| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
| Should the US invade Iraq? |
| Yes |
|
68% |
[ 13 ] |
| No |
|
31% |
[ 6 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 19 |
Krycek
Leader of the Senate
Joined: 07 Mar 2002
Posts: 314
Location: Primary Observation Complex |
Well,if the US Army wants to catch\kill Saddam they'll have to be smarter cause they've screwed up things in Afghanistan,they erased that place and not even now they couldn't achieve the main purpose:to catch that psycho Bin Laden.
Also I think that the Us Army(I do not inttend to offend anyone) and also the Us government are acting like an opressive force,I agreed with them when they attacked Iraq and Afghanistan but why they've attacked Yugoslavia a couple years ago,I mean that country had its own internal problems with Albania,I'll tell you why,cause they wanted to test they're new guns and Yugoslavia couldn't oppose them.
Let me give you another example, Russia and Cecenia,why the americans didn't interfere here too,becuase Russia its a nuclear power and still its very strong.
Anyway,the topic was about Iraq and yes,they should catch Saddam but they have to make a good plan for this.
_________________
Guns don't kill people,people kill people!
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild= |
Sat Jul 06, 2002 12:53 am |
|
|
Kendrik
Thin Blue Line
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 550
Location: England |
quote:
Originally posted by Krycek
......but why they've attacked Yugoslavia a couple years ago,I mean that country had its own internal problems with Albania,I'll tell you why,cause they wanted to test they're new guns and Yugoslavia couldn't oppose them.
Wasn't this because the UN sanctioned action as Molosvich (please excuse my spelling) had broken the International Human Rights Law?
_________________
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds; and the pessimist fears this is true."
JAMES BRANCH CABELL
~Member of The Nonflamers' Guild~
~~Champion of the (Unofficial) RPGdot Text Signature Contest 2002~~ |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 12:57 am |
|
|
Roach
SBR Belfry Bat
Joined: 20 Jan 2002
Posts: 3233
|
I'd like to say thank you as well. I don't really know very much about Tony Blair, but from what I do know he seems like a good leader.
Milosavich (sp?) also killed 250,000 people. |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 12:59 am |
|
|
Krycek
Leader of the Senate
Joined: 07 Mar 2002
Posts: 314
Location: Primary Observation Complex |
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
I'd like to say thank you as well. I don't really know very much about Tony Blair, but from what I do know he seems like a good leader.
Milosavich (sp?) also killed 250,000 people.
Yeah,and they forgot to say how many people the albanians killed.
Don't get me wrong,I'm not with Yugoslavia for what they've done but I do not agree with the Us army policy,maybe has to come to this cause in that time was that witch Margaret Tachter(sorry for spelling) who put gaz on fire.
Also if the UN sanctioned Yugoslavia and Miloshovich why the UE didn't take care of this,cause they have weapons and troops like everybody else.
Also in that time I've heard at news that the americans used a lot of new weapons there so in my opinion they've used that country for training ground.
And when americans destroyed the bridge at Novisad and other locations they've met human shields made by civillians and they still fired.
So,in the end,wich one is more cruel  ??
Again,I have to remind everyone here that I don't have nothing against US and other nations,all I wanted was to bring some facts here.
_________________
Guns don't kill people,people kill people!
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild= |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 1:25 am |
|
|
Kendrik
Thin Blue Line
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 550
Location: England |
quote:
Originally posted by Krycek
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
I'd like to say thank you as well. I don't really know very much about Tony Blair, but from what I do know he seems like a good leader.
Milosavich (sp?) also killed 250,000 people.
Yeah,and they forgot to say how many people the albanians killed.
Don't get me wrong,I'm not with Yugoslavia for what they've done but I do not agree with the Us army policy,maybe has to come to this cause in that time was that witch Margaret Tachter(sorry for spelling) who put gaz on fire.
Also if the UN sanctioned Yugoslavia and Miloshovich why the UE didn't take care of this,cause they have weapons and troops like everybody else.
Also in that time I've heard at news that the americans used a lot of new weapons there so in my opinion they've used that country for training ground.
