VisorCentral.com - Web slowdown caused by Iraq

Pages (9): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 » ... Last »
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)
-- Web slowdown caused by Iraq (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=26443)

Posted by ToolkiT on 09-02-2002 08:26 AM:

Re: Re: a European (and personal) view

Fist of all sorry for dropping in so late

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer

I don't think anyone here has really said that oil doesn't play a part in it. That's a very mypoic view. I can tell you certainly it isn't about some family feud with the Bush clan. Bush isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier (sp?) but he isn't some bloodthirsty freak out to avenge the political death of his father.

I'm not so sure about that... I agree oil is a big part of if, but so is family pride...

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer

I personally think the international criminal court is a good idea, but I understand the concern. Now about invading the Haag, you have to be kidding. There is no way that would ever happen, and I'd be willing to go out on a limb that your source for that information is wrong.

His information is right, Bush said something in the likes of 'we will do anything to free american soldiers being judged of foreign ground' He did not literaly say he would invade the Hague, but he sure did imply it...

BTW Bush has very little international support on this one (even though johny Howard is still kissing his behing) most people around the world will think this is just a vendetta...
Maybe this is a good reality check for Bush so he sees that he needs allies and his word is not the final one... Hopefully he'll learn something out of this (but hopefully not at the cost of a lot of young soldiers..

)

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

Posted by tantousha on 09-02-2002 08:59 AM:

These last few posts remind me of something else I don't think has been covered...if so...I apologize.

The weapons inspectors were kicked out of Iraq, right? we all remember that and I believe that was one of Bush's stated reasons to invade..but I think we need to ask why the weapon's inspectors were kicked out...what is Iraq hiding that these inspectors were slowly unearthing? and if there IS something, is it operational and how dangerous could it be for our soldiers.

As for the nuke Iraq thing...I think you Americans should seriously stop waiving your nukes around and put them back in your pants where they belong. Nukes are not the be-all-end-all that everyone thinks they are. If my memory serves me correctly, there was a reported rise in Cancer in N. America that was attributed to the radioactive dust cloud that floated over the pacific and settled in over the West Coast...not to mention the THOUSANDS of Japanese that are STILL dying from the radiation, the only way those deaths could be justified is if the Japanese were still evil, but guess what, THEY'RE NOT! (And the make pretty good sushi too...no Japan, no sushi!)
Alex (The Great II)

__________________
Goodbye my lovely Treo
HELLO TG50

Posted by Toby on 09-02-2002 02:13 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by tantousha
Well you Americans are talking about a war...sure canada will be affected but not as direct as you guys will..so yeah..you guys are talking about war.

Gotta love bad grasps of statistics.

quote:
Personally I think that if you guys want the Arabs to start liking you than you should stop shooting at them, let them be.

Personally, I couldn't care less if the Arabs like us...as long as they don't go running planes into buildings or trying to blow up other things or do other sorts of nastiness over here.

quote:
There is a lot of support for Saddam in the Middle East [...]

I think you mistake self-interested opposition to a US action as support for Saddam. IOW, they don't want the US to put an end to a dictatorship which represses its people, because they're dictatorships which repress their people too (in most cases).

Posted by Toby on 09-02-2002 02:24 PM:

Re: Re: Re: Re: The surgeon general has determined that this post is not safe for the humor impaired

quote:
Originally posted by septimus
oh for the love of... google

For someone who claims to like joking, you sure seem to have a difficult time detecting them.

quote:
the heart of the matter is that we've got a whole group of islamic terrorists with WMDs that we need to contain before we aggravate them further by invading a country they may consider an ally without serious international support.

Newsflash: you can't contain them (they're too decentralized), and ally probably means _supplier_ here.

quote:
Actually, international support would help keep the other instable nations in the region from, uh, causing MORE problems.

No, some of them have problems which are going to bite someone in the ass one day no matter what we do.

quote:
exactly.

Somehow, I doubt we have the same conclusion which follows from this.

quote:
Because we didn't give them proper teeth.

The proper teeth is "let _all_ inspectors in right now and let them go anywhere they want to, or we're going to put a bullet through _Saddam's_ head" and then follow through.

quote:
if we brought "Restart inspections with some seriousness" to the international community, it would get done. Instead, we brought "Let's invade Iraq again and fulfill the destiny of my father"

LOL...we haven't brought anything to them yet. Give them time to actually propose something before pulling that out your anus.

quote:
Yep, but invade? we need to be smarter about this.

I agree there. Getting rid of an executive order could make a big difference.

quote:
Dude, did you see the post about irony? Lord. Gore isn't a complete numbnuts and all, but the avatar is a joke. Changing it in a second - maybe then it will be clear.

Dude, Gore _is_ a complete numbnuts (so is Bush, but Bush has better advisors). And I think your sense of humor is defective if you can't tell when someone's joking back at you.

Posted by Toby on 09-02-2002 02:29 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by tantousha
The weapons inspectors were kicked out of Iraq, right? we all remember that and I believe that was one of Bush's stated reasons to invade..but I think we need to ask why the weapon's inspectors were kicked out...what is Iraq hiding that these inspectors were slowly unearthing?

By George, I think you're on to something here...

quote:
and if there IS something, is it operational and how dangerous could it be for our soldiers.

Now you've lost the trail. Those soldiers (in our case) volunteered for their duties, and I bet if you gave them the option of either getting hit with Anthrax personally while taking out Saddam, or potentially having it released on their families, they'd take the former without thinking twice.

quote:
As for the nuke Iraq thing...I think you Americans should seriously stop waiving your nukes around and put them back in your pants where they belong.

Who said anything (seriously) about nuking Iraq?

Posted by KRamsauer on 09-02-2002 03:11 PM:

Re: Re: Re: a European (and personal) view

quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT
Fist of all sorry for dropping in so late

His information is right, Bush said something in the likes of 'we will do anything to free american soldiers being judged of foreign ground' He did not literaly say he would invade the Hague, but he sure did imply it...

Yeah, I've since learned that he did say as much. I maintain that such a prospect is so crazy as to never happen. I personally think all this ICC stuff is overblown. In the end we'd all like to see the exact same thing down with war criminals, American or not, so the ICC approaches a non-issue in cross-Atlantic relations for me.

quote:

BTW Bush has very little international support on this one (even though johny Howard is still kissing his behing) most people around the world will think this is just a vendetta...
Maybe this is a good reality check for Bush so he sees that he needs allies and his word is not the final one... Hopefully he'll learn something out of this (but hopefully not at the cost of a lot of young soldiers.. )

In the end I think this is just international politics. Like domestic politics, it's full of lying, manipulation and all-around jerks. Yawn.

:-)

Posted by KRamsauer on 09-02-2002 03:15 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by tantousha
As for the nuke Iraq thing...I think you Americans should seriously stop waiving your nukes around and put them back in your pants where they belong. Nukes are not the be-all-end-all that everyone thinks they are. If my memory serves me correctly, there was a reported rise in Cancer in N. America that was attributed to the radioactive dust cloud that floated over the pacific and settled in over the West Coast...not to mention the THOUSANDS of Japanese that are STILL dying from the radiation, the only way those deaths could be justified is if the Japanese were still evil, but guess what, THEY'RE NOT! (And the make pretty good sushi too...no Japan, no sushi!)
Alex (The Great II)

Any effects of the WWII bombings on American I think are highly exaggerated for political purposes. In four words: Give me a break. The whole bombing in the first place is a very interesting question as there is a lot of evidence that we would have easily won the war had we just stuck with it for a few weeks. The military commanders (not the imperial rulers) of Japan wanted to surrender. Was the real reason Truman dropped the bombs to scare the Russians into stopping at E. Berlin and go no further? There is a good chance of that. Even if it was the right call (if it did keep them from marching on), was it a moral call? That's a tough one I don't think I presently or ever will know the answer to.

Posted by Toby on 09-02-2002 03:25 PM:

Re: Re: Re: Re: a European (and personal) view

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
[...] I maintain that such a prospect is so crazy as to never happen. I personally think all this ICC crap is overblown. In the end we'd all like to see the exact same thing down with war criminals, American or not, so the ICC approaches a non-issue in cross-Atlantic relations for me. [...]

The problem, as usual, is one of context. The ICC seems to be a political body and not a judicial one, just like the World Bank is a political institution and not a financial one.

Posted by yardie on 09-02-2002 05:25 PM:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a European (and personal) view

And of course you going to back up these accusations with some arguements and proof right?

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
The problem, as usual, is one of context. The ICC seems to be a political body and not a judicial one, just like the World Bank is a political institution and not a financial one.

Posted by ToolkiT on 09-02-2002 11:39 PM:

Re: Re: Re: Re: a European (and personal) view

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer

Yeah, I've since learned that he did say as much. I maintain that such a prospect is so crazy as to never happen.

If Clinton was still president I would agree with you, with Bush I'm not sure, he seems way to instable for my taste...I dont trust that guy...he's way to trigger happy for my taste..

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

Posted by KRamsauer on 09-02-2002 11:59 PM:

quote:
If Clinton was still president I would agree with you, with Bush I'm not sure, he seems way to instable for my taste...I dont trust that guy...he's way to trigger happy for my taste..

More so than perhaps any other president in modern history, Bush has a loud bark, and weak bite. Look at his veto record.

Posted by ToolkiT on 09-03-2002 12:01 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer

More so than perhaps any other president in modern history, Bush has a loud bark, and weak bite. Look at his veto record.

Did you say weak bite or weak brain?

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

Posted by ToolkiT on 09-03-2002 12:02 AM:

But seriously, that bark will get him in trouble....
More and more people are getting pissed of with his remarks...

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

Posted by KRamsauer on 09-03-2002 12:42 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT
But seriously, that bark will get him in trouble....
More and more people are getting pissed of with his remarks...

Perhaps, but I was addressing the massive whining on the part of the international community that Bush is acting unilaterally. First of all, he hasn't done anything. Second of all, he is trying to convince people of his position. And third of all, he blows a lot of hot air.

Posted by septimus on 09-03-2002 03:38 AM:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The surgeon general has determined that this post is not safe for the humor impa

I think we're pretty close on our opinions on Iraq, but you're more willing to invade full-scale than I am. let's call that done.

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
Dude, Gore _is_ a complete numbnuts (so is Bush, but Bush has better advisors).

Well, Bush has more unified and aggressive advisors, which means he doesn't waffle as much (until now), and allowed him to, uh, "win" the election. I personally think Bush's administration is the closest thing to a group of fascists-in-training since the Spanish Civil War.

quote:
And I think your sense of humor is defective if you can't tell when someone's joking back at you.

Must be your avatar. :P~~~~~~

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by septimus on 09-03-2002 03:40 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
Perhaps, but I was addressing the massive whining on the part of the international community that Bush is acting unilaterally. First of all, he hasn't done anything.

...except increase bombing raids...

...plus, don't you think that "whining" is a reason he hasn't acted?

quote:
Second of all, he is trying to convince people of his position.

And he's doing a bang-up job!

quote:
And third of all, he blows a lot of hot air.

That's part of his strategery!

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by septimus on 09-03-2002 03:47 AM:

God Love The Onion

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by septimus on 09-03-2002 03:51 AM:

Also, this forward is going around.

__________________
Don't like somebody? Click "Profile" on a post and then click "Ignore "so and so's" posts". Voila!

Posted by BobbyMike on 09-03-2002 07:40 AM:

Warning.... I'm an equal opportunity offender, If I don't offend your sensibilities below, I apologize...

Some thoughts:

The thing with all of this is that not whether we "whack the mole" or not, it's what happens afterwards.
We certainly have the tech and might to reduce the idiot to a pile of ash in a puddle of molten glass- but what happens afterwards? How many kids, moms and grandparents would die because we thought invasion was a good idea? ... and not just in Iraq.
The other countries don't want any shindigs happening over there and rightly so. they don't want the "overflow". Where is the wind going to take all the crap?
Remember what happened after Kuwait? ...and that was only a 'little' campaign.
As a formerly active Marine I'm quite aware of what our Armed Forces could do if we unleashed them on Iraq, but really what would the whole exercise accomplish, even if we kill Saddam? We would feel compelled to stick around and fix Iraq afterwards - and that would never happen. The instability of that region is caused by cultural forces that we can not hope to channel.
If we want to kick his a**, kick him in his wallet. His people are starving - we don't need to kill them too.
Yet if we assaninate him, we'll just create a martyr.

Why don't we finish up in Afganistan first? We helped to "free" that country. How about we make sure they all enjoy some basic freedoms, like the freedom not to starve?

This all isn't about Iraq anyway, it's about never having found Bin Laden. if we really thought Saddam was such a threat, we wouldn't have stopped pressing him when he was on the ropes before.

I notice there is always a nice vocal contingent that wants war, but they're rarely ever at the front line.
(There's also the ostriches too, that just hope the problem will just go away)

So far the level of thinking that I've heard discussed all over isn't any different.
That old adage applies here too- The same level of thinking that caused the problem, will not solve it.
But since both the Reps and the Dems can share equal blame for ignoring events when it's not profitable for them to handle them, and then to incessantly argue about what's right when the public becomes aroused about an issue- what are we to do?
And worse- we have the EU(our allies?) come along and say, even though they agree that Saddam is reprehensible, the US is led by an unstable trigger happy idjit that they can't stand behind - Yet they stood by and let thousands die in Serbia and Croatia because they didn't want to get involved with someone elses fight. No "civilized" nation is innocent. The past one hundred years have shown that.

Why don't we just destroy their military electronically? Bombard them with EMPs and jam their transmissions- and then dump about 100,000 tons of rice and popcorn on their cities along with flyers that said "We love you! Please come to our house for dinner!" and "You may think we're nutty, but we're kinda sweet on you!"

__________________
"I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."

Posted by ToolkiT on 09-03-2002 07:55 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by BobbyMike

Why don't we just destroy their military electronically? Bombard them with EMPs and jam their transmissions- and then dump about 100,000 tons of rice and popcorn on their cities along with flyers that said "We love you! Please come to our house for dinner!" and "You may think we're nutty, but we're kinda sweet on you!"

Ah the good old devide and concer tactic

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:17 PM.

Pages (9): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 » ... Last »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page