Change Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 You meen Dictator Bush right? The nondemocraticly elected leader of the U.S.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by {SITH} Change [/i] [B]You meen Dictator Bush right? The nondemocraticly elected leader of the U.S.? [/B][/QUOTE] How was bush nondemocraticly elected? Just because Gore tried to use blood thirsty lawyers to get the votes doesn't mean Bush wasn't originally chosen. Also you really don't know what a dictator is if Bush is one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domon Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Honestly {Sith} Change, Bush isn't a dictator. God, what is it with people saying Bush is a Dictator. I was listening to the radio today and some jack-*** (pardon my language) was going on a rant about how we are in the Persian Gulf just for oil. Dear god some of these people need to pull their heads out of their butts and smell the coffee, I am for peace but if we have to resort to war then I'll be supporting our boys over there and hoping they come home soon. But whoever thinks our president is a dictator obviously needs a dictionary thrown at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sui Generis Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Ok this is to all those people who insist on calling Bush a dictator. Do you not realize that after the attacks of September 11th, 2001 President Bush was granted total control by the Congress for as long as he needed it. Yet he didn't use it, he could use it right now. He never once did something without talking to the congress or house of reps. If he truly was a dictator he woulda use that for his advantage and did some seriouse damage. Including attacking Iraq since everyone thinks all he wants is oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Yea, the dictator known as bush is just another one of these comments that supports my common theory that it is better to have my political adversaries wasting their time with ideas like "oil and dictatorship in America" than it is to have them put up formidable and intellectually stimulating arguments. Sith, you do more damage to the title "democrate" than any republican could ever do. dictatorships, oil...this stuff is brilliant. I was just wondering if I have mentioned yet that a soldier in the army is suspected of putting grenades in his commanding officers tents... There were 15 injured and 1 killed. It is also preliminary, but the suspected soldier has been arrested. Also preliminary is reports that the soldier who is suspected is a muslim american. I guess things can always take a turn for the worse. However, I want to mention that the "shock and awe" strategy has officially begun. This is going to be where the crap really hits the fan... especially if the stuff we have seen so far was not anything big in comparison to the things to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 [color=teal]I just got back and this thing is ten pages long, I'm sure gokents posted most of it so I'm not going to read it... Let?s get this straight, Bush was not democratically elected. Democratically elected means every ones votes and opinions are counted, this was not the case by any stretch of the imagination. Florida I believe coursed most of the controversy, but a lot of other states had problems. As far as I know gore had the greater votes in the end. Of course these are useless once the final counting has been completed. This is the American system so to any one complaining about the result all I have to say is, "it's your country." Gore and Bush both used dirty tactics, but hay if you've just spent millions of trying to win the world?s biggest popularity contest why wouldn't you? (And may I say after that last election incident all the American election system seems to be is a big popularity contest and a big joke for the rest of the world.) Quote - Gokents- Also preliminary is reports that the soldier who is suspected is a Muslim American. - Oh so all Muslims are bad now? I'm sure after those pictures came over the TV and you also saw the guy was black that you wanted to associate al-quada with blacks as well? This seems to just be an attack on a superior officer who might have been a basted to him and some others, this sort of thing happens a lot, seems to happen a lot more in the American army... And do get me on to the army practices; "Friendly Fire" is just unacceptable by a first world country. So far in the last few conflicts America has lost more by its own guns than the enemy, and Iraq is carrying on that tradition. I've also just heard reports that America shot down an English fighter of some sort. No wonder no other countries want to be under American control. "Shock and Awe". Pfft... This as far as I am concerned is a dud, and a big waste of money. It shows Allied supremacy and technological achievements but it is over kill. They know they are beat, why spend so much on a fireworks show? [/color] [Edited - Added] It has been confirmed that the Americans shot down an English plane with a patriot missile, unknown type and deaths. Eps ? No crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mei Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 [color=green][size=1]Eep...don't know if anyopne posted this yet cause I'm too lazy to read this last page, but, if you haven't heard, there is a video on Iraqi television of reporters interviewing captured American soldiers. It seems that there are about 10 captured soldiers, plus some dead ones. It seems that some of the Iraqi soldiers just won't give up. Please remember and pray for these American soldiers, and just hope they will make it out alive...