And when americans destroyed the bridge at Novisad and other locations they've met human shields made by civillians and they still fired.
So,in the end,wich one is more cruel ??
Again,I have to remind everyone here that I don't have nothing against US and other nations,all I wanted was to bring some facts here.
I will admit to being a little hazy on the facts but at the time I don't think Thatcher wasn't our primeminister - she was just some mad old women who nobody listened to. I can't answer for the american policies or stratagies (there are plenty of Americans here to do that) but from a British point of view we were simply there to prevent Miloshovich (or anyone else) carrying out any more atrosities.
_________________
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds; and the pessimist fears this is true."
JAMES BRANCH CABELL
~Member of The Nonflamers' Guild~
~~Champion of the (Unofficial) RPGdot Text Signature Contest 2002~~ |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 1:34 am |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
Excuse me, but do you know where the UN gets the majority of it's troops, weapons and money? The US.
The war in Yugoslavia was a UN sanctioned police action. It was also carried out by NATO. We still get blamed for it because those two organizations mostly use our troops. It was also total crap and the US should never have gotten involved in it. It was a bad piece of foriegn policy carried out by a president who IMO was a person out for nothing but a "legacy".
@Moondragon: And how do you propose we could have prevented 9-11? The terrorists themselves did not know what would happen until they had boarded the planes.
Hindsight is 20-20.
As far as invading Iraq goes? I'll support it if we get rid of Saddam this time.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound=  |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 4:11 am |
|
|
TheLonePaladin
Mighty Warrior
Joined: 27 Feb 2002
Posts: 1808
Location: San Francisco, CA |
why invade when we can bomb? and why do all these wars with teensy tiny little countries always take so long? you could fit 50 afghanistans in the US, why are we still fighting them? and shouldn't saddam have died about a decade ago? if we can actually succeed in killing him this time and set up a stable democracy government in iraq, then i'm all for invading.
for the greater good, sacrifices must be made. a minor war now could prevent a world war in the future.
or maybe i don't know what i'm talking about and i'm just bored because my dad has hijacked NWN.
_________________
=Follower of Righteousness=
"Though the gates that stand between the mortal world and the immortal Realm of Chaos are now closed to me, still I would rather die having glimpsed eternity than never to have stirred the cold furrow of mortal life.
I embrace death without regret as I embraced life without fear." |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 4:29 am |
|
|
Gorath
Mostly Harmless
Joined: 03 Sep 2001
Posts: 6327
Location: NRW, Germany |
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
You're very prejudiced aren't you? We're shooting/bombing terrorists not Arabs! Terrorists don't have a race or a creed, that would imply that they were human, which the members of Al Queda, and the leaders of the former Taliban are most defiantly not!
Are you really so naive? Obviously the propaganda machinery works perfectly. The USA bombed Afghan cities. I´ve never heard of the bombs that are intelligent enough not to kill civilians when they explode.
The only major difference I see between the assault in NY and the bombing of Afghanistan is that the Afghans were warned. If civilians had a chance to escape is a different question.
Don´t misunderstand this, I´m not saying the actions against the Taliban were wrong. (Remember German troups are also there.) But I think some people should at least try to step back a bit, differenciate between information and propaganda, and be extremely careful when they try to deny other people the human rights every single one of us has!
_________________
Webmaster GothicDot |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 8:49 am |
|
|
RPG~!@#$%killer
The One
Joined: 27 May 2002
Posts: 372
Location: where kangaroos get squashed by cars |
As an Asian live in Australia
I think America shouldn't attack Iraq.
I know Saddam is evil, but the war is gonna kill more people than starve.
Anyway the only way that the Iraq people are dying of hunger is because the Americans are blockading Iraq.
As the Americans' point of view they shouldn't attack Iraq now, they shouldn't attack until the war in Afghanistan is over until they get Osama Bin Laden.
The American can only afford to fight two medium scale wars. What happen is someone else starts another war, Eg Russians attack Europe, or Chinese attack Taiwan?
So as this time they shouldn't attack Iraq yet.
