WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines America: Oil, Terror, Lies, Greed and Control (the issues version)

Jung

???
Premium
13,982
1,399
487
#1
I posted this in the Writers Block a while back, but due to recent events I’ve come to beLIEve that this wasn’t in all fairness. I restricted other members ability to reply to or dispute my statements. To be in all fairness I’m reposting it here, so others may reply, comment, dispute or otherwise add insight to my statements. With that in mind, please feel free to comment or offer your opinions of my claims. Also, feel free to disprove my statements, as I’m sure I’ve left something out or made a biased claim somewhere along the way. :)

========================================
The original post:


Oil, Greed, Lies and Control

It's my beLIEf that a lot of people don't truly understand the reasons behind this war. I BeLIEve this is mainly due to media hype and suppression of facts not relevant to the "war on terror”, which I’ll address later in this post. It saddens me deeply that 52% of Americans are happy being ignorant to such facts. I’m truly at a loss for words when it comes to their feckless attitudes towards such an important issue.

In 03 upon incept of this war Russia and France voiced their opposition to our possible invasion, as it would harm their oil contracts. We ignored our allies and geared up for war, warning Russia and France that if they did not support or at least remain neutral in a U.S. intervention in Iraq, their oil contracts with the Saddam’s regime may be cancelled and redistributed in part to U.S. companies. Russia anf France both had huge oil contracts with Saddam, for billion and billions of barrels of oil; however, these deals wouldn’t become active until the U.N. sanctions on Iraq were lifted.

The Bush administration has several goals in Iraq, the most vocalized being to rid the middle east of Saddam, whose expansionist history has threatened U.S. interests. The other major goal is ending the economic sanctions that prevent Iraq from producing oil at full capacity; by replacing Saddam with a U.S. friendly government, the sanctions would stop Iraq from selling a majority of it’s oil to global markets, this would allow for cheaper and more plentiful resources in oil dependent countries such as the United States. Much of the U.S. oil industry would benefit after an invasion of Iraq. Several U.S. oil companies; Exxon, Chevron, Texaco, Halliburton etc, have been in discussion with the Bush administration over rehabilitating Iraq's damaged oil infrastructure which is in a state of disrepair largely due to the sanctions. You can’t tell me that isn’t being an “oil field raider”, this war is clearly about oil, money and power. We didn’t give a fuck about the oppression of Iraqi’s or Saddam’s alleged terrorist connection/ties before. The 9/11 attack opened the door for us to invade Iraq in the name of the war on terror. I’d be willing to be sooner or later we’ll have military bases in and around Iraq; we’re trying to find some real estate so we can have more influence in Middle Eastern affairs.

Iran, Libya, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia have all posed problems for U.S. interests in the past. The first gulf war gave the United States its first major foothold in the Middle East: most notably its bases in Saudi Arabia that remain to this day. However, after 9/11, the United States was given a window of opportunity to further its influence in the Middle East.
The question now is how long global powers will stand in direct opposition of U.S.’s plans in Iraq. The Bush administration has not backed down, warning that a new Iraqi government may cancel all existing oil deals between Baghdad and nations hostile to U.S. interests. The administration said that if it received support from nations such as Russia and France in the Security Council, Washington and the new Iraqi government would honor their current deals signed with Saddam. Way to go Bush, we’re bullying our allies, holding their oil for ransom for enrichment of our “evil empire.” Yet, Bush’s motives are seen as noble? :rolleyes:

The hope is that, like Afghanistan, the new Iraqi government would have no problems with the U.S. using the country for a military staging ground. The new regime would also be more sympathetic to Washington's concerns about global oil production, should the United States want to interfere with quotas set by the OPEC.

Removing Saddam would also gain leverage on Iran, part of the "axis of evil," between U.S. military bases in Afghanistan to the east and Iraq to the west. If the United States were to have its military poised and ready on both sides of the Iranian border, Tehran would have to become very careful about taking actions that could threaten U.S. interests. In addition to threatening Iran, the U.S. would send a strong signal to other countries in the area opposed to U.S. influence in the Middle East.


Terror, Greed, Lies and Control

The patriot act is egregiously unconstitutional; it all but eliminates the 4th amendment, because it claims that police officers can search your home with out a warrant; it eliminates the 6th amendment, because it states that the government can label you a terrorist, throw you in jail with out indictment and deny you a lawyer. Why are we allowing politicians to create such unconstitutional law and acts? Furthermore, why do we continue to vote for those who create them?

The war on Iraq is an unfortunate situation; 50% of Americans realize that going to Iraq was a mistake; Iraq never attacked us, there is no evidence that they had any direct connection to the 9/11 tragedy. It was a mistake to go there; it compounds the mistake to stay there and to send 150 thousand troops there was a mistake; we can not win. The only rational solution is to bring our soldier home as safely and quickly as possible.

People are concerned about the war on terror; the war on terror didn’t’ start after 9/11, although the term was coined during that time. The war on terror started some fifty years ago, when we began to meddle in the Middle East. We’ve been dividing that country up; creating artificial political lines and trying to influence governments there. The constitution authorizes us to do national defense; we have every right to protect American soil and American lives. The constitution does not authorize us to do international offense; we aren’t supposed to be the policemen of the world, even if that’s what some people think will make them sleep better at night, that’s not what the U.S. military is for. We have American military in over 135 countries around the world; we’re using our military to influence other governments; influence other economies and politically we’re bullying other countries with our actions.

It’s no surprise that people are angry about our foreign policy. We should heed George Washington’s words he offered us in his farewell address. That advice is to maintain economic ties to all countries, and entangle in alliances with none. Our foreign policy is actually making terrorism worse. People in Iraq hate us; 92% of Iraqis consider us occupiers, rather than liberators. Are we going to make them change their mind and make them love us when we bomb their buildings and kill innocent civilians? Do Americans really think that our relationship with Iraq will improve because of this?
 

RageAgainst

Chaotic Neutral
7,540
506
257
#2
God..Good post. Quick related comment: in one of their papers, "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century", the PNAC advises the government to reposition permanently based forces to the Middle East. It also says that America must "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars" in order to establish American dominance. The document was written in 2000...

Also, in the same document, "the PNAC demanded an increase in defense spending to at least 3.8% of GDP. Bush's proposed budget for the next year asks for $379 billion in defense spending, almost exactly 3.8% of GDP." Yay. Think thanks have direct influence in Bush's decisions, how fantastic and fabulous and marvelous and god it makes me fucking sick.
 

gurlgonewild

Was machen Sie?
1,086
0
0
#3
junglizm said:
In 03 upon incept of this war Russia and France voiced their opposition to our possible invasion, as it would harm their oil contracts. We ignored our allies and geared up for war, warning Russia and France that if they did not support or at least remain neutral in a U.S. intervention in Iraq, their oil contracts with the Saddam’s regime may be cancelled and redistributed in part to U.S. companies. Russia anf France both had huge oil contracts with Saddam, for billion and billions of barrels of oil; however, these deals wouldn’t become active until the U.N. sanctions on Iraq were lifted.
You forgot Germany.

We didn’t give a fuck about the oppression of Iraqi’s or Saddam’s alleged terrorist connection/ties before. The 9/11 attack opened the door for us to invade Iraq in the name of the war on terror. I’d be willing to be sooner or later we’ll have military bases in and around Iraq
All true.

The first gulf war gave the United States its first major foothold in the Middle East: most notably its bases in Saudi Arabia that remain to this day.
no dude, we have had presence in the middle east long before the Persian Gulf War. military bases, maybe but thats debateable when you consider how close our other bases are.

Yet, Bush’s motives are seen as noble? says who?

In addition to threatening Iran, the U.S. would send a strong signal to other countries in the area opposed to U.S. influence in the Middle East.
q? with what money & military force might we accomplish this with? we're already stretched to the limit, and they know it. hence iran entering the EU unabated.

The patriot act is egregiously unconstitutional;
not for those reasons but in principle.

Why are we allowing politicians to create such unconstitutional law and acts? Furthermore, why do we continue to vote for those who create them?
because it preys on people's fears...

The only rational solution is to bring our soldier home as safely and quickly as possible.
i disagree. we're there, we have lost and sacrificed too much already to throw in the towel. we need to stay to make sure iraq doesn't turn into a breeding ground for terrorist elements, recoup our monetary losses, stabilize this country and maybe have some influence on the rest of the middle east, build our military presence, etc. its what we went there for, he better fuckin accomplish his goals. don't let him off the hook that easily!

we aren’t supposed to be the policemen of the world, even if that’s what some people think will make them sleep better at night, that’s not what the U.S. military is for. We have American military in over 135 countries around the world; we’re using our military to influence other governments; influence other economies and politically we’re bullying other countries with our actions.
damned if we do and damned if we don't. furthermore we do not police the world for "unexpected gain".
you are suggesting we are powerful enough to afford doing nothing or remaining neutral and always have been. the lifestyle afforded to you today, though it may not be much, is due to our "bullying" and "influence".

you forget that the USA is not the ONLY country who employs such tactics in the interest of their statehood. you forget history is long, frought with villanous injustices dealt by some to the many. we happen to come into focus because we are a current event. our interests are just as important as the next guy who takes over and as was the one we took over for.

at some point in time it would be nice to see a world that gets along, plays well together and everyone is friggin happy. thats what death is for. to relieve you of the pain of life....if you so choose to live that way.

and lastly, you assume your assumptions of others are correct and are all encompassing. as if it were that easy? or that people who do not follow to the beat of your tune...nevermind, that just sounds American.
 

bigck3000

The Iron Lung
1,684
1
0
#4
So your argument against his essay is "Other people have done it, so why cant we"

Our country is slathered in the oily lube of double standards....on the one hand we do try to act as "policemen to the world" (evidence of this is in Jung's post, We have numerous 'bases' all over the world....I believe the Romans employed this same tactic) an example for all to behold "See the great U.S and its civilized government, See its generosity in bestowing 'Freedom' on the poor, savage, masses." On the other hand we act as the little playground bully, "influencing" governments, creating new countries, occupying other countries. This sort of "Do as I say and not as I do" mentality is what is so disheartening about the future. Yet what you and our current administration fail to realize is that we are seeing these cultures and governments through the distorted looking glass of our ethnocentrism. It isnt untill we take the voices of foreign people at face value that we will have peace.

Jung's post was eloquently put and quite informative if not a little slanted, but hey, he's only working with what 'W' gave him. I'd like to see a certain someone else show the class and willingness to debate by posting her work up here in issues....but alas....maybe if I "demanded" it be put in Issues, she would comply.
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#5
junglizm said:
Oil, Greed, Lies and Control

It's my beLIEf that a lot of people don't truly understand the reasons behind this war. I BeLIEve this is mainly due to media hype and suppression of facts not relevant to the "war on terror”, which I’ll address later in this post. It saddens me deeply that 52% of Americans are happy being ignorant to such facts. I’m truly at a loss for words when it comes to their feckless attitudes towards such an important issue.
Jung, Thanks for reposting this in Issues.

You are absolutely correct that Americans have been lied to about the Bush Administrations reasons for war against Iraq & that they enjoy their ignorance. I would say it's about 51% of the voting population, that watch Fox News and gleefully spoon up the daily doses of shit that are delivered to them are the population you reference.

This group is sort of like animals, as long as the get food, sex & shelter, that is their only concern.

The only answer to this is education. The rest of them can only be moved by economic means, and that is coming dear reader, because our government's economy is fucked.
 

gurlgonewild

Was machen Sie?
1,086
0
0
#6
bigck3000 said:
So your argument against his essay is "Other people have done it, so why cant we"
yes and no....
nah my arguement has to do with realizing the bigger picture. in all honesty, unless there is a war in x,y,z the majority of Americans do not care or pay attention to our foreign policy. then suddenly, they become buffs. foreign policy is not just about the USA.

even people who are obviously informed tend to marginalize and narrow their focus to the point they do not realize for every action there is a reaction.

<and bigck3000 who's the certain someone, name name's man!!>
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,982
1,399
487
#7
gurlgonewild said:
you are suggesting we are powerful enough to afford doing nothing or remaining neutral and always have been. the lifestyle afforded to you today, though it may not be much, is due to our "bullying" and "influence".
I think you may have misread my statements; I’m merely pointing out that our stance today is in no way a reflection of the original. Had this country stayed true to its original direction, we likely wouldn’t be in a lot of todays situations, but that’s history and not really relevant. We’re already in a potition of our brothers keeper, as well as the “world police.” I don’t agree with this stance, so I’m speaking out on it.

I fail to see how influencing foreign governments to suit our greed has given me more liberties today, maybe you can outline some of this for me though. What I do see is our nation creating angst and oppression of foreign bodies. We’ve meddled in affairs that we had no business in, and when conflict occurs we blame others; others who are only reacting to our meddling. Don't get me wonrg though, I’m not condoning the sometimes extremist action of others. I just choose to be a slight bit more objective in my views. The bully, when finally confronted, is often met with violence. To one who isn’t aware of the bully's history, it may seem as if the bully’s would be victim is the aggressor, although that isn’t always the case. Perhaps you're the one who doesn't see this though.

gurlgonewild said:
you forget that the USA is not the ONLY country who employs such tactics in the interest of their statehood. you forget history is long, frought with villanous injustices dealt by some to the many. we happen to come into focus because we are a current event. our interests are just as important as the next guy who takes over and as was the one we took over for.
Perhaps, in this short time between reading and clicking the reply button, you’ve forgotten the title of my article. I’m strictly referring to America here, hence the title. My article was never meant to be about other countries, except where relevant to America. Perhaps you expected this thread to be about world affairs, if that’s the case, then I apologize for failing to meet your expectations.

Why do we view other countries that choose to invade or meddle, in a different manner? Why are foreign countries always viewed as evil and tyrannical, when we mirror most of the same behaviors in America? People don’t often cheer against the home team, do they? Often there comes a point that cheering against the home team, even if for a just cause, is discouraged, and attempts to silence that action are executed.

Please excuse my vagueness, but I’m only replying in the same manner as you already have. Although, I’ve tried to refrain from babbling.

gurlgonewild said:
at some point in time it would be nice to see a world that gets along, plays well together and everyone is friggin happy. thats what death is for. to relieve you of the pain of life....if you so choose to live that way.
I don’t really know what you’re attempting to get at here. The world will never ba a completely happy shiny place, but we can definitely take some steps towards achieving some type of harmony. We should place more value upon the happiness and well being of America; instead we invade countries on false claims and justify it as a humanitarian action. Are their not homeless, oppressed and under privileged inside our own country? Have we acted in direct response to a prevalent threat, or are we just securing more real estate and leverage?

gurlgonewild said:
and lastly, you assume your assumptions of others are correct and are all encompassing. as if it were that easy? or that people who do not follow to the beat of your tune...nevermind, that just sounds American.
Well, instead of vaguely commenting on my assumed faults, perhaps you’d like to quote/link/post your assumptions of others, whose assumptions may not concur with mine. Never mind… that just sounds American.

====

gurlgonewild said:
yes and no....
nah my arguement has to do with realizing the bigger picture. in all honesty, unless there is a war in x,y,z the majority of Americans do not care or pay attention to our foreign policy. then suddenly, they become buffs. foreign policy is not just about the USA.
Ah, the arrogance of the student! I created a sig picture for another forum, I’ll post it for you. It was a mockery of the very people you’d likely view me as. I’d like to know where you come off implying that I’ve only just gained an interest in such events. Furthermore, you seem to imply that you’re well versed and an “old hat”, to such topics. How droll, how very droll indeed. I’m a bit older than the average college student and I’ve placed importance on political issue for a very long time. I’ve served my country; I did it because I’m a patriot. I didn’t join the military for college money, like so many others; I passed up MIT for Georgia Tech and Syracuse Uni. I won’t just silence my views to appease others though, nor will I walk on egg shells just because someone else’s opinions may differ. Write me off as whatever suits your fancy, but next time maybe you could attach a more relevant argument.

gurlgonewild said:
even people who are obviously informed tend to marginalize and narrow their focus to the point they do not realize for every action there is a reaction.
Again, you imply that my or our views are narrow and blind. Surely your views aren’t though, that’s impossible. You’re coming off as a bit arrogant and elitist.

Now you’ve gone and created an issues thread, and included nice pretty bold letters at the top. Those letters point out that you’re the only one vigilant enough to have noticed these issues. Well, I for one, apologize for being so narrow minded. I’m sorry that as an American citizen I value the future of America more than any other country. I apologize for reposting a few month old thread so others might reply to it. I also apologize for insulting your intelligence and political superiority with my statements and choice of topic. Also, if I’m not mistaken, you appeared to be in agreement with me originally, or at least you didn’t offer so much contrasting opinion.

http://www.wtf.com/showpost.php?p=92748&postcount=3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
14
0
0
#8
half and half

Yes you're statement drives a stake into the heart of bush making him the visualization of an undead. and no i don't agree with him and his tactics. but the people who were opressed did need to be saved and couldn't do it themselves. but yes also we had no right to say what is right and what wrong also. the statement where you used the people ive in ignorance i liked you are a strong writer good statement.
 

Smoke

Banned - What an Asshat!
2,583
0
0
#9
junglizm said:
I posted this in the Writers Block a while back, but due to recent events I’ve come to beLIEve that this wasn’t in all fairness. I restricted other members ability to reply to or dispute my statements. To be in all fairness I’m reposting it here, so others may reply, comment, dispute or otherwise add insight to my statements. With that in mind, please feel free to comment or offer your opinions of my claims. Also, feel free to disprove my statements, as I’m sure I’ve left something out or made a biased claim somewhere along the way. :)

========================================
The original post:


Oil, Greed, Lies and Control

It's my beLIEf that a lot of people don't truly understand the reasons behind this war. I BeLIEve this is mainly due to media hype and suppression of facts not relevant to the "war on terror”, which I’ll address later in this post. It saddens me deeply that 52% of Americans are happy being ignorant to such facts. I’m truly at a loss for words when it comes to their feckless attitudes towards such an important issue.

In 03 upon incept of this war Russia and France voiced their opposition to our possible invasion, as it would harm their oil contracts. We ignored our allies and geared up for war, warning Russia and France that if they did not support or at least remain neutral in a U.S. intervention in Iraq, their oil contracts with the Saddam’s regime may be cancelled and redistributed in part to U.S. companies. Russia anf France both had huge oil contracts with Saddam, for billion and billions of barrels of oil; however, these deals wouldn’t become active until the U.N. sanctions on Iraq were lifted.

The Bush administration has several goals in Iraq, the most vocalized being to rid the middle east of Saddam, whose expansionist history has threatened U.S. interests. The other major goal is ending the economic sanctions that prevent Iraq from producing oil at full capacity; by replacing Saddam with a U.S. friendly government, the sanctions would stop Iraq from selling a majority of it’s oil to global markets, this would allow for cheaper and more plentiful resources in oil dependent countries such as the United States. Much of the U.S. oil industry would benefit after an invasion of Iraq. Several U.S. oil companies; Exxon, Chevron, Texaco, Halliburton etc, have been in discussion with the Bush administration over rehabilitating Iraq's damaged oil infrastructure which is in a state of disrepair largely due to the sanctions. You can’t tell me that isn’t being an “oil field raider”, this war is clearly about oil, money and power. We didn’t give a fuck about the oppression of Iraqi’s or Saddam’s alleged terrorist connection/ties before. The 9/11 attack opened the door for us to invade Iraq in the name of the war on terror. I’d be willing to be sooner or later we’ll have military bases in and around Iraq; we’re trying to find some real estate so we can have more influence in Middle Eastern affairs.

Iran, Libya, Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia have all posed problems for U.S. interests in the past. The first gulf war gave the United States its first major foothold in the Middle East: most notably its bases in Saudi Arabia that remain to this day. However, after 9/11, the United States was given a window of opportunity to further its influence in the Middle East.
The question now is how long global powers will stand in direct opposition of U.S.’s plans in Iraq. The Bush administration has not backed down, warning that a new Iraqi government may cancel all existing oil deals between Baghdad and nations hostile to U.S. interests. The administration said that if it received support from nations such as Russia and France in the Security Council, Washington and the new Iraqi government would honor their current deals signed with Saddam. Way to go Bush, we’re bullying our allies, holding their oil for ransom for enrichment of our “evil empire.” Yet, Bush’s motives are seen as noble? :rolleyes:

The hope is that, like Afghanistan, the new Iraqi government would have no problems with the U.S. using the country for a military staging ground. The new regime would also be more sympathetic to Washington's concerns about global oil production, should the United States want to interfere with quotas set by the OPEC.

Removing Saddam would also gain leverage on Iran, part of the "axis of evil," between U.S. military bases in Afghanistan to the east and Iraq to the west. If the United States were to have its military poised and ready on both sides of the Iranian border, Tehran would have to become very careful about taking actions that could threaten U.S. interests. In addition to threatening Iran, the U.S. would send a strong signal to other countries in the area opposed to U.S. influence in the Middle East.


Terror, Greed, Lies and Control

The patriot act is egregiously unconstitutional; it all but eliminates the 4th amendment, because it claims that police officers can search your home with out a warrant; it eliminates the 6th amendment, because it states that the government can label you a terrorist, throw you in jail with out indictment and deny you a lawyer. Why are we allowing politicians to create such unconstitutional law and acts? Furthermore, why do we continue to vote for those who create them?

The war on Iraq is an unfortunate situation; 50% of Americans realize that going to Iraq was a mistake; Iraq never attacked us, there is no evidence that they had any direct connection to the 9/11 tragedy. It was a mistake to go there; it compounds the mistake to stay there and to send 150 thousand troops there was a mistake; we can not win. The only rational solution is to bring our soldier home as safely and quickly as possible.

People are concerned about the war on terror; the war on terror didn’t’ start after 9/11, although the term was coined during that time. The war on terror started some fifty years ago, when we began to meddle in the Middle East. We’ve been dividing that country up; creating artificial political lines and trying to influence governments there. The constitution authorizes us to do national defense; we have every right to protect American soil and American lives. The constitution does not authorize us to do international offense; we aren’t supposed to be the policemen of the world, even if that’s what some people think will make them sleep better at night, that’s not what the U.S. military is for. We have American military in over 135 countries around the world; we’re using our military to influence other governments; influence other economies and politically we’re bullying other countries with our actions.

It’s no surprise that people are angry about our foreign policy. We should heed George Washington’s words he offered us in his farewell address. That advice is to maintain economic ties to all countries, and entangle in alliances with none. Our foreign policy is actually making terrorism worse. People in Iraq hate us; 92% of Iraqis consider us occupiers, rather than liberators. Are we going to make them change their mind and make them love us when we bomb their buildings and kill innocent civilians? Do Americans really think that our relationship with Iraq will improve because of this?
Great post, I think about it the same way you do.
 

gurlgonewild

Was machen Sie?
1,086
0
0
#10
junglizm said:
Had this country stayed true to its original direction, we likely wouldn’t be in a lot of todays situations, and when the fuck was that?

We’re already in a potition of our brothers keeper, as well as the “world police.” because we puts our asses in that seat; willingly plotted and planned it that way.

I fail to see how influencing foreign governments to suit our greed has given me more liberties today, maybe you can outline some of this for me though. What I do see is our nation creating angst and oppression of foreign bodies. We’ve meddled in affairs that we had no business in, and when conflict occurs we blame others; others who are only reacting to our meddling.

OUTLINE:
-you get paid to do a job half the world gets less than $1/mo. to do
-you live in a home backed by our banking system
-you eat food most likely grown in other countries for cheap
-you drive a gas guzzling SUV (probably, if not a truck...anything but a 4 cyl) that costs you next to nothing to gas up (& your household has at least one fuckin car)
-you wear clothes made on the cheap
-you get to "volunteer" to go into the services where as most other places its fuckin mandatory
-you have the opportunity to purchase the basic american luxuries of at least one of the following...tv, microwave, vcr or dvd player, a phone, etc for dirt fuckin cheap
-you get subsidized loans to go to college
-or does none of this apply to you because you live in a mud hut somewhere, unemployed, uneducated, and starving with internet access and a puter?


My article was never meant to be about other countries, except where relevant to America. has the word globalization ever entered into your vocab? what makes you think everything is un-connected and we can afford to become disconnected?

Please excuse my vagueness, but I’m only replying in the same manner as you already have. Although, I’ve tried to refrain from babbling. no, but you are redundant.

I don’t really know what you’re attempting to get at here. The world will never ba a completely happy shiny place, but we can definitely take some steps towards achieving some type of harmony.
dude you must live on another fuckin planet! since the beginning of man there has and always will be a major conflict somewhere.

We should place more value upon the happiness and well being of America; instead we invade countries on false claims and justify it as a humanitarian action.
...again with the "i love you, you love me" Barney crap. get real. just because its spun that way and you believe it doesn't make you right and them wrong.

Are their not homeless, oppressed and under privileged inside our own country?
wtf has this to do with the topic? hmmmm...babbling? nothing in history has ever shown if we stayed the out of world politics we would feed, shelter and generally take care of the homeless or anyone less fortunate than ourselves.

Ah, the arrogance of the student! Furthermore, you seem to imply that you’re well versed and an “old hat”, to such topics. How droll, how very droll indeed. I’m a bit older than the average college student and I’ve placed importance on political issue for a very long time.
ah again with the assumptions. i too am a bit older.

I’ve served my country; I did it because I’m a patriot. I didn’t join the military for college money, like so many others; I passed up MIT for Georgia Tech and Syracuse Uni.
does mentioning the fact you passed up...x,y college make YOU feel elitist? then why mention it? you are so fucking unbelievable by stating you served your country as if to imply this gives the absolute last word and right on the issues.

Again, you imply that my or our views are narrow and blind. Surely your views aren’t though, that’s impossible. You’re coming off as a bit arrogant and elitist.
you know, its funny...i didn't state specifics because i do not neccessarily disagree with you. however having made it personal, and i do not take lightly to the insinuations that #1 because you're apparently slightly older than i #2 you passed up the op to go to a good school for the military #3 you cannot conceive of someone else pointing out other events that might be interrelated and therefore relevant to the arguement (such as my post regarding Germany, France, China) because i didn't rip off someone else's article and pose it as mine...no, that was wrong, but i am certain somewhat true...
yaddah, yaddah, yaddahh- you sound just like a bump off the old log. the same shitty attitude as the people you say you feverishly cannot see eye to eye with. yet you utilize their same tactics...trying to diminish my statements by saying "you're too young, i served, i wasn't talking about that. "


Now you’ve gone and created an issues thread, and included nice pretty bold letters at the top. Those letters point out that you’re the only one vigilant enough to have noticed these issues.
ugh you wouldn't know it. all of the issues swell around americans, america.

I apologize for reposting a few month old thread so others might reply to it.
you wanted a reply, you got it. you didn't like it so i guess one should be careful what one asks for...typical of your generation.

Also, if I’m not mistaken, you appeared to be in agreement with me originally, or at least you didn’t offer so much contrasting opinion.
like i said. i didn't write that reply in opposition.
i started posting here because of the recent Presidential elections. Making comments on the obscenity of the War in Iraq and in general an overwhelming feeling of dispair because now we have to go through another four years of a president who didn't deserve his first four years.

talk about yikes! narrow minded, me? who's the one who gave me a bad rating and called me an idiot? hmmmmmm? you fuckin people are childish. remember you are the one who said you believed the President when he stated we were going to war with Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction and needed to be stopped, not i. i never fuckin believed that crap- so who's the idiot?
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#11
gurlgonewild said:
i started posting here because of the recent Presidential elections. Making comments on the obscenity of the War in Iraq and in general an overwhelming feeling of dispair because now we have to go through another four years of a president who didn't deserve his first four years.

talk about yikes! narrow minded, me? who's the one who gave me a bad rating and called me an idiot? hmmmmmm? you fuckin people are childish. remember you are the one who said you believed the President when he stated we were going to war with Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction and needed to be stopped, not i. i never fuckin believed that crap- so who's the idiot?
Why are you worried about what idiots think?

Ratings don't mean anything. Say what you want. Fuck 'em, little chicken shit bastards...
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#12
a8ngelfir7e said:
but the people who were opressed did need to be saved and couldn't do it themselves.
Sorry, but you've been fed a line of crap, and you spooned it right up.

There are many opressed people. We didn't give a shit about the opressed kurds when Saddam gassed them, because he was out friend against Iran in those days.

