Simple Statement: You(terrorists)are not ALLOWED to murder 3000 of OUR innocent civilians to PROMOTE your cause!... BUT We are ALLOWED to murder 3000 of your innocent civilians to PROMOTE our cause!... Somebody clearify this statement for me...Am I mistaken or is this hypocrisy in every sense of the word!?...Guess its just my imagination or so Ive been told... Many people in this world view the United States as being filled with spoiled rotten brats wanting everything their way without ever taking a step back to evaluate their actions... Gee, what ever gave them that idea? Here I will simplify the statement: "Youre NOT allowed to slap my little sister because youre mad at me!...BUT Im allowed to slap your little sister because Im mad at you!"...(putting it in childish terms seems to some it up much better dont you think?).... Go over there and Kick some Saddam ass! God Bless our troops I support them 100% and pray for their safety take out the military, surround the country, etc. etc. but DONT 'order' them to launch multiple missiles into a city in turn murdering 1000s of innocent people in the process for Christs sakes!... What kind of IDIOTS go off and 'order' the murder of thousands of innocent people when they just got done Bashing Terrorists worldwide for doing the "exact same" thing!! Somebody explain the "logic" behind this please...Justify Why it is the United States is "allowed" to murder innocent civilians to promote their cause, Yet terrorists are forbidden to do so... Before you do, picture your family being blown to bits by a missile or two and then having to retrieve the pieces...okay, NOW explain this to me... And dont give me any of that "Youre Anti-American!" bullshit, Im as American as they come and support our troops completely, its the hypocritical Government that pisses me off. (Edited by Seizure Dude at 11:40 am on Mar. 20, 2003)
I like the logic of committing a crime (unauthorized invasion of a soveriegn country) to force Saddam to comply with the UN resolutions. Kind of like letting opposing gangs battle it out- who cares about the innocents in the crossfire, it'll be worth it. Isn't that your position SS?
No. I dont view america as a terrorist/hipocrasy regime as you, ranger and SD and mamafingers does. I understand your concerns about innocent lives, but to sit there and say that america "orders the killing of innocents" on purpose is UNamerican in every sense of the word, unless ofcourse your trying to re-define what america stands for. SD, you feel saddam needs to be removed, and you know he will not go peacefully. If he stays, people will suffer to death, if its a UN lead war, people will die, if its an american coalition of the now 50+ countries, people will die, if its a civil war people will die. the only peaceful bloodless solution was for saddam to leave voluntarily, which he didnt do back in 1991, and has said he wont do now. You have offered no other solutions that are any more humane than war. You thcdude, have proposed nothing that would be more humane either, maybe immediatly more humane, but not down the road. Look at the BIG PICTURE, look at the next 20 years, instead of the next 20 hours, and tell me what paths both of your solutions wouldve went down. And who gets to authorize a war??? You act like the UN is the government of the world and we have to ask them permission to liberate iraq and rid Iraq of the remaining WMD's the inspectors said it left behind. The UN sat there and watched almost 1,000,000 people get killed via ethnic cleansing in Rwanda because it was too afraid to do whats right. They sat there and did nothing about Milosivic, and the US/Nato had to stop the ethnic cleansing there. What did the UN do about POL POT when he killed over 1 million in cambodia via ethnic cleansing?? Nothing. If american troops had stayed, maybe it wouldnt have happened. Ever think of that? I know your anti-violence THC, so i would never expect you to understand where im coming from. but sometimes, and history has shown, that sometimes violence can only be beaten by violence. Giving hitler, stalin, khan, all a hug, wouldnt have worked. Why do you think the first things leaders like Hitler, saddam, Castro, Chavez all have done was disarm the citizens?? Because they know without guns and without might, there free to rule as they wish without dissent.
Thuggybear, nice to hear a civilized voice in this wilderness. Everyone--Are protests happening where you live?
It's absolutely hypocritical, and if I remember correctly it's the third clause in the preamble of the constitution, very American. Speaking of protests, THC, explain to me exactly how a hunger strike is effective.
Sylent you can slice it anyway you want, You can bring up points that have nothing whatsoever to do with my original question of: Justify for me Bushes ordering the murder of innocent people through missile and bombing raids of Baghdad, when He just got done condemning the murder of "innocent" people after 9/11!"...You can throw a pro war, "innocent civilians will die in this type of war" stance at me and I will say its BULLSHIT...and you can tell me my ideas arent any better than Bushes and I will agree they all have their downside...But you will NEVER convince me of this type of propaganda for example: 1. "The United States knowingly murdering innocent "civilians" to promote their cause is NOT terrorism"...Please Sylent, thats a U.S. politicians brainwashing scheme and always has been...you talk about spinning how bout answering my original questions before raising your flag and putting your hand over your heart? what about this: 2. Bush and the boys tactics of: making the terrorist related deaths of "innocent Americans" seem so (EVIL)... yet theyre justifying the deaths of "innocent Iraqis" and that isnt evil?... BULLSHIT! plain and simple... Hypocrisy in every sense of the word! Ive got news for you, Im not fooled and NO amount of "propaganda" will make me believe their is not some amount of Hypocrisy involved in this situation... PERIOD!... If youve read my past posts you would realize: 1. I agree with our Government on "certain" Issues 2. I dont completely disagree with using force. I do however disagree with ramming into Baghdad head first with missiles and tanks in turn killing many, many civilians in the process...but I "do" agree with dethroning Saddam, neautralizing his military in the desert if need be, and then stopping short of Baghdad to see what we can work out... Why do you think the Iraqi citizens themselves arent as excited as you are Sylent? Could it be because they had casualties in the last war due to the United States? Think about it, would you want the very country that was responsible for the 1000s of deaths of your citizens 12 years ago coming back to do it again? Whether they agree with Saddam or not they are going to protect themselves from an immediate threat, regardless of what that threat represents... Why are the Egyptians rioting Sylent? Why are the "everyday people" of Syria, Lebanon, and other middle eastern countries disagreeing with this war? Do you think this is promoting more anymosity toward the United States in the "LONG RUN"? But then again I suppose what they think(being the very countries that bread terrorists) doesnt matter to you, does it? You wanna talk about the long run Sylent you better start taking what the citizens of the middle east think about this war seriously because their radicals are the very people attacking our country in the "long run"... You say there are no other options besides having a war where civilians will die, CMON... youre talking to grown adults here Sylent, not children...If you want us to take this seriously hows about a little less on the Pro Republican and Pro Bush propaganda and a little more on the humanity side... If I told you there was "absolutely" NO other way of solving your plumbing problem then ripping your house down with you inside of it, would you believe me?... If I told you the only way to solve your termite problem would be to tent your house and spray poison inside of it with your whole family still living in the house would it upset you and make you look at me as the bad guy?...Why do you think the iraqi citizens are arming themselves Sylent? Could it be because the so called liberators were responsible for the deaths of their loved ones in the past? Id be arming myself right now too Sylent if China was going to liberate me by possibly murdering my family with bombs and missiles in the process how bout you?... My daughter is guarding a possible terrorist target for the U.S. army right now, do you think its possible the idea of America killing Iraqi civilians in turn producing 'more' terrorists and terrorism in this country is an issue for our family right now?...Sometimes peoples reasoning goes a little bit deeper than you may realize Sylent...The long run isnt always cut and dry now is it?... (Edited by Seizure Dude at 2:15 pm on Mar. 21, 2003) (Edited by Seizure Dude at 2:17 pm on Mar. 21, 2003)
so then whats your point SD? I know killing is wrong. There is no justification for innocents dying. But innocents will die no matter what. You know that. I dont understand what answers your looking for SD. You seem to be playing devils advocate on both sides 24/7. No one can justify killing innocents. But if innocents will be killed either way, then there is no justification for anything, and you just have to go with whatever will have the least-worst results. Maybe a sniper could take saddam out, but what about his sons, or whoever takes his place. What about the weapons? What about the future of iraq, 20 years from now, 50 years from now, 100 and so on. Yes the next few years will be hard, but after that, iraq will be a 1,000,000 times better place then it ever was. Your asking a question with no possible answer SD. Its not a fair question at all. Things need to be done, and they will be. Killing innocents is wrong. Do you have an alternate solution? Does anyone have any solution thats any more humane after taking into consideration all the factors of the situation?
Sylent my concern is for our people AND the Iraqi people...You say I play the devils advocate on both sides and to a certain extent you are correct that is because both sides have valid points in my opinion...It seems pro war or anti war rules this forum no inbetweens, if I told you I sit in the middle would you take me seriously?...That is the case. I agree with disarming Saddam by force if need be, I agree with neautralizing his military in the desert, I 'disagree' with destroying Baghdad with bombs, missiles, and artillery fire in turn leaving many civilians dead...You see both sides have valid points in my opinion therefore to you I look confused, however it makes perfect sense to me.... Here is my stance in a nutshell and always will be: Take the deserts of Iraq by force if need be soldier vs soldier, hunt down Saddam and his officials, BUT Dont 'destroy' Baghdad in the process with a bloody battle of epic proportions in turn killing 'many' civilians and of course promoting more terrorism toward our country and the other coalition members...Once we take 90% of Iraq do we have to create a bloody battle for Baghdad? If so someone explain why?... In my opinion the answers NO, once we take the majority of the country and surround Baghdad it is only a matter of time until either 1. They surrender or 2. The iraqi people themselves take over... civilian deaths created by the coalition=more terrorism... The destruction of Baghdad by the coalition=civilian deaths... always has and ALWAYS will...The "citizens" of the Middle east are flaming mad at us for this move Sylent, who gives a **** what their governments say Sylent the "radicals" are the terrorists we have to contend with over here not the government officials.... So, angry Middle Eastern "citizens"=more terrorists correct?...To sum it up: Making the fight for Baghdad a bloody battle is the BIGGEST mistake we could possibly make in this war and that is exactly what Im against... (Edited by Seizure Dude at 12:26 pm on Mar. 22, 2003)
I agree with thcdude. Invade with U.N inspectors. All this gas gas gas bollocks is for the good of the cameras.No biological or chemical weapon has been used (yet) so why not allow the inspectors in to calm the situation?But gung ho Bush wants to use 300 cruise missiles,at around 1 million dollars a piece just to hinder the economy a bit more.Can no one else see what is happening?How much is tax gonna go up now? The price of fuel?Hes gotta find the money from somewhere, and guess what its gonna be the tax payer.Whether it be Britain or U.S. the tax payer will foot the bill, so Lets all switch on too cnn or ITV and watch the fireworks,cause it gonna cost you.
SD, there have been about 70 casualities last i checked, all soldiers, no civilians. I see both points of view too, but i also take a stand on the side i believe in. The inspections obviously were not working because weapons saddam claimed he didnt have, he used against us the other day ie: Scuds. Even Blix said to the world that all the time in the world wouldnt have been enough to disarm him. Bombing baghdad is dangerous, but its either we bomb baghdad, or we send in troops in a ground invasion and urban warfare, where even more civilians would die. America is fighting the war with the intention to spare the infrastructure and civilians. Urabn warfare is what your suggesting. Hunting down saddam and his leaders would require it. just curious, did you see the news last night? The troops had taken a few towns already. the ppl were dancing and hugging the troops! The best tho, is when 1 of them took his shoe off and smacked a picture of saddam with it! In islam, its extremly disrespectful to show the bottoms of your shoes. lol It made me feel reral good when i saw how happy these people were. Ofcrouse it wasnt actually iraq. It was just more right wing conspiracies using hollywood smoke n mirrors. LMAO
That was awesome Sylent! thats what it should be about in my opinion...Although not all people of all towns are dancing in the streets some are hostile yet many are happy...Its going to go both ways Sylent, much like life. Some will love us, some will view us as invaders. We MUST Keep the civilian death count down, wayyyyyy down in order to pull this thing off without creating more enemies, problems for the coalition, and to prevent future terrorist attacks on our soldiers who occupy the region, once the war is over. So far, so good.
Yep. Even Tom Daschle is happy about it now. After seeing all the iraqi support for the war and the low numbers of deaths period, i feel much better about it too. Looks like my optomistic attitude about bush and the war hasnt let me down! Even our economy is sky rocketing!! The stocks are up for the 7th session straight! The DOW has said it had its best week since the 80's!! Even oil will go down from 50 a barrel to 20 a barrel by next week according to the oil companies and countries that export oil. btw, Did you hear yesterday, that some scumbag HIV infected anti-war protestors in california plan to vomit on the cops during the protests? I think they should be locked up for manslaughter if any of those cops get HIV.
QUOTE Quote: from rangerdanger on 10:29 pm on Mar. 22, 2003 It's beyond me ss how you can look at Bagdad on fire and say no cililians have been killed. Its real sad ranger, how you cant even see the good in this. You are a very sad person. For your own sake buddy, I hope someday you learn to see the silver lining in every cloud. (Edited by Sylent Skull at 6:06 am on Mar. 23, 2003)
We can see the silver lining...too bad you can't see the cloud ! THC...I almost fell off my chair man...Invasion of UN inspectors ! Too bad too...can you imagine how the world would have changed if this worked out the way the majority of the world wanted...the possibility of no war and actually getting things to work out for the better ! ! Hell we could have taught the IRA and others that we can do this ! Humanity isn't dead ! Too bad we..well Bush (lets face it...HE WAS going to war) dropped the ball....again Virtua:
but dudes what about all this raping and beheading thats gettin done to our dudes? And I heard on the news about some dudes called the faded sadam or something that are grabing up women and children to hide behind while they shoot at our dudes. And they also shoot their dudes that are trying to surrender but I dont think they rape and behead their dudes just our dudes.