_________________
=former moderator of "the sports fans' club"
anyone who wishes to join "the sports fans' club" click here or PM me
=all high shadow of the RPGDOTshadows
=member of The Nonflamers' Guild
=member of the sixth house
=Worshiper of the written words |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 9:36 am |
|
|
XeroX
The MasterCopy
Joined: 13 Dec 2001
Posts: 7125
Location: The Netherlands |
bombing some countrys has no effect. With bombing you can never be as accured ass with ground operations.
To catch a single persen you have to invade a country.
Or he should put a flag on his location and stay there so you could bomb him
_________________
The original RED poster (retired now)
=Moderator of The SportsFans Club=
=member of The NFG + Shadows + WWW + PC=
To join the Sportfans PM me
www.feyenoord.com |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 11:02 am |
|
|
Kendrik
Thin Blue Line
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 550
Location: England |
quote:
Originally posted by Val
Excuse me, but do you know where the UN gets the majority of it's troops, weapons and money? The US.
The war in Yugoslavia was a UN sanctioned police action. It was also carried out by NATO. We still get blamed for it because those two organizations mostly use our troops.
Val, I'm not sure who this was in response too but from my side of things I will accept that the US provides more troops and money (due to the fact that you are a much bigger country but mainy because the proportion of the tax payers money that goes towards the defense budget is huge compared to the UK ( i heard rough figures of about 40% int he US compare to 5% in the UK). The point I was trying to make is that the US isn't in this by itself - you have allies in the UK who provide both troops and skills but most of all we provide political support which no matter how big the US is it still needs. This was meant to both reassure the US and to remind you all that you are not the police force of the world - you are part of it.
_________________
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds; and the pessimist fears this is true."
JAMES BRANCH CABELL
~Member of The Nonflamers' Guild~
~~Champion of the (Unofficial) RPGdot Text Signature Contest 2002~~ |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 12:43 pm |
|
|
MoonDragon
High Emperor
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 1254
Location: Waterloo, Canada |
I'm starting to walk on very thin ice here. Nationalism, I found, especially the blind kind, is worse than religion. People are more inclined to kill for their nation these days than they are for their god. So, I have to put a disclaimer here saying that I'm just being a Devil's Advocate here. I don't really care that much about US policies or US involvement in the world. The information I'm about to present paints a "not so pretty" picture of the US foreign policy. So, if you like the truths you currently posses and believe, and wish to retain them unblemished, please do not read this. Some of you may find this information disturbing and disillusioning. I have no motives in this beyond pure dissemination of information for anybody that wishes to read it. Again, I'm not doing this to disturb anyone or to argue how US is a horrible monster. I just wish to present an independent view and let people decide what to think for themselves. If it was up to me, I'd drop nukes on any hot-spot in the world, and finally we would have peace. But that's me. And I have been called weird before. :/ I do not wish to shatter anybody's dreams of a wonderful nation. If you think USA is the greatest thing that happened to you DO NOT READ THIS POST! Please!
There are few people this is a reply to, so to preserve space I won't quote all of them.
Some of you are too young to remember the days of USSR's invasion of Afganistan and the 10 year war between Iraq and Iran. At the time, USSR was funding Iran's military and USA was funding Iraq. Iraq, kind of, won that war and became a power to be reconned with. You know what happened after that. But, most of Hussein's military might was bought with US dollars. During the same time, in Afganistan, the rebel fighters against the USSR invasion were actively funded by the USA, there was no secret about that. After the USSR realized they can never win in Afganistan, they pulled out and the best funded and armed group of people took over. Few years later, they implemented social reforms that were the most strict in just about any country in the world in the last 1000 years. Women were not allowed to get an eductation. Not allowed to go on the street unless accompanied by a male. Not allowed to ever show their skin. People of different religions were required to wear highly visible insignia on their sleeves at all times (1939 Germany anyone?). They also blew up 2000+ year budhist monuments carved in the side of the mountain, to prove their point. If you did not do what they told you, you got shot by an M16 gun, bought with US dollars. Yes, you're guessing by now, the group's name is Taliban.
Additional little tidbits of information: Al Queda was at some point in the distant past funded by the CIA. Don't believe me? Look here (interesting and provocative article--if somewhat politically incorrect, like my post here  ). When the usefulness to the US stopped, so did the funding. Unfortunately, the group survived and their focus changed. Few years back Clinton personally authorized assassination of Hussama Bin Ladin (after the bombings of US embassies). His decision got overridden by his military and security staff. CIA was well aware of Al Queda's movements prior to 9/11. There were also plenty of warnings and clues given. While we are at it, Japanese did not just decide to roll into Pearl Harbor like that. They were fed explicit information by CIA that indicated how they can attack. In fact, there are some documents that surfaced not too long ago that indicate that US actually performed manouvers and fake attacks on Pearl Harbor trying to ascertain what would be the best way to attack. This was done under the pretense of pre-empting attacks. But once the best attack vector was found, nothing was done to secure it. The findings of these studies "conveniently" found their way into Japanese hands. Along with some other "evidence" that seemed to imply USA is about to attack Japan and hurt them very much. It seems Japanese didn't have much choice. Additionally, turns out Washington knew about the Japanese fleet coming few days before the attack, yet the warning "coveniently" came 1 hour after the attack has occured. But don't trust me on all these things. There are much better sources for this information than me.
Additionally, if you wanna see your tax dollars at work, type something like "Kissinger Nixon Argentina Chile" into Google and read up on few articles that pop up. Turns out few countries in the world want to see the former US Secretary of State tried for crimes against humanity at the highest level. Amongst others, they want to try him for the attrocities commited in the same war for which ending he got the Nobel Peace Prize. Kindda ironic, don't you think?
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
You're very prejudiced aren't you? We're shooting/bombing terrorists not Arabs! Terrorists don't have a race or a creed, that would imply that they were human, which the members of Al Queda, and the leaders of the former Taliban are most defiantly not!
Su, you earned my respect by now in conversations, so I'll pretend I didn't see this. But in case you need reminding, members of Al Queda and the leaders of the former Taliban most definately are human. They are human and they did the things they did for a reason. You may disagree with them, but they had reasons. Perhaps this world would be a better place if we all stop saying things like the above and we actually listened to each other's reasons.
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
When we see something terrible happening we watch the situation, then if something happens that lets us justify our involvment to the international community, we do what the Judeo-Christian moral ethic tells us is right.
Is giving Israel $3billion a year to buy helicopters and tanks (from US, of course) to blow up refuge camps and civilian dwellings and enemy armed with sticks and stones what your "Judeo-Christian moral ethic tells [you] is right?"
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
I don't really agree with that line of thinking, but morally it is far better than an isolationist view.
So, you're saying that's it's morally better to give money to someone for arms used to blow up civilians, than it is to try and resolve the matter peacefully? Because that is what your government does.
quote:
Originally posted by Suicidal Cockroach
Trust me, we don't like being the world's watchdog, but this world would be a much worse place without one, and we don't see anyone else volunteering.
Hmmm... the world has a watchdog. It's called UN. And it seems US government doesn't like that too much. Turns out US owes UN the most in back fees and dues. US hasn't paid its contribution to UN in many years. The situation is so rediculous that Ted Turner (I think it was him, but I'm not sure) paid $1billion to UN in the name of US, hoping to embarass the government enough that they would finally pay. It didn't work. Additionally, most of the "action" US solders saw in the last many years were not UN sanctioned. The Afganistan issue is not UN sanctioned. Nor was the Desert Storm. And even when US is part of a UN initiative, they try and pull off stunts like this.
About this world being a much worse place... read the bullets on the top of this page, and wonder what country could they be talking about... And this is without brining about the issue of so many treaties that the Bush administration decided they will not any more honor. Like nuclear testing, for example.
And then there is this small issue of Israel again. After reading this, does the US strike you as a world watchdog or an Israel's lapdog? (I'm specifically thinking of the "Washington wants slavery reparations and Zionism off the agenda" part.)