[/size][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Change Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 As for what you said Gokent...lol you make me so glad that I am not a suck up snob of a Republican. I have done nothing to damage democratic intrests by being here. Everyone just votes partisan anyways... All I am saying is that Gore actualy wone in Florida when all the recounting was done (a few week after 9/11). And to some degre I am not protesting the war, but Bush. But I also don't think that we ahve the right to "appoint" ourselves police of the world and start "nation building" soverign governments. I belive that the world will right itself eventualy, I know nothing lasts forever. You think the U.S> will be on top forever? No, I give up 200 more years tops. Then someone else will "nation build" us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegitto4 Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 I would want to, but thats because hopefully, I would have something to come back for. I do hope they get out, and make it fun too. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuoMax Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Hey Gokents, its called "fragging" they did it Vietnam to officers they didn't like. EDIT:If we are really going after Iraq to free his people, why aren't we also attacking El Salvador(member of the Coalition of the Willing), Nicargua, and multiple countries in Africa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orien_Xel Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 [color=blue]Looking at all these points and counter-points has made realize one thing: War is sometimes a neccesary evil. I believe that one can use violence to defend one's life. Agrresive wars are just wrong.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 DuoMax, I know you're trying to make a point..and it is a valid one...though, idealistic. We aren't attacking those countries because it isn't possible that the US can take out all of the idiots in this world. I highly doubt Bush thinks that. However, as I said, every little bit helps. We must do that which we can do. And the fact that Saddam has the actual potential to threaten us makes our attack on him all the more justified. EDIT: On cloricus' post- Friendly fire happens. Welcome to war. -Justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Im loving you guys... Im not sure, but stuck up snob republican stuff might be flaming, although there is no need for anyone to stick up for republicans, only democrates need the fairness of no personal insults. As I found out first hand when I flamed a lefty and got mauled over it. I still stick by what I say about the democrate arguments being led by sith amongst others... I do believe it does a good job of misrepresenting the majority of the party or it does a good job of showing the true colors of the party... either way, I would say it has a negative effect. Also, half of this has turned into a discussion about whether bush won florida and the other half is friendly fire and fragging... Where to begin? I actually dont even really know where to begin becuase half of it has nothing to do with the situation in Iraq. The bush v gore thing was a supreme court case, judged by a panel of 5 democrates and 4 republicans. So you guys can argue all you want about bush v gore, but just take it some where else. I also gotta mention that I love the traditional style cloricus where he stated... "wow, 10 pages... but since Im sure it was mostly gokents, I woulnt read it." Thats just the perfect example of what these debates are really about. No need for the otherside, just spit out your opinion and jump on the first sentence you dont like. That is also the case with cloricus mentioning "what does that make all muslims bad now"? I guess you guys could say that if you want, but I sure as hell didnt say that. About fragging, yes, I know that happend and quite often too. That still has nothing to do with me reporting that it happend just the other day. Now, to get back on topic... I have noticed a new trend developing amongst the Iraqis. This would be fake surrender. In atleast one place the soldiers have put up white flags and then tried to ambush the soldiers responding to it. Another trick that has occured is the welcoming of American troops by Iraqi soldiers in civilian clothes and then the ambush. Its a dirty trick, but like they say, all is fair in love and war. (although I dont really believe in that philosophy.) I also want to mention the video Mei mentioned... This thing is supposed to be pretty bad and from what I understand, the people taken prisoner were REMF that are a matainance crew who got caught off gaurd by Iraqis who ducked out when the main force came through and then ambushed these people working on a vehicle. Allegedly one of the people is a woman and several of the people were killed execution style