint to everybody northern Iraq is filled with petrol.



posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dragon73
A small quiz to Mad scientist: N29 14.44' E47 59.02' when you are done, talk to me.



I assume you are talking about lattitude and longitude coordinates. It's bloody hard to find a decent map on the web which shows the lat and long lines. However I believe this point lies very near Kuwait City. As for the significants please fill me in.



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nasojiti

1) To invoke images of 1935 Nazi Germany is a dangerous one as the situations have only the slightest similarities.

2) The results of a mobilisation against Germany could have been seen as being too fast, too forceful, especially considered what the whole disarmament angle which the League of Nations had pushed in the post WWI period.



1) No, it was a good example.

2) The League of Nations and the UN.Yeah, let's talk about them. WE DON'T NEED THEM ! And you are safe ONLY when you are armed to the teeth. When you are weak, you have allways someone who want to attack you, BECAUSE you are weak. Hitler did it ,other tyrants did too before him and it will never change, exceptifwe are all well armed.


Originally posted by Dragon73

Ultra you mentioned Hitler and WWII. Great. I will ask you then about the ministry of propaganda in the 3rd rich. Gebels was his name? The job he had was to inform (or misinform for us) the axis citizens. Right? What is the job of all the big networks? More or less the same thing. And they can be control by governments. Can't they?



It was Goebels. And I know that each media is a part of a big propaganda machinery.

But Saddam is still a tyrant, and tyrants have to be removed. When it was Pinochet or Franco, everybody were thinking that we didn't have to deal with them.

So, I wonder why the same peoples who were against Franco & Pinochet are now ready to deal with tyrants from Irak or North-Korea. Oh yeah, I know....These tyrants are from the left !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, when we have a right-wing tyrant, it's : " DOWN THE TYRANT ! ", " DON'T DEAL WITH THE TYRANT ".

But when we have left-wing tyrants, like we have in China, Irak or north-Korea, the song sound different. It's : " We have to speak with him/them ", " DON'T ATTACK THEM ", " DOWN THE IMPERIALIST "

And you are not biased ? Let me laugh ! I say : " DOWN ALL THE TYRANTS , from the right or the left "

Peoples who are now pro-Irak are the peoples who were telling us that Staline, Mao Dze Dong, Pol Pot or Ho Chi Minh were all great men !


ha ha, and we have to believe you....
Yeah, sure, I believe you.


TN1

posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Keep walking,
You can easily qualify for the second moron award!!!!!!!!

Open your eyes and some books !!!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 08:04 AM
link   
"But Saddam is still a tyrant, and tyrants have to be removed"

A tyrant is defined by those people wishing to attack said person.

To Saddam, America is a tyrant, and, given its behaviour in his country, in many ways he's far more justified in using the term than we are.



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101

A tyrant is defined by those people wishing to attack said person.

To Saddam, America is a tyrant, and, given its behaviour in his country, in many ways he's far more justified in using the term than we are.


So, for you, Saddam is a democrat may be ?



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by TN1

1) You can easily qualify for the second moron award!!!!!!!!

2) Open your eyes and some books !!!!!


1) Really ? But if I receive this award for my previous post,it will be an honor !!!!


2) That's what I did. And now, I know that socialism and communism made more death than the nazism did.

Leftist are using these nazis tricks just to screw us ! That's the tree who's hidding the rest of the forest !

Oh yeah, and don't think that I like nazism, cuz I don't like it, like I don't like communism and socialism.

Ok amigo ?



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 08:34 AM
link   
"So, for you, Saddam is a democrat may be ?"

Saddam, elected President of Iraq under dubious circumstances

Bush, The President of The US under dubious circumstances.


According to the letter of the law, yes, he's as much of a democrat as Bush.

Accept the term for both or reject it for both.



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101

1) Saddam, elected President of Iraq under dubious circumstances

2) Bush, The President of The US under dubious circumstances.

3) According to the letter of the law, yes, he's as much of a democrat as Bush.

4) Accept the term for both or reject it for both.



1) He did 100% , and you dare to call it " dubious circumstances " ????


2) If you had right, the democrat party would have sued the republican party and WON !

3) Lupe, you are not biased, you are nut !


4) See point 3 !



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 08:53 AM
link   
and your confused by the wonderfully bombastic propaganda campaign which has removed any poeeibility of you regarding Saddam as "just another politician" which basically he is.



posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Propaganda ? Ok, I agree with you on this. But who don't use it ?


But " another " politician like another one ? WOAW,no, I don't agree with you. You have to write " another tyrant ".





new topics
 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join