We don't give a shit about the Iraqi people, you can tell that by the way we kill them everyday & blow up their cities.

WE WANT THEIR OIL & A SAFE HAVEN IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

Wake up, stop being a pawn...
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,982
1,399
487
#13
because we puts our asses in that seat; willingly plotted and planned it that way.
Yes, that was my point. I’m not sure why you felt the need to add to it though. The fact that we’ve strategically placed ourselves there doesn’t make me feel any better about it.


OUTLINE:
-you get paid to do a job half the world gets less than $1/mo. to do
-you live in a home backed by our banking system
-you eat food most likely grown in other countries for cheap
-you drive a gas guzzling SUV (probably, if not a truck...anything but a 4 cyl) that costs you next to nothing to gas up (& your household has at least one fuckin car)
-you wear clothes made on the cheap
-you get to "volunteer" to go into the services where as most other places its fuckin mandatory
-you have the opportunity to purchase the basic american luxuries of at least one of the following...tv, microwave, vcr or dvd player, a phone, etc for dirt fuckin cheap
-you get subsidized loans to go to college
-or does none of this apply to you because you live in a mud hut somewhere, unemployed, uneducated, and starving with internet access and a puter?
Wow, you talk about babbling, well what does any of that have to do with this topic? I’m not saying that I hate America, not by far. I’m just disgusted with some of our political stances. If you’ll read my original post, you’ll see that I mentioned keeping economical ties open, but not alliances. (read: we should trade with others, but not go to their rescue or meddle in their affairs.)
has the word globalization ever entered into your vocab? what makes you think everything is un-connected and we can afford to become disconnected?
Another irrelevant comment; I was speaking from a specific standpoint, not about globalization. I admit that I don’t have most of the answers, but I still feel the direction our country is heading in isn’t too bright.
no, but you are redundant.
Completely baseless, I was only defending my position. You seemed to miss some of my points, so I reiterated them for you.
dude you must live on another fuckin planet! since the beginning of man there has and always will be a major conflict somewhere.
How droll, you’ve missed the point again, perhaps read too much into my statements. I wasn’t saying that we can make the world a fucking picnic in the park. We can take measures to prevent some terrorist activities and anti-American sentiment though. In my opinion, we’re bring a lot of undue hatred on ourselves. Maybe that’s just me though…
...again with the "i love you, you love me" Barney crap. get real. just because its spun that way and you believe it doesn't make you right and them wrong.
Again, you’re twisting my words around. I’m sorry, but invading a country isn’t humanitarian action. You can’t bomb building and kill civilians, then give the survivors food, water and shelter and call expect to make amends. That’s fucking ridiculous.
wtf has this to do with the topic? hmmmm...babbling? nothing in history has ever shown if we stayed the out of world politics we would feed, shelter and generally take care of the homeless or anyone less fortunate than ourselves.
I was only making the point that we seem more interested in other countries, while ours has many problems. The money we’re spending in Iraq could be put to better uses, no? Sorry if you feel that I’m babbling.
ah again with the assumptions. i too am a bit older.
I apologize, that may have been an assumption. Allow me to clarify though; by “old hat” I was speaking of the longevity of your interest in politics, not age. Also, I got the student bit from your profile, although I did assume college. I’m sorry if their was any confusion.
does mentioning the fact you passed up...x,y college make YOU feel elitist? then why mention it? you are so fucking unbelievable by stating you served your country as if to imply this gives the absolute last word and right on the issues.
Of course it doesn’t make me feel elitist, why would it? Ga Tech and Syracuse aren’t even that great of schools. I was replying to your implication that I was a bandwagon patriot. My statements were the first thing that came to mind. I thought that you were implying that I’m only acting patriotic since 9/11 or the recent election. It seemed as though you were implying that you’ve been politically minded all this time, but none of us have. That’s simply not true! I was only defending my position, forgive me if I misread your comments, but them seemed directed at me.
you know, its funny...i didn't state specifics because i do not neccessarily disagree with you. however having made it personal, and i do not take lightly to the insinuations that #1 because you're apparently slightly older than i #2 you passed up the op to go to a good school for the military #3 you cannot conceive of someone else pointing out other events that might be interrelated and therefore relevant to the arguement (such as my post regarding Germany, France, China) because i didn't rip off someone else's article and pose it as mine...no, that was wrong, but i am certain somewhat true...
I apologize then; your lack of specifics led me to believe that your post was in opposition. I never made this an age or education issue, I’ve clarified that earlier in this reply. I never implied that you were ripping off someone else’s article either. I have no evidence of that, nor did I insinuate that. I’m not sure where you’re getting that from.
you sound just like a bump off the old log. the same shitty attitude as the people you say you feverishly cannot see eye to eye with. yet you utilize their same tactics...trying to diminish my statements by saying "you're too young, i served, i wasn't talking about that. "
You’re twisting my words around; I never offered any of those statements as a proof of my being right. I was directly replying to what I took as personal attacks. I wasn’t talking about that. ;)
ugh you wouldn't know it. all of the issues swell around americans, america.
You talk about my assumption, but you seem to be pretty good at making them yourself. I never said that those issues didn’t directly affect America. I was replying to what I took as you being arrogant. Why did you feel the need to point out that those topics haven’t been discussed? You seemed to be implying that we’re too dumb to focus on anything but the present topic. That’s simply not true; I think if you stick around for a bit you’ll realize that we don’t fit that assumption at all. ;)
you wanted a reply, you got it. You didn't like it so i guess one should be careful what one asks for…
I’m not worried about the words one may type on computer. I never said that I didn’t appreciate your reply; on the contrary I appreciate you taking the time to read my post. It’s more than most have done or likely will do.
typical of your generation.
I’m sorry, but that’s just hilarious; you’ve called me out for supposedly attacking your age, yet you see fit to make generalization about my generation. How droll, how very fucking droll. Might I ask, just out of curiousity, what you assume my generation is. Moreover, what is your generation?
like i said. i didn't write that reply in opposition.
I’ll apologize again; I misread some of your reply, for that I’m sorry.
gurlgonewild said:
talk about yikes! narrow minded, me? who's the one who gave me a bad rating and called me an idiot? hmmmmmm? you fuckin people are childish.
Actually, I didn’t rep you. I myself received anonymous negative rep for this thread.
Simple one line remarks of no real value. I also received this rep: “Veterans, and liberal shit, I swear your gay.” For a completely unrelated post. I agree that a lot of members here are childish, but that’s just life. Rep doesn’t really matter to me.
gurlgonewild said:
remember you are the one who said you believed the President when he stated we were going to war with Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction and needed to be stopped, not i. i never fuckin believed that crap- so who's the idiot?
Speak for yourself; I’ve never said that, nor did I originally believe it. Quite the contrary, I believe you’ll find many posts of mine stating that I’ve always thought it was bullshit. I'm aware that this comment was general in nature, I'm just offering my comments. :)
 