already. The video shows Iraqis playing with the bodies and interrogating prisoners. This is a direct violation of article 13 of the geneva convention. (the public usage and display of p.o.w.'s) That is why al jezera has stopped airing it... pentagon threats always carry wieght when you are in the wrong and the world will recognize the pentagon is right. I also want to address the british fighter shot down: it was shot down by an anti-missile system. Not an american soldier doing his job the wrong way or anything like that. On a side note: Ive had about enough of this humanitarian crap... Im ready to support a full on nasty assualt of Iraq with no regard to human rights or the geneva convention. I would like to see the world stand in awe as we show them just how bad the U.S. could really be. (and Im sure that makes plenty of you happy to hear, as it gives you "ammo" to make America or myself look like warmongers (god I love that word) and the violators of human rights.) This nasty war effort would also include the siezure of all U.N. food supplies, which feed 60% of Iraq. I would also suggest the use of the E bomb and the MOAB. these suckers need to be destroyed because I am tired of america being the only country to play by the rules besides a few others like the aussies and the brits. (although I am seriously being taken over with anti aussie sentiment due to the general austraillian view of america... well represented by the number one player in political threads on the boards, no not james, but cloricus of course.) Of course this last part is just frustration speaking and not reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Change Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 If the Geneva convetion held water we would not be using the m-16 5.56mm ammo. That suff is in plain violation of the Geneva convention and has been for a long time... But who cares, we are America, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 I hate to tell you sith, but that only applies to "soft lead" bullets and it should also be noted that the majority of signators to the geneva convention are the very same people who use the 5.56 round. Germany, france, britian and america all use the 5.56, and those are just for starters, there are plenty of others that carry the 5.56. Plus if your so darn good with this stuff, could you do a search or something and find me what article of the geneva convention specifically out laws the 5.56 round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Gokents, a few pages back I had a go at having a _real_ debate with you as opposed to my usual. (Eg this post.) I put the facts out plan to see with links to where I got my information. You couldn't "be bothered", so why should I be bothered to take the crap that you are severing up now? Oh and next time, quote me, don't just slap any thing there and hope people don't notice. Clear? Quote | Gokents- That is why al jezera has stopped airing it... pentagon threats always carry weight when you are in the wrong and the world will recognize the pentagon is right. - I don't think they even bothered listening to the Pentagon, I get the feeling it was just that that part of their propaganda was finished. Though I will stand corrected on that one. :) (Not by Gokents.) Quote | Gokents- I also want to address the British fighter shot down: it was shot down by an anti-missile system. Not an American soldier doing his job the wrong way or anything like that. - Some one had to control that system, it was just a big **** up. America has and rightly should take reasonability. Justin, in any war you have casualties, but these can be minimised. What I am complaining about is that America has hardly any of these. Australia, Canada, England and many others have as many ways as they can. We have hardly any deaths. So in this regard the "Friendly Fire" is completely unacceptable. I would post more but I?ve got to go to school, exams exams!!! Eps ? Flaming Gokents and loving it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Ok, I also want to point out on the 5.56 issue that the 5.56 wasnt even in use during the time of the geneva convention. Another point to be made is that America is not denying responsibility for anything, I am not an official press release... I was just defending and pointing out the difference between an honest friendly fire incident and a problem with a computer operated missile detection system reacting to an airborne signal precieved as a threat. I also want to point out that I am getting really tired of the fact that it is ok to flame me and not anyone else. anyway, Im about to go to work, so you guys are gonna get about 5 hours of undisputed time to write what ever you want with no gokents around to contest it. Keep this in mind and use the time wisely. See ya when I get back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Gokents, we flame you because, to put it simply you flame us. Childish hay? Though Domon's thread was and out right flame and I think should be deleted. Try and keep this thread clear. Try and have a real debate, put in some effort people. Like James and CWB, and not like Gokents and myself. As for the missile system, can some one find out if it is computer automated or human controlled? No point arguing if we don't even know the facts. Eps - Okay time for a real debate! ...Or when we all get back that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegitto4 Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B] As for the missile system, can some one find out if it is computer automated or human controlled? No point arguing if we don't even know the facts. [/B][/QUOTE] Even if it is human controled, why does it matter. It is most likely a radar screen they look at, and all they see is a figure flying in. Not the make, model, and country of it. Now, if they had a schedule that the craft was flying in on, and somebody wasn't paying attention, then drop him for 500, and then set him up for whatever military legal action must take place. ( Cant rememebr the exact charge it would be from the UCMJ[United Code of Military Justice]) Oh, and gokents, on the 5.56 mm round deal, i looked, and couldn't find anything. Yes, that means that i looked at the convention articles. All 60+ ones. Now, if I missed something, then i missed something. However, from what i found, there are no restrictions on the 5.56 mm round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Alright this is good. We have confirmation that the 5.56 isnt mentioned. I also want to address cloricus directly and say... I will not ever be grouped with you. You put no effort into your post by your own admission, that has nothing to do with me. I rarely flame and I even more rarely speak of things if I dont know anything about them. I speak based on the facts of the situation and if not that... then the opinions I hold based on the history or the current events of the situation. As usual I am slightly insulted by your comments and frankly I find it to be a way for you to not feel so lonely in your world of unrealistic arguments. Keep me out of your groupings and dont bother trying to categorize me, I dont fit your mold and I woulnt fit anything you try to make... I will only fit the molds of people who are honest and independant in the castings they make of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathKnight Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 [color=crimson]Its odd how something that could be a fun sharing of opinons boils down into children fighting amongst themselves. I guess thats how some of the more opionated people of OB find pleasure- proving themselves the worser person by engageing in confrontational debate that ruins threads that could offer new ideas and thoughts. Hm. Sad that fact holds true.. And its the same people that ruin these threads with petty debates too. Cloricus, Gokents. Sensitive, Defensive, Opinonated people who ruin threads with a 'holier than thou' attitude. Bah. Also i'd like to ask some form of upper justive- God, I guess- to bless the familes of the Iraqi casulaties and the American casualties. Poloticans never fight the wars themselves, they just send other people in to do their work, and die for them..[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Change Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Hmmm just looked it up any you are right. A friend of mine mentioned it and I assumed he did his homework. NM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShinje Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 [size=1] [color=darkblue] I think we should all just think for a minute lol. No one is disputing that war is a good thing. The majority of Pro War opinion, including mine, Is sorry it had to come to this, but in retrospect, he was given [i]12 years to disarm.[/i] Surely, Anyone can see that he is dangerous, and that we have to remove him by all means, before we get a biological or chemical catastrophe on our hands. would you still be anti war if he nuked Sydney? or if he gassed New York? I don't think so. correct me If I'm wrong. [img]http://www.hallindseyoracle.com/cartoons/cartoon64.jpg[/img] I would like to have seen this end diplomaticaly, but unfortunately, action had to be taken, this action will liberate thousands of Iraqis from oppression and dictatorship rule. So I believe this war is far over justified. It can't end [i]peacefully[/i] like everyone wants, Saddam made that pretty impossible by ignoring the deadline. [/size][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 I've had enough. There will be no more snide comments, petty flaming, or bickering in this thread. Such behavior is not only inappropriate, but disrespectful to those who have kept an open mind and taken a serious stance in this discussion. If anyone has personal issues with one another, they are to be settled elsewhere. In threads that touch upon hot issues, members may not always agree with one anothers' viewpoints or their styles of debating them, but it's important to retain a proper degree of civility. If you disagree with one another, you may debate the issues in a respectful manner. Otherwise, don't comment on each others' posts at all. I suggest that this warning be taken seriously. And, I apologize to all for disrupting the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegitto4 Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 No Apology needed Charles. That was needed, very badly. Anyway, Has any one any info on the guy that betrayed Saddam? I read a little about it, but not much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts