Recreation War in Iraq protest.

thank you

 

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021803/content/from.guest.html

 

Here. Let me flame you.

If everyone was a pacifist, so would you be.

Well I do live in a "fairy tale magic land." Over here, we don't go to war ever, our police don't even have guns, our army couldn't beat a flock of sheep, and we're doing okay.
To every goal a first step must be taken. Idealy, I'd like there to be a total disarmament of the entire world, but I'm not a hopeless optimist. I don't see that happening, now or any time in the forseeable future.

Don't believe what(anything) you hear on CNN, or other american news channels. It's all propaganda. CNN is shown over here after another channel finishes, and the amount of bullshit on it is almost breathtaking. Europe is not for war.

Now let be hand you a big fat DUH. Imagine of 2% of america showed up for one march, at one time, on one day. This is a huge amount. Not everyone who would have been there was. People have jobs, other engagements, or just wouldn't want to go out on a freezing cold day to march. It is true that the goverment isn't taking as strong an anti-Bush stance as the people, but they'll be ****ed if they go agaist us. You said the people's wishes don't reflect goverment policy. Duh again. It is a goverment of the people. They will be dipposed mighty quickly if they forget that.

That is the stupidest thing you have said. How does this make my argument less valid? It doesn't. American people are fed crap from school and from television. Most do not have the complete picture, most believe what they see. They don't seem to want to make up their own minds.

You are assuming that the "silent majority" is for war. In refference to ireland, you could not be more wrong. I really don't need to say anything more. WW2 was not the result of "peacenicks." WW1 was still fresh in people's memories, and they did not want to repeat that. I believe it was inevitable anyway, and I do think war was the right thing then. I'll get on to that in a bit.
I am not a "peacenick." Anyone that knows me could tell you that(I was even voted "most likely to start WW3 in my yearbook{which I'm pretty proud of[but I'm afraid Bush might get there first]}. I believe sometimes violence is neccessary, I have written about it before. I just think america is jumping the gun. I don't want war, because people will die. I don't want war if there's a way to solve this without war. Hussein might not have weapons, in which case there is no need for war at all. I think the best solution for this is for Hussein to be taken out, and a new goverment to be set up, but I don't think it should be america to do that, they don't have a very good track record with that sort of thing(Afganistan, Vietnam), I think it'd be best to come from within the country.

Now, WW2, and the possibilities of a need for war. WW2 was neccessary, Hitler had to be stopped. If Hussein has nukes and bio-weapons, and he's planning on using them, then war may be inevitable. But maybe they can be dissarmed peacefully if they're found. Let the weapons inspectors do their job, I say. I say america should stay the **** out of it. Why do they feel it's anything to do with them anyway, they started all the bad blood that's there.
But if Hussein does have nukes 'n ****, and war is declared, and he sees he's going to lose, what's to stop him from using them?

One last thing for you to ponder upon. Might the world not be better if the Germans had won WW1?
If you have read this far, I thank you for bearing with me.

 

I don't believe CNN (thats why I asked), I only go by what I have read (not in the newspapers and that stuff either).

All those protesters out there, they think that just because a couple hundren thousand people have nothing better to do than skip work and walk around holding signs, doesn't make them a majority, or even a big voice. 250,000 people showed up in S.F. to protest, that is less than .001 % of the poulation. All those protesters are just old people who want to feel young again, young people who want to feel old, college kids who missed the vietnam riots and want to re-create that havoc, pacifists who think that the world will get better if we become isolationists and parents who believe think that we have no right to go after them until they attack us first (not that they already haven't...RIGHT?). The war is going to happen no matter who says what now. There is plenty of proof, nothing more needs to be said. Protestors went to Iraq so that way they can protest against the war over there too. But GUESS WHAT HAPPENED???, they were arrested by the Iraqies and thrown into concentration camps.

What else do you guys need to see that there is an immenant threat? He has the capabilities, he has the power to get what he wants, all he needs is time and thats exactly what you people are giving him. What else do you need, another (possibly even greater) attack? What then? Are you going to say we SHOULD have done something when we could? This is what Bush and the cabinet knows. They know what happened (TWICE!!) in the Napolianic wars, in WWI and in WWII. They can see that the most powerful foes start off as pushovers. Only when the government is reluctance to do something about it, in the blind hopes that everything will turn out fine, that the opposition becomes a major deal. Then we are forced into years of (as Winston Church said) of "Blood, sweat and tears." This time we are taking the first step. Iraq has clearly disobeyed UNITED NATIONS DECREES (not orders from the United States). Hussain is clearly not going to comply with anyone and we need to do something about it rather than bicker and wait till he strikes first.

All that media bullsh!t about Bush being a idiot is all foolish. Since Bush has no family problems and is a honest and truthful guy (I have proof for this), they cannot talk about him the same way as they did Clinton. Clinton was an idiot, but the Monica Lauwinski (can't spell her name) thing was enough for the media so they didn't have to talk about that.

Romie, I'm out.

 

War sucks. I don't want it, never will. I'm joining the Air Force, so why would I be hoping for war? I don't have some sort of death wish. But what else can we do? People keep saying, "Find another way!!" Like what?

