TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- FAO: terrorists
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles But he really does seem dumb to me. Even disregarding the typical stuttering and bad grammar, the content of what he says is often equally ridiculous and incoherent.

You can be smart and still not have a way with words, the reverse also applies (although less). But he reads Camus and tons of other great writers monthly, and it's just not possible to accomplish what he has managed in the white house without some serious smarts. Thats not praise, I think his record is horrible, but it is the truth.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN you're kidding right? he is pretty fucking stupid.

Again, thats the mistake people make. Stupid is relative anyway. Stupid like "has backwards ideas of the way government should work and a poor understanding of what democracy is", maybe, but he's definitely able to get what HE wants done, very effectively.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis but he's definitely able to get what HE wants done, very effectively.

um, he is the president after all. and he had a GOP congress for 3/4 of the time. i think he has a very capable staff, but no, i do not rate his intellect whatsoever.

Instead of rating his intelligence how about we rate the intelligence of the American people that actually voted for him 2 terms in a row?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN um, he is the president after all. and he had a GOP congress for 3/4 of the time. i think he has a very capable staff, but no, i do not rate his intellect whatsoever.

I know that What I'm saying is, to have the audacity to persue this type of plan, this type of execution of a war and all the ridiculous line-stepping he has done, he HAS A BRAIN, and he KNOWS HOW TO USE IT. I think "smart-ass douchebag" is a much more fitting description of him.

quote:

Originally posted by jupiterone Instead of rating his intelligence how about we rate the intelligence of the American people that actually voted for him 2 terms in a row?

They reflect brilliantly on him.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 *diatribe*

maybe you'd feel more empowered if you didn't spend all your time ranting on trance message boards mmmm?

quote:

Originally posted by CleverName maybe you'd feel more empowered if you didn't spend all your time ranting on trance message boards mmmm?

lol, havn't seen you post in a while, whats up mang?

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 personally, I liked it when the "real" wars were fought - e.g. WWII - there, no media interviewing the enemy. Just a plain and simple building-leveling air strike, combined with "f*ck political correctness, who gives a crap about civilians", nothing held back deathmatch. You knew the enemy, enemy knew you - boom boom, death is dealt out in plentiful numbers, the enemy surrendered or killed, the end. now, it's all about being politically correct, about public opinion, let's see who's with us/against us. you know what? it's all bs. the wars are fought at much higher levels - the levels to which neither one of us, "mortals", are privviyed to. We don't know the half of it, nor the true reasons, nor the real motivations. It's all a game of chess, between the crazy power moguls of this world. Oil, natural resources, money - is the true motivators. The rest is just a trite babble to pacify/arouse the masses. Besides, activism as we know it is dead in US. all this demonstration crap is a fart in the wind, comparing to mass-delivered sensual overload that is mainstream media/TV programming. Does US even feel that it's at war???? Hell no. All suburbanites are happily surfing the web on their iphones at the local starbucks, while some misfortunate souls are dying for reasons unknown to most. disguisting, if u ask me. p.s. u know this war would have been over long time ago, if everyone in this country had to contribute and be involved. If people had to sacrifice their lofty lifestyles and go serve in the war zone or people had to leave their well paid jobs and go work in the factories to build or make tanks, planes, ships, ammunition, guns, etc. People would get sick of it very quickly and it would result in the following: 1. Wider support for the war effort, resulting in quicker end of conflict 2. Spiraling out of control, into a true WW III, with massive a$$f*ckery world-wide 3. Wide rebellion against the war, resulting in more pronounced acts of opposition to war, resulting in quicker end of conflict and withdrawal of troops. This war benefits the bushes, the chenneys, the haliburtons, boeings, lockheed martins, and other interests. they are the ones profiting from your tax dollars, while reducing our collective security to nil. sorry to have disturbed your oreo cookie pizza snack time. you can go back to your burgers and lattes, america. the government is in control. /fyi: I am an American

It's interesting that you posted this paranoid and violent little manifesto right after putting down "left wing nutjobs". I understand that you were probably just trying to group everyone that disagrees with you into one category so that you could more easily ignore and hate.

