TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- It's already slowly starting to work!
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

It's already slowly starting to work!

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/046...resoluti:.shtml

Way to go ppl of the world!

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY
NO TO WAR!!!!
im glad the world is opposed to this war...

Izzy, Yoepus, Arbiter...and others... what do you think of all this?

War is too serious a matter to entrust to military men and politicians.

thats great news, looks like they're beginning to take global opinion more seriously ;D

Personally I am opposed to the war also, HOWEVER I have a major problem with people who are prejudiced against the USA/Americans...

All of you people from other countries, SHAME ON YOU, because it was only the US who brought the issue of Saddam and WMD to the attention of the international community, and if it wasn't for the backbone of America's military might and pressure, Saddam would have now continued to defy the international community and secretly worked on WMD programs.

Saddam can only be dealt with by force and military pressure. He doesn't understand other means because he's a brutal dictator and oppressor... any "negotiations" with him are fruitless unless they're backed up by the threat of war. So all of you ultra-pacifists can stick those peace slogans up your asses. You understand as perfectly as I do, that without America's pressure we would to this day have no fucking clue what the hell is going on in brutally-governed secretive Iraq. First it gave in to the pressure and let the inspectors back in. Now, with 200,000 soldiers in the Gulf, it agreed to let the U2 planes fly. This guy only understands FORCE...

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Izzy, Yoepus, Arbiter...and others... what do you think of all this?

I'm not really too surprised by it. Given the impressive size of the anti-war movement, the U.S. and British governments faced so much internal and external pressure to back down somewhat that they would have been jeopardizing their own careers to continue.

Of course, I am somewhat disappointed, as I feel it is merely a demonstrations that mob mentality can work both ways - a triumph of rhetoric over truth, if you will. But neither would I be happy to see our governments moving to war with such a lack of support from the free peoples of this world. Ultimately, my disappointment lies in those people, because I believe they've failed to see the larger picture.

I myself was once one of them:

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter on 10/28/02 I'm opposed to it on the grounds that I think the costs outweigh the potential benefits. Besides, if we remove Saddam from power, he'll just end up being replaced by a fundamentalist regime. At least his government is relatively secular.

But ultimately, what made me change my mind was when a friend of mine asked me to help her write a paper for an Anthropology class. In pouring over her notes of the atrocities commited by Saddam Hussein towards his people, not only in simply killing them, but also in denying them basic freedoms, as well as by many other "leaders" in the middle-east, I came to somewhat of an epiphany: I finally understood that this had to stop. No matter the cost, no matter the short-term consequences, to allow these people to continue to live in the manner that they do is simply unjustifiable.

It would cost billions of dollars over a span of decades to actually bring true freedom to these countries. I, too, have had my share of doubts about whether or not the Bush administration would realistically be willing to make that kind of expenditure. But ultimately, I supported the war, and still do, because I had no choice: it is the only realistic first step towards achieving the sole acceptable outcome.

It is sad that the chances of freedom being brought to the people of the middle east are diminishing rapidly, though admittedly they were never particularly high. Perhaps one day the people of Iraq and other middle eastern nations will endeavor to free themselves, but the nature of their culture in reality produces a vicious cycle of authoritarianism which I don't believe can be removed except by force.

It may be for the best that we avoid war, as no one can be certain of the consequences it will bring, but if you ask me, by doing so, we abase ourselves by doing so. To tolerate the existence of tyrants makes one a tyrant. There can be no middle ground with such people, no compromise, and no diplomacy. The pathology of the tyrant simply does not comprehend such things. Perhaps even Bush himself could be viewed in such a light. I personally believe his domestic policy to be fascist in much the same way Hussein's is, only to a lesser degree.

Ultimately, I fear the world is moving away from freedom and towards safety, a trend which leaves us all prisoners of fear. You can see it in foreign policy, where "liberation" is scorned as invasion (and perhaps rightfully so, for it takes a hero to be a liberator, and the heroes of this age rarely choose politics). You can see it in domestic policy, where a mountain of restrictions continue to be placed on what one may or may not do. These are not the principles upon which the United States was founded. Truly, these are not the principles upon which the free world in its entirety has established itself.