bigck3000

The Iron Lung
1,684
1
0
#14
Not that I dont enjoy the little exchange going on here....I just had a nagging thought...why is it that the Iraqis were so defensless against Saddam and yet they are holding their own against the most technologically advanced army in the world? I know everyone here will probably agree, but please, Maybe i'm making some generalization here that prevents me from understanding this.


By the way....I'm speaking from experience....You're not going to win an argument with Jung. Its not that you arent going to win an argument against him, its just that he doesnt fuck around and post baseless shit...if he's posting it, he's researched it and understands it. Just thought I'd save you some time.

another btw, I like that word droll....i'll let it cool down before I pick it up...but its very effective.
:thumbsup:
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,982
1,399
487
#15
bigck3000 said:
By the way....I'm speaking from experience....You're not going to win an argument with Jung. Its not that you arent going to win an argument against him, its just that he doesnt fuck around and post baseless shit...if he's posting it, he's researched it and understands it. Just thought I'd save you some time.
While I do research the topics I debate, I wouldn't go as far as to completely agree with your statements. I've certainly lost debates on this forum, and definitely elsewhere. If I've won debates in the past, I'd say it was less of an issue of my definitive knowledge of the topic, rather an issue of the other party’s lack there of. Also, I wouldn't really call it a "win", but that's just me. My purpose isn't to win a thread, rather express my views.
bigck3000 said:
another btw, I like that word droll....i'll let it cool down before I pick it up...but its very effective.
:thumbsup:
There's your "word of the day service." :cool:
 

gurlgonewild

Was machen Sie?
1,086
0
0
#16
awesome vibe.
btw- how do you quote each of those sentences separately??????? i haven't a clue. someone teach me, peas?
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,982
1,399
487
#17
You can just write out the
tags by hand, or you can open in multiple windows, like I do. I use Firefox, so it’s multiple tabs, rather than windows. I also use a Firefox extension (plug-in) called BBcode, it gives me a right click menu to add quote, and most of the BBcode tags, including quote. It works beautifully, all you need to do to quote something is highlight it and select “quote selection.”
 

RageAgainst

Chaotic Neutral
7,540
506
257
#18
bigck3000 said:
why is it that the Iraqis were so defensless against Saddam and yet they are holding their own against the most technologically advanced army in the world?
True that, good question. Why wasn't there Resistance against Saddam as there is against the occupiers? I'll give it a shot. Saddam was just another bully in the history of mesopotamia (was he liked by the majority? was he hated? or just feared?), while the invasion is seen like a direct western vs islam confrontation, and we know for sure that the invaders are hated by the vast majority.

edit: oh btw jung have you read this article ? It's directly related to your first post. (I know I often bring up informationclearhinghouse but damnit it's not my fault if they write such good articles ;) )