Do you honestly believe that the government, after showing the mass amount of incompetency it has so far, even possesses the capability to make ethical and right decisions, especially regarding something as intense as war? Or are you just itching to kill people and see people killed?

Re-analyze your definition of "nutjob". Re-analyze your outlook on the world and make sure your own behavior isn't reflected by your political desires and slants, destruction is not a good energy to harbor, and it's also important to know which statements you make are poison.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 how can one read the transcript without cringing? sh!t, if Asshatjerkwad was a real Pinnochio, he could make millions, working for Home Depot, as an endless provider of lumber coming out of his nose. Personally, if one of the students blew him/herself up and took the out Asshatjizwad, even if it meant killing everyone in the audience - I'd say it would have been a reasonable sacrifice.

Just ignore my last post... I didn't realize you actually were a psychopath.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Just ignore my last post... I didn't realize you actually were a psychopath.

Yeah I was about to ask why you were wasting your time...

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis Yeah I was about to ask why you were wasting your time...

It's amusing because in the political forum there is some troll who gets his jollies calling liberals "terrorist lovers"... yet the mindset of pro-war people is much more intune with violence and terrorism, as our friend here just demonstrated.

Vicious cycles, w00t w00t... it takes a very self-aware man to move beyond the basic underlying animal functioning of the reptile mind.

quote:

Originally posted by HardTranceProd You know next to nothing about Iran or its people.

I would be willing to wager money to claim otherwise. As a matter of fact, I am quite certain of the fact that I know more about Iran, its people, it's political system, even every day life - more than your average (and even above average) Iranian knows about America.

Wanna put your money where your mouth (errrrmmm - keyboard) is?

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Personally, if one of the students blew him/herself up and took the out Asshatjizwad, even if it meant killing everyone in the audience - I'd say it would have been a reasonable sacrifice.

You are one sick individual. You are advocating suicide bombing, which, by definition, is a terrorist activity. Not to mention the assassination of a foreign leader which is an act of premeditated aggression. Please stop, you are making my country look worse than it already does.

I think out of this whole thing, the United States is the clear loser. We let the guy speak, but didn't listen to him, and called for his arrest or death. And these are the exact things that we would use as casus belli against any other country rude enough to act this way. How do we differ from Iran again?

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov How do we differ from Iran again?

You are posting on a free forum... that is a start.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby It's interesting that you posted this paranoid and violent little manifesto right after putting down "left wing nutjobs". I understand that you were probably just trying to group everyone that disagrees with you into one category so that you could more easily ignore and hate. Do you honestly believe that the government, after showing the mass amount of incompetency it has so far, even possesses the capability to make ethical and right decisions, especially regarding something as intense as war? Or are you just itching to kill people and see people killed? Re-analyze your definition of "nutjob". Re-analyze your outlook on the world and make sure your own behavior isn't reflected by your political desires and slants, destruction is not a good energy to harbor, and it's also important to know which statements you make are poison.

I have no idea how you arrived to all these conclusions, when my message was rather simple:

1. Most of the ppl in US don't feel the impact of war (as it were felt with previous wars)

2. People don't fully feel the impact of country being actually at war because their life is mostly unaffected, save for families and relatives of those in the service.

3. I subscribe to Vegetius' school of thought: "Si vis pacem, para bellum"

4. Activism to end the war peacefully or force required to end the war conventionally does not exist. Basically, end of "old warfare tactics" as we know it. This war is fought unconventionally and would not end conventionally either.

and

5. Ask yourself: if you had an opportunity to get rid of TRUE evil, EVIL that will shape this world for many more years, EVIL that will kill countless number of people, EVIL that has potential to negatively shape the history of the world as we know it, perhaps even a capacity to destroy it - would you, being able to do so, and having an an ample opportunity - would you be willing to sacrifice yourself, so that you could stop this evil? What if it meant taking others, innocent people, with you? Would you?

