VisorCentral.com - One Year On

Pages (24): « First ... « 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Off Topic (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6)
-- One Year On (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=26965)

Posted by John Nowak on 10-22-2002 11:25 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by jhappel

I challenge you to find one statement I made where I said anything at all about this country pursuing Shrub's policies.

Why in heck would the United States fight a war for Iraqi oil when the only reason it's not on the open market is that the United States is the only member of the Security Council that takes the sanctions seriously?

Did you think we invaded Grenada for nutmeg?

Posted by DingoFish on 10-23-2002 03:31 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by jhappel

This statement is almost too laughable to respond to. I challenge you to find one statement I made where I said anything at all about this country pursuing Shrub's policies. I said that it was his administration . Fortunately I can tell the difference between this country and its administration even if you seem not to be able to. Also where is the acknowledgement of the freedoms we have here (swiftly leaving us due to the Patriot Acts and other rulings of Dubya's administration) that would allow me to criticize our country and still remain here. It is my patriotic duty to criticize our government and even our country when I feel it warranted. The whole concept of "Love Or Leave It" (which your statement seems to echo) has been consigned to the trash heap where it belongs.

Ok, seems we both have mistaken each other. First, I misunderstood what you said when I wrote about the nation as a whole and you only meant Bush and his, maybe, 100 aides and members of his administration. Ok?

Now you misunderstand me as well. I did not say Love it or Leave it. I said I wonder why you would want to stay in such a corruptly run nation. A regime that would risk US soldiers and citizens of another, arbitrary country that just happens to have an oil rich land - all for the pockets of the Oil Companies.

I don't believe that personal benefit is the underlying motivation for the potential action against Iraq. If you (in a general sense 'you') call me naive, I'll just call you paranoid...so have your opinion and I'll have mine. Which is our Patriotic duty.

Posted by Yorick on 10-23-2002 06:56 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
I'll send the bill for my monitor to you, sir. C/O Charlie Brown @ Pumpkin Patch should work, I assume?

It's "Sweet Baboo" actually. Charlie Brown went to the party.

__________________
The light at the end of your tunnel has been disconnected due to non-payment. Please remit funds immediately for restoration of hope.

Posted by yardie on 10-23-2002 09:10 AM:

Of course it is obvious. But you are missing the point again -- the fact that the mighty U.S is chicken when it comes to countries that can actually defend itself. Look at the countries it has picked on since the Vietnam war?

- Tiny Grenada
- Lowly Panama
- Iraq with its outdated armaments
- Middle Age Afghanistan

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
I think that's perfectly clear. Why would we want to go to war against someone who will start lobbing nukes? That's why we didn't invade Russia when they took over Afghanistan. This is in the realm of the so incredibly obvious I'm surprised you even have to mention it. It all comes down to which has the best risk/reward payoff. Saddam is a big threat, true. North Korea might be in the future. Recently they've shown that they are indeed open to progress, such as the release of the Japanese prisoners, the admition of their program, the setting up of a special economic zone near China. I personally have hope for N. Korea reasoning with the world. Iraq clearly won't do that. You have to speak the native language wherever you act in the world. So far reason hasn 't been ruled out as the native language of N. Korea. Long ago we realized we'd just be speaking to ourselves in Iraq.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by yardie on 10-23-2002 09:14 AM:

Ha Toby. Come on. You are comparing apples to oranges here.

The believe that a God/Creator exists is a spiritual one. The believe that Global warming exists is a scientific one, based on scientific findings. Of course scientific findings can be contested.

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
If most scientists believed that a God/Creator exists (which I'd be willing to bet is true), does that make it true?

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by yardie on 10-23-2002 09:38 AM:

Dingo fish read this article here: http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?...007&s=klare
It is not authoritative per se, but it gives another perspective to the issue.

As for North Korea, diplomacy (i.e appeasement and bribery) has been used with the North Koreans for many years now. In fact, the Clinton administration made a deal with North Korea to freeze its nuclear program way back in 1994. By admitting that it is stiull developing nuclear weapons, the North Koreans renegade on the deal.

Synposis:
Monday, October 21, 2002 � Print Edition, Page A10

Washington -- Top U.S. officials said yesterday they will discuss with allies a response to what they view as the scrapping of a 1994 agreement for North Korea to freeze its nuclear-arms program.

On several talk shows, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said the administration is taking at face value Pyongyang's assertion that its newly disclosed program to produce enriched uranium "nullified" the deal.
Reuters

quote:
Originally posted by DingoFish
Wow.
This is a serious question:
Do you think that the US government and Pres. Bush and his top aides are actually so evil as to risk US lives and kill thousands of Iraqi for profits in the oil business?

If you firmly believe that our nation is so purely evil towards the love of money, then I wonder why you would stay in this country at all.

Why diplomacy for North Korea, but not for Iraq? Short answer because we are ten years into diplomacy with Iraq, and just starting wit N Korea. For ten years Iraq has told the UN to f*ck off. This isn't "all of a sudden" or just becasue there are elections coming up.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by yardie on 10-23-2002 09:47 AM:

Actually the inane ramblings is between you and Toby (which I choose to skip over). The thread is just fine thank you very much.

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
Yawn. This thread is getting old. Should we make a run for the inane ramblings thread?

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by yardie on 10-23-2002 09:50 AM:

North Korea is reaching out the world because it does not have the money to get the food and other essentials that its people needs. Its nuclear program is a bargaining chip.

Iraq has enough oil to buy the stuff its people need -- for now. All it need is for the sanctions to drop.

quote:
Originally posted by John Nowak

My apologies; I screwed up royally.

In any event, Iraq is not North Korea. North Korea might be making a genuine attempt to approach the rest of the world; it might explain the recent admissions coming out of that country. Iraq is almost certainly not.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-23-2002 01:01 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Of course it is obvious. But you are missing the point again -- the fact that the mighty U.S is chicken when it comes to countries that can actually defend itself. Look at the countries it has picked on since the Vietnam war?

- Tiny Grenada
- Lowly Panama
- Iraq with its outdated armaments
- Middle Age Afghanistan

Why is that a bad thing? Before I sound too much like a bully,

, isn't all war a cost/benefit analysis? That perhaps is the definition of a bully but I'd rather live in a country that didn't go into war not knowing the strength of the enemy.

And for what it's worth, Iraq wasn't seen as a complete walkover. They weren't a modern, superpowerful army, no, but there were estimates of 10-15k American deaths.

__________________
<a href="http://www.kurtramsauer.com">KurtRamsauer.com</a>

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-23-2002 01:03 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Actually the inane ramblings is between you and Toby (which I choose to skip over). The thread is just fine thank you very much.

Huh? I think I've posted about 5 or 6 messages to Inane Ramblings. This is the thread that's between Toby and myself. Smart move skipping over it, btw.

Wish I had your good sense.

__________________
<a href="http://www.kurtramsauer.com">KurtRamsauer.com</a>

Posted by Toby on 10-23-2002 02:59 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Ha Toby. Come on. You are comparing apples to oranges here.

No, I'm not. The belief that humans cause or contribute significantly to global warning is a religious one.

quote:
The believe that a God/Creator exists is a spiritual one. The believe that Global warming exists is a scientific one, based on scientific findings.

So were the global cooling scares according to their proponents.

quote:
Of course scientific findings can be contested.

Here's a funny little cartoon about the issue. I'm not sure if Trudeau even realizes the full breadth of his critique on this one.

Posted by John Nowak on 10-23-2002 05:19 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Of course it is obvious. But you are missing the point again -- the fact that the mighty U.S is chicken when it comes to countries that can actually defend itself.

Why is it that leftists seem to think that war is a game that should be played fair?

Posted by John Nowak on 10-23-2002 05:24 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
The believe that a God/Creator exists is a spiritual one. The believe that Global warming exists is a scientific one, based on scientific findings. Of course scientific findings can be contested.

Nope. The Global Warming people were originally motivated by politics and possibly science; they are now frantically covering up and denying the simple fact that the theory is bankrupt.

One British group went so far as to claim, indirectly, that the Southern Hemisphere has winter at the beginning of the year rather than admit they published incorrect information.

Posted by yardie on 10-24-2002 06:31 AM:

Toby what would this religion be called? Is it a new religion? Please enlighten me.

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
No, I'm not. The belief that humans cause or contribute significantly to global warning is a religious one.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by yardie on 10-24-2002 06:34 AM:

Oh boy. my friends think I am a rightist. now you think that I am a leftist -- I guess that makes me a centrist?

quote:
Originally posted by John Nowak

Why is it that leftists seem to think that war is a game that should be played fair?

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by yardie on 10-24-2002 06:36 AM:

But why would all these scientists be making things up? What would they have to lose or gain by doing this?

quote:
Originally posted by John Nowak

Nope. The Global Warming people were originally motivated by politics and possibly science; they are now frantically covering up and denying the simple fact that the theory is bankrupt.

One British group went so far as to claim, indirectly, that the Southern Hemisphere has winter at the beginning of the year rather than admit they published incorrect information.

__________________
My life is in my Treo... Where is yours?

Posted by Toby on 10-24-2002 02:36 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
Toby what would this religion be called? Is it a new religion? Please enlighten me.

Oddly enough, it's called Our Lady Of The Sacred Research Grant.

Posted by Toby on 10-24-2002 02:37 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yardie
But why would all these scientists be making things up? What would they have to lose or gain by doing this?

Money and reputation.

Posted by jhappel on 10-24-2002 03:26 PM:

John Nowak said:

quote:
My apologies; I screwed up

No problem, we all do. Apology accepted. But now you owe me a drink.

__________________
Jonathan

Posted by jhappel on 10-24-2002 03:32 PM:

From John Nowak:

quote:
Why is it that leftists seem to think that war is a game that should be played fair?

Rather, why is it that all on the right wing (I don't want to use the word rightists) think that war IS a game?

__________________
Jonathan

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:46 AM.

Pages (24): « First ... « 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page