I found many of these links while trying to find the nice one about US military funding of Israel. But unfortunately I couldn't find it. I have it somewhere else, so if anybody in particular is interested, I can produce it, come Monday.
Again guys, before you jump on me as a America hater and proclaim me a terrorrist and a non-human, I just presented you with some readily available facts. I don't want to make your conclusions for you. I don't know what it all means and I don't pretend to do. Also, I've spent more hours thinking about it today than in the whole past year put together. I really don't care that much about this topic. With one exception. I despise nationalism. Any sort. For many reasons, not the least of which would be standing over a body of a dead friend, who got his brains drained from his head in the name of nationalism. I've lived in 3 different countries, on 2 different continents. Have familiy all over the "old" world (Germany, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, Syria, etc) and some parts of the "new" world (mostly North America, but there should be some in South as well). I have been exposed to many cultures, nationalities and religions. One thing I've come to believe after all that, is that it's all just a load of bs. I find it petty. But it is a reality of the world we live in. I cannot erase the borders. I cannot change the animal instintcs in humans. At least not for now. What I can do though, is show people the no-so-pretty side of their nationalism. Hope this was as eductional for you as it was for me and I hope I haven't lost too much respect from the people I've come to respect.
_________________
(@) |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 6:49 pm |
|
|
mDrop
High Emperor
Joined: 06 May 2002
Posts: 479
Location: Under the desk |
@MoonDragon, thanks for saving me a great deal of time by writing that previous post, I agree with you.
The US military has been mainly protecting the oil resources and other important assets that US wants to secure. US has also supported many dictators in South America, again to secure their own goals and to keep socialist and communist leaders from gaining power in there.
As MoonDragon said, US supplied most of the army for Al Queda, Iraq and also supports Israeli military actions agains palestinians. It seems strange how US picks the targets it wants to protect and the conflicts it wants to take part in. A lot of the hatred towards US is because of the actions they have taken in Middle-East and other parts of the globe. First the military and other agents go in, stir things up and generally make a mess of the situation. Then, when the other parties try to attack back or stop taking orders, the rest of the military goes there and bombs the country to pieces.
There are also a lot more reasons to current situation, one of the biggest is the economical gap between different countries. If more attention was given to helping the poor countries and listening to them instead of abusing them and attacking them, a lot of these confrontations could be prevented. If things keep going like they have in the past 20 years, I suspect things will get worse and we'll be witnessing a lot more violence and sadness all around the world.
And as for the watchdog part, like I said in the text, you are mostly cleaning up the mess you made yourself.
I know this is pretty harsh text and some people may get really offended by this, but this is my opinion and I stand behind it.
Also, I admit there are times when it is necessary to intervene, Palestina/Israel conflict is the most important conflict ew should be focusing on. We need the peace and stability in the Middle-East or there will be hell to pay later on. Too many times the reasons are wrong and the actions unforgivable, though..
And finally, I'm not attacking the people of US either, it's mostly the old guys in power who do this. Most of US citizens don't have enough information about these things and the information the mass media gives us all, not just you, is often really biased. Most of the US people I know, either in real life or via the web are really nice and intelligent people, it's the minority giving the majority a bad name.
_________________
"If you can't get rid of the skeleton in your closet, you'd best teach it to dance."
- George Bernard Shaw
- Member of The Nonflamers' Guild -
- Member of The Alliance of Middle-Earth -
- Worshiper of Written Word -
- Proud supporter of E.H.U.A.O - |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 7:34 pm |
|
|
EverythingXen
Arch-villain
Joined: 01 Feb 2002
Posts: 4342
|
War.
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!
Say it again!
_________________
Estuans interius, Ira vehementi
"The old world dies and with it the old ways. We will rebuild it as it should be, MUST be... Immortal!"
=Member of the Nonflamers Guild=
=Worshipper of the Written Word= |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 8:07 pm |
|
|
MoonDragon
High Emperor
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 1254
Location: Waterloo, Canada |
Preach it brother! Preach it!
_________________
(@) |
|
Sat Jul 06, 2002 8:45 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 10:21 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