Although, I do realize that aside from pure rhetoric - this is a rather futile, if not a dangerous move. Ahmadinejad would be replaced by some other puppet, while those behind him would trum up unseen levels of support for fallen "martyr". Could even turn him into Franz Ferdinand of 21st century.

Anyway, rant over.

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX You are posting on a free forum... that is a start.

I think you missed the point.

I understand the differences, but when we start replicating the things about Iran we are most angry at (repression of freedom of speech, political vitriol, calls to arms or even terrorism(!)), we are compromising our most basic values.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov You are one sick individual. You are advocating suicide bombing, which, by definition, is a terrorist activity. Not to mention the assassination of a foreign leader which is an act of premeditated aggression. Please stop, you are making my country look worse than it already does. I think out of this whole thing, the United States is the clear loser. We let the guy speak, but didn't listen to him, and called for his arrest or death. And these are the exact things that we would use as casus belli against any other country rude enough to act this way. How do we differ from Iran again?

I'm advocating removing this psycho from position of power. If you don't think he's a nutcase, with definite capability to make mayhem and endanger lives of millions, you need to have your reality detector checked ASAP.

If you don't think Iran and its leader poses any threat to the world, you're totally of the rocker. Can't wait to see what happens at UN meeting, I'm sure rest of the world is just as delusional as I.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov I think you missed the point. I understand the differences, but when we start replicating the things about Iran we are most angry at (repression of freedom of speech, political vitriol, calls to arms or even terrorism(!)), we are compromising our most basic values.

No, it's you who missed the point. I am wasting my time, though, aren't I? I'll give you one thing - just because he's flapping his gums is not enough to warrant calls for his death, there are plenty other idiots in the world.

However, when you take into consideration proven facts of all the things that he's done and been part to - he deserves to go. The method of the disposal is up for discussion/debate.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 5. Ask yourself: if you had an opportunity to get rid of TRUE evil, EVIL that will shape this world for many more years, EVIL that will kill countless number of people, EVIL that has potential to negatively shape the history of the world as we know it, perhaps even a capacity to destroy it - would you, being able to do so, and having an an ample opportunity - would you be willing to sacrifice yourself, so that you could stop this evil? What if it meant taking others, innocent people, with you? Would you?

This is what drives me nuts!!! Who decided Iran is the be-all, end-all of evil? Sure, their regime sucks. Oppression is widespread. As it is in Belarus, where all political affiliation is banned and any ethnic enclaves in the country are brutally oppressed. As it is in North Korea, where starvation is used as a tool of the government. As it is in Sudan, where the regime carries out the systematic extermination of an entire region of people. As it is in Saudi Arabia, where laws regarding women and social rights are far more archaic than in Iran. As it is in Burma, where a brutal military junta is even today considering violence as a means of putting down civil discourse among religious monks. As it is in China, where the Uigher population is denied political affiliation or the right to upward mobility. As it is in Israel/Palestine, where women and children live in fear of Israeli tanks and helicopters or madmen with bombs strapped to their chests. As it is in Iraq, where private US military contractors gun down civilians. As it is in Zimbabwe, where the economy has ground to a halt due to government mismanagement. As it is in Mali, where US gunships are aiding a corrupt government in the persecution of nomadic tribesman who have formed a secession movement. As it is in the DRC, where paramilitary organizations with little compassion for human life maintain more control over regions of the country than the government in Kinshasha. As it is in Chad, where abundant oil revenue only pads the coffers of the elite few.

Oppression is everywhere, so don't for a minute act like Ahmadinejad (which, by the way, is easy enough to spell if you want to be taken seriously on the issue) has a freaking monopoly on evil in this world. Where is the talk of invading Zimbabwe to take down Mugabe? Sudan to take down Bashir? You are so selective of your target that it screams discrimination on some basis. Why, because Iran has oil? So does Sudan. Why, because Iran may be pursuing nuclear weapons? Pakistan and North Korea already have them, and they oppress their people sometimes to an even greater extent. Why, because Iran's human rights violations are particularly aggregious? Sadly, they aren't. Why, because the Iranian government presides over the persecution of groups of people? They do, but to a far lesser extent than in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Belarus, etc.

Iran has far greater good governance than a wide swath of the world. That may be hard for you to digest, but by most indicators it is true. There is relative stability, economic security for the wide majority of the population, freedom of expression for a growing number, and a growing moderate political base. Sure there are religious zealots with control over the country still. But that control is inexorably linked to their ability to show the Iranian people that they are needed to combat the US. And when we shout "death to Iran" in their faces we are playing right into their hands, establishing them as a necessary vigilant institution safeguarding Iranian security. So stop it.

Bottom line:
Give me a reasoned, ordered, logical explanation for why any free country should launch a preemptive war against Iran and I will listen to you. But stop with the "he's bad so he's evil so we should kill him routine," because if I wanted to hear logic so dimwitted, I would listen to the fundamentalist mullahs calling for Death to America. Same logic.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 I'm advocating removing this psycho from position of power. If you don't think he's a nutcase, with definite capability to make mayhem and endanger lives of millions, you need to have your reality detector checked ASAP.

Removing a bad leader from power is a far cry different than having a suicide bomber take out a lecture hall of American students and professors. Which if I recall correctly, is PRECISELY what you are advocating.

Operation Ajax anyone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov This is what drives me nuts!!! Who decided Iran is the be-all, end-all of evil? Sure, their regime sucks. Oppression is widespread. As it is in Belarus, where all political affiliation is banned and any ethnic enclaves in the country are brutally oppressed. As it is in North Korea, where starvation is used as a tool of the government. As it is in Sudan, where the regime carries out the systematic extermination of an entire region of people. As it is in Saudi Arabia, where laws regarding women and social rights are far more archaic than in Iran. As it is in Burma, where a brutal military junta is even today considering violence as a means of putting down civil discourse among religious monks. As it is in China, where the Uigher population is denied political affiliation or the right to upward mobility. As it is in Israel/Palestine, where women and children live in fear of Israeli tanks and helicopters or madmen with bombs strapped to their chests. As it is in Iraq, where private US military contractors gun down civilians. As it is in Zimbabwe, where the economy has ground to a halt due to government mismanagement. As it is in Mali, where US gunships are aiding a corrupt government in the persecution of nomadic tribesman who have formed a secession movement. As it is in the DRC, where paramilitary organizations with little compassion for human life maintain more control over regions of the country than the government in Kinshasha. As it is in Chad, where abundant oil revenue only pads the coffers of the elite few. Oppression is everywhere, so don't for a minute act like Ahmadinejad (which, by the way, is easy enough to spell if you want to be taken seriously on the issue) has a freaking monopoly on evil in this world. Where is the talk of invading Zimbabwe to take down Mugabe? Sudan to take down Bashir? You are so selective of your target that it screams discrimination on some basis. Why, because Iran has oil? So does Sudan. Why, because Iran may be pursuing nuclear weapons? Pakistan and North Korea already have them, and they oppress their people sometimes to an even greater extent. Why, because Iran's human rights violations are particularly aggregious? Sadly, they aren't. Why, because the Iranian government presides over the persecution of groups of people? They do, but to a far lesser extent than in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Belarus, etc. Iran has far greater good governance than a wide swath of the world. That may be hard for you to digest, but by most indicators it is true. There is relative stability, economic security for the wide majority of the population, freedom of expression for a growing number, and a growing moderate political base. Sure there are religious zealots with control over the country still. But that control is inexorably linked to their ability to show the Iranian people that they are needed to combat the US. And when we shout "death to Iran" in their faces we are playing right into their hands, establishing them as a necessary vigilant institution safeguarding Iranian security. So stop it. Bottom line: Give me a reasoned, ordered, logical explanation for why any free country should launch a preemptive war against Iran and I will listen to you. But stop with the "he's bad so he's evil so we should kill him routine," because if I wanted to hear logic so dimwitted, I would listen to the fundamentalist mullahs calling for Death to America. Same logic.