 

George W. Bush was arrested for drunk driving back in 1976. Bush told Dallas Morning News reporter Wayne Slater in 1998 that he had never been arrested after 1968, when this was untrue.

Plus there is his... strange, shall we say... military record. He went AWOL for a year.

 

Comment on Lepper's post:

1. It is true that a government does not necesarilly reflect the majority's political ideals. Look at Australia ^_^

When you voted for them you were perhaps unaware of the clashes between your ideals and their party's stance. Even if you were aware of their stance and disagreed with it, you could had voted for them because of other reasons. Don't generalise.

2. Let's not assume that the silent majority is on anybody's side. We need facts and figures. Your proposition that 2% of a country's people turning up to a protest means majority is still not valid.

3. Your claim that Americans are "fed crap" and "don't seem to want to make up their minds" seem to contradict any claim that the public is against war.

4. I did not say anything about Ireland.

5. WW2 was necessary? Why? Because Hitler launched an attack? So perhaps we should sit here and wait for Hussein to launch an attack before we can try to justify war, right? Well, I guess that's what the Just War Theory is about. But I am not a Christian!

6. No the world would not had been a better place if the Germans were in charge. I'm sure any Jew would be inclined to agree with me.

7. If the stupidest thing I said was that "Your argument has been disarmed", I'm pretty pleased. I'll take that as a compliment.

Comment on Bloodberry's post:

1. I am for a peaceful solution too. But as I said before, let's be practical and realistic shall we? Is there a way out? Not really. What are the options?

a) Saddam Hussein steps down and says, "I'm sorry for everything I've done. Please punish me for my sins so I can go to heaven after you execute me".

b) America backs down and Bush says, "I'm sorry for everything I've done. Please punish me for my sins so I don't have to go to hell after Saddam whips me fo the umpteenth time".

c) An American pre-emptive strike against Hussein Terrorism.

d) Appeasement, which will buy time for Iraq to form strategic alliances and build up for a pre-emptive strike against American Terrorism.

Comment on Phalanx's post:

1. What else do we need to see? We need to see Hussein attack the very heart of our first-world civlisation. Until then, any military action will never be fully justified.

2. Bush and the cabinent know what happened in the pass, but peaceniks and co. don't. Or rather, they choose to avoid this issue all together.

3. Iraq disobeyed UN Conventions? As if the peaceniks even care. In their eyes, shedding blood is much worse than disobeying UN Conventions. While I sympathise with that view, isn't it true that if the implicit benefits of an action outweigh the casualties, it is worth it?

4. Bush is an idiot? Let's see some people manage the country. Sure, his IQ might be low. But I'm sure he has had much more experience in dealing with political and social affairs than some of the working-class protestors in America.

Comment on artemis's post:

1. You ask what else can we do? Let Iraq bomb us... maybe we'll all condemn him by then.

 

I just found this place. This guy named Evan Maloney went out during the protest in San Francisco and asked some people some (not too difficult) questions.

http://www.brain-terminal.com/articles/video/peace-protest.html

God, don't you people who support the anti-war movement feel embaressed? 250 THOUSAND PEOPLE OUT THERE AND I'LL GARANTEE THAT ONLY A FEW HUNDRED ACTUALLY HAD SIGNS OF INTELLIGENCE. Jeeze, listen to these answers for goodness sake. THESE PEOPLE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING OUT THERE (water....water, some lady mentioned that we were going there for WATER!!)!! I'm thankful that Bush is smart enough to not listen to these people and push for war.

This is getting sickening. If your gonna oppose or uphold something, at least know what the hell your talking about (i'm referring to these protestors, not anyone here).

France and Germany, you know we are beginning to uncover ties between them, Iraq and terrorism. Thats probably why they are opposing the war, they know that we'll uncover some dirty, embarressing little secrets of theirs. They are like cheating husbands, they deny and oppose but cannot explain WHY they deny and oppose.

 

I'm getting sick of this thread, it seems the people with sense have all but stopped posting. Not suprising really. This will probably be my last post here also.
The majority of americans are horribly ignorant. They probably couldn't find europe on a map. You could say that's a generalisation, but I'm not wrong. The fact that ignorant people support a system that they're told is good is not suprising. I was talking about the majority of irish people, where people have freedom in thought, not just in theory.
You can't invoke facts that are not prooved facts in an argument, and then not listen to rebutles. Get some skillz.
You know who else is a threat? Bush. The "leader" of the most powerful nation in the world, and the most war hungry. He's a stupid ******* who is willing to go to war over oil, or just for public support. He is at least as dangerous as Hussein. Saying he's honest or intelligent is just plain stupid.
On to the indomitable Omnidragon. 1) I didn't vote, being under the legal age. And besides, all the candidates are politicians, they don't say what they mean and the don't mean what they say. I'm not generalising. 2) & 3) It's ireland I'm talking about, where the majority is not silent, and strongly against war. It's not ireland that's fed crap it's america. They are fed crap, hence the minority of anti-war peeps. 4) I did dumbass. 5) WW2 was neccesary because Hitler invaded poland. I don't see Hussein invading poland. 6) I clearly said WW1. If the germans had won that, Hitler wouldn't have written Mein Kampf, he wouldn't have been able to appeal to the people because germany would not have been chaotic, and his ideals would have held no appeal. Many intelligent people were convinced by his way of things. Apart from all the evil and powerhunger, he would have made quite a good ruler(you know who else is evil and power hungry? Yes, Hussein, but also Bush). 7) Well, you're taking it quite wrongly then, I did not mean it as such. You can not state some unrelated fact, and dismiss all arguments because you feel like it. You talk like an idiot.
On BB's post's comments, 1) Ever heard of diplomacy? Oh yeah, I thought this was good:

"American Terrorism," aptly put. I won't coment on the rest, because I think I've covered it all already.
Phalanx, listening to something on a website is also just plain dumb. It's no better than watching CNN, perhaps worse. A few selected clips does not make a majority. Lastly...

Good grief. This really takes the cake. You're topping Omnidragon here. Who the **** are "they"? And what, are you in favour of goign to war with europe now? If everyone thought like you, there would be no life at all on earth.
Now, unless someone posts something worthwhile, I'm done with this crap.

 

Ever notice how people who say threads like this are stupid go off to post an essay on the same thread...?

Is it true that you've run out of arguments and can no longer support your case that you need to resort to:

a) anecdotal evidence that probably only speaks for yourself, and not everybody else?

b) personalising this issue and hurling insults?

c) incapacity to communicate at a sophisticated level and take into account the alternative viewpoints?

d) generalising, as you have in the pass.

You think Americans are stupid. That is another classic example of your generalisations.It seems to me that the only people who are really arrogant are those who say such things.

France and Iraq were going to build oil refineries together, weren't they? Now, that's pretty relevant...

And to comment on your generalisation: the guy was talking about Germany and France, not Europe, as you have not so aptly put it...

You have a great sense of sarcasm...

Zanza: EDIT BOTTON..

 

No, not sarcasm. Thats what we do. What would YOU call it if someone went around bombing strategically significant points of your country? Tell me that, shiny boy. And Americans are not so much stupid, as...ignorant. Of knowledge. But thats not important.
And you know what? **** Bush. He isnt the one that ratifies the declaration of war. AND he isnt the one who formulates war strategies. He's just there to spout political crap and look like a monkey. He's got nothing to do except look important. I apologise for my Bush is an assclown remarks reguarding the war, but. You know. He is. Heh..."Get Some skillz"...I love that phrase.

(P.S: Omnidragone, dontdouble post. If you have something else to add, please use the Edit button. It's why it's there.)

 

Well, everyone needs their scape goat. The public needs someone to take the blame, but in Bush's case, he probably is partly responsible for that.

Actually Omnidragon, France was helping Iraq build nuclear power stations during the beginning days of Hussain's regime. That is, until Israel blew them up. Also, there have been discoveries of terrorist organizations throughout Germany (hell, the CIA found that they used to meet in Hamburg). Tell me, why would this be a shallow argument? Like DL so brashly assumed, did I say we are going to attack them?? No I didn't, so don't accuse me of saying things I didn't say. But think about it, why would someone deny without any explanation why? You only do that when your hiding something (am I right?).

 

I don't like Bush too - not that I hate him. And I'm never very fond of what America does to other countries in order to opress them (Taiwan and Falun Gong, anyone?). But I don't think America's political ideals this time are wrong. Somebody has to deal with Iraq some time in the future. If not now, it's going to be later.

As Phalanx implied in his last post, France and Germany's stance should be examined with caution and scepticism. Assertions that they are only standing up for what is morally-correct seems to be a simplistic argument.

And yes. Next time I'll use the edit button if I want to add to my comments. I appreciate your unctuous advice.

 

Zanza I'm praying for you and everyone that they are about to hurt...I'm SO ANGRY AT BUSH HE'S SO LAME!! DOES HE NOT REALIZE ALL THE GREAT INNOCENT LIVES HE IS ABOUT TO TAKE?????? DAMN THAT JERK! I'm SOOO SCARED ABOUT THIS WAR I WISH IT WOULD JUST END.....

 

Naru, you might be in luck, supposedly Iraq has begun disarming..

And on that note, the weapons Saddam had would have taken a lot more 'innocent' lives than an American invasion would have. Americans don't kill civilians on purpose, unlike certain other powers *cough cough* Saddam's Regime *cough cough*.

Also, several middle eastern nations are calling for Saddam to step down. If he does, that'll be a good aversion to the war as well. There's always hope of a peaceful solution...

But in lieu of a peaceful solution, war now on our terms, is better than war later, on Saddam's terms. Let's just hope Iraq's actually intending to follow UN resolutions this time...

- Ark

 

i belive that sadam is telling the truth. and we should give him the chance to do what he says he will

 

heh, no saddam ain't telling the truth

as much of an idiot as bush is, he ain't as bad as saddam.. he;s a different kind of monster.

we don't need the war, we just need to keep the pressure on him