I'm not going to bother trying to explain to you what is rather plain obvious. Calling Iran "Free" or "Democratic" is rather big stretch. I will agree with you that despite of what mass media would have you believe, substantial population in Iran does not favor the mulah-led government. I would also agree that Iran, as a nation, is not as "evil" as Bush would have us all believe. However, its leadership, hell-bent on de-stabilizing the region and actively participating in Middle-eastern affairs not concerning it is perhaps (and call me crazy) not really cool. I'm sure you'll have tons of examples to throw my way, to show how U.S. interferes in world affairs, etc. - however, I fail to see what greater good would be achieved by letting a government intent on (to quote your lovely Ahmadinejad) "Wiping Israel off the map" and calling for it's destruction, obtain a nuke.


Here's where the difference lies:

http://english.aljazeera.net/Englis...ArchiveId=15816

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/ne...17target=_blank

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/821548.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...icle2199281.ece

http://www.breitbart.com/article.ph...&show_article=1

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter...ent_iran_c.html

http://regimechangeiniran.com/2006/...f-iranian-weap/

http://in.reuters.com/article/world...-29713620070925


and just to ballance it off, some opposing suggestions I happen to like:

http://www.imd.ch/research/challeng...0-07.cfm?bhcp=1

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov This is what drives me nuts!!! Who decided Iran is the be-all, end-all of evil? Sure, their regime sucks. Oppression is widespread. As it is in Belarus, where all political affiliation is banned and any ethnic enclaves in the country are brutally oppressed. As it is in North Korea, where starvation is used as a tool of the government. As it is in Sudan, where the regime carries out the systematic extermination of an entire region of people. As it is in Saudi Arabia, where laws regarding women and social rights are far more archaic than in Iran. As it is in Burma, where a brutal military junta is even today considering violence as a means of putting down civil discourse among religious monks. As it is in China, where the Uigher population is denied political affiliation or the right to upward mobility. As it is in Israel/Palestine, where women and children live in fear of Israeli tanks and helicopters or madmen with bombs strapped to their chests. As it is in Iraq, where private US military contractors gun down civilians. As it is in Zimbabwe, where the economy has ground to a halt due to government mismanagement. As it is in Mali, where US gunships are aiding a corrupt government in the persecution of nomadic tribesman who have formed a secession movement. As it is in the DRC, where paramilitary organizations with little compassion for human life maintain more control over regions of the country than the government in Kinshasha. As it is in Chad, where abundant oil revenue only pads the coffers of the elite few. Oppression is everywhere, so don't for a minute act like Ahmadinejad (which, by the way, is easy enough to spell if you want to be taken seriously on the issue) has a freaking monopoly on evil in this world. Where is the talk of invading Zimbabwe to take down Mugabe? Sudan to take down Bashir? You are so selective of your target that it screams discrimination on some basis. Why, because Iran has oil? So does Sudan. Why, because Iran may be pursuing nuclear weapons? Pakistan and North Korea already have them, and they oppress their people sometimes to an even greater extent. Why, because Iran's human rights violations are particularly aggregious? Sadly, they aren't. Why, because the Iranian government presides over the persecution of groups of people? They do, but to a far lesser extent than in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Belarus, etc. Iran has far greater good governance than a wide swath of the world. That may be hard for you to digest, but by most indicators it is true. There is relative stability, economic security for the wide majority of the population, freedom of expression for a growing number, and a growing moderate political base. Sure there are religious zealots with control over the country still. But that control is inexorably linked to their ability to show the Iranian people that they are needed to combat the US. And when we shout "death to Iran" in their faces we are playing right into their hands, establishing them as a necessary vigilant institution safeguarding Iranian security. So stop it. Bottom line: Give me a reasoned, ordered, logical explanation for why any free country should launch a preemptive war against Iran and I will listen to you. But stop with the "he's bad so he's evil so we should kill him routine," because if I wanted to hear logic so dimwitted, I would listen to the fundamentalist mullahs calling for Death to America. Same logic.

+7345723947289347

give the man a cookie

Do you even know that most Iranians love the United States, unlike citizens of other countries like Saudi Arabia? Do you even know Iran held a vigil for the victims of 9/11?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.