Indeed, these are the principles of corruption, cowardice, and tyranny. Our leaders uphold all that is unworthy, and trample our freedoms by teaching us to value our own lives more than we value what is right. In this day and age, perhaps I was naive to believe any good could actually be accomplished by war. Nevertheless, I still feel there can be no honor if we do not try.

Regardless of whether or not we do go to war, it is clear that tyranny is winning the battle against freedom. To turn the tide in this greater struggle, will take a sacrifice far greater than would be required in Iraq, and it is with great sadness I must say, that I do not see many people who would be willing to make such a sacrifice.

quote:

Originally posted by Eugene Personally I am opposed to the war also, HOWEVER I have a major problem with people who are prejudiced against the USA/Americans... All of you people from other countries, SHAME ON YOU, because it was only the US who brought the issue of Saddam and WMD to the attention of the international community, and if it wasn't for the backbone of America's military might and pressure, Saddam would have now continued to defy the international community and secretly worked on WMD programs. Saddam can only be dealt with by force and military pressure. He doesn't understand other means because he's a brutal dictator and oppressor... any "negotiations" with him are fruitless unless they're backed up by the threat of war. So all of you ultra-pacifists can stick those peace slogans up your asses. You understand as perfectly as I do, that without America's pressure we would to this day have no fucking clue what the hell is going on in brutally-governed secretive Iraq. First it gave in to the pressure and let the inspectors back in. Now, with 200,000 soldiers in the Gulf, it agreed to let the U2 planes fly. This guy only understands FORCE...

can you explain to me how come all of a sudden Iraq is such a big issue as it is when george bush's redneck ass comes tumbling into the presidency by mistake? what a coincidence that george dubbya's pops was also involved in a war with saddam and that saddam tried to kill herbert. this war is a joke, bush is a joke, and non-americans have the right to criticize this government

quote:

Originally posted by TuanAnh213 can you explain to me how come all of a sudden Iraq is such a big issue as it is when george bush's redneck ass comes tumbling into the presidency by mistake? what a coincidence that george dubbya's pops was also involved in a war with saddam and that saddam tried to kill herbert. this war is a joke, bush is a joke, and non-americans have the right to criticize this government

amen.

I think the USA is the much more serious issue. I would much rather see the USA disarm themselves of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons instead of Iraq. After all, the USA is the only country to actually use weapons of mass destruction in war. Oh, and it'd also be interesting to see what kind of stuff the USA has been researching in terms of weapons. Also, something should be done about the USA government pushing American culture, government, and values on the rest of the world. I do not want to live in a world entirely of American culture, government and values. That is a world I do not wish to live in. (I realize many Americans don't share these stereotypical values, but you know what I mean)

Arbiter, if it werent for 9/11, Bush's administration wouldnt even be attacking Iraq, he would have way to many domestical problems.. he had many before 9/11, but 9/11 was like a SAVE BY THE BELL kind of thing. So I pretty much doubt that he is doing it for the people. If it was for the people, then he would be all over other countries such as North Korea for an example, China , and most recently, Venezuela or better yet, Colombia. the US helps, yes, but they always , as I see it, help, but yet, the US will win something as it helps. There's always interest created. And, with the whole Bush administration been OIL maniacs.. theres alot to say about Iraq... Afghanistan. They had an even worst regime. But, just because of 9/11, all the attention went to Afghanistan, and thats the only reason helped the Afghan people. So all of that making Saddam stop and that Bush is such a nice person to help Saddam stop, is all BIAS ! .. If Saddam gives the US the OIL fields, I can BET that Bush will not take Saddam out .

quote:

Originally posted by Mosaic amen. I think the USA is the much more serious issue. I would much rather see the USA disarm themselves of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons instead of Iraq. After all, the USA is the only country to actually use weapons of mass destruction in war. Oh, and it'd also be interesting to see what kind of stuff the USA has been researching in terms of weapons. Also, something should be done about the USA government pushing American culture, government, and values on the rest of the world. I do not want to live in a world entirely of American culture, government and values. That is a world I do not wish to live in. (I realize many Americans don't share these stereotypical values, but you know what I mean)

the problem is i have yet to see some other culture besides american culture that seems to captivate other cultures around the world. For instance, american movies (hollywood) are well known all around the world while movies from other countries, nobody gives an ass about them. American culture just seems to have the kind of "charisma", i dont' know how to explain it.

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX Arbiter, if it werent for 9/11, Bush's administration wouldnt even be attacking Iraq, he would have way to many domestical problems.. he had many before 9/11, but 9/11 was like a SAVE BY THE BELL kind of thing. So I pretty much doubt that he is doing it for the people. If it was for the people, then he would be all over other countries such as North Korea for an example, China , and most recently, Venezuela or better yet, Colombia. the US helps, yes, but they always , as I see it, help, but yet, the US will win something as it helps. There's always interest created. And, with the whole Bush administration been OIL maniacs.. theres alot to say about Iraq... Afghanistan. They had an even worst regime. But, just because of 9/11, all the attention went to Afghanistan, and thats the only reason helped the Afghan people. So all of that making Saddam stop and that Bush is such a nice person to help Saddam stop, is all BIAS ! .. If Saddam gives the US the OIL fields, I can BET that Bush will not take Saddam out .

Why the Bush administration wants to attack Iraq is entirely irrelevant to whether or not Iraq ought to be attacked. The Bush administration is full of shit, but that does not mean that all their policies are necessarily the wrong thing to do.

Personally I think we should be "all over other countries such as North Korea..." Iraq is on that list. Whether or not it is the best place to start (and you must admit, it would be far more efficient to conduct such operations one at a time), which I think is rather dubious (it wouldn't be my choice), it is still better than simply doing nothing. But that's really extraneous information that isn't necessary to answer the simple question "should we attack Iraq."

There is at least one reason to attack Iraq, and it is a moral reason, and one which I have yet to see sufficiently refuted. Although I share your doubts that this is the reason the Bush administration wants to attack Iraq, that doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not the former justification is logically valid.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Ultimately, I fear the world is moving away from freedom and towards safety, a trend which leaves us all prisoners of fear.

EXCELLENTLY hit the nail on the head! *claps*

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Izzy, Yoepus, Arbiter...and others... what do you think of all this?

firstly i want to say that basicly everything i belive in arbiter has already said in his two posts... though i cant let this by without saying it in my words.

if bush does indeed now go ahead with war plans then the fact that he is willing to sacrafice his political future and support from the populace shows his convection to what he thinks is right and that he is willing to lose everything for what he belives in (just like the tragic plays of theatre). you might not think it is right to go to war but you have to admire someone who stands up for what he belives is right, through thick and thin.

now seeing as the anti-war movement is succeeding to some extent there are a few things that dissapoint me. one is that it seems we are going to be staying in a state of suspense with no end truly coming about and this may last on for years and years. what is the point about dragging on something you can fix today? another thing that gets to me is that no real solution to core problems have been proposed. i feel as if the anti-war movement is stripping away one viable solution without bringing forth a new one to replace it.

My impression is that the UN is basicly just out to make sure iraq has no WOMD and most the members in the anti-war movement are trying to save the iraqi people from 'collateral damage' and stop american aggression just for the fact that is america and the actions are aggressive. both of these body's have failed to address and dare i say even bring a solution as to the other core issues at hand. how do you deal with someone who is defying the world? how do you bring about freedom and libirties to those who are suffering from tyranny and oppression? how do you stop a leader who is a genuine threat to world stability? as a person should saddam have to right to continue governing a country? even a simple question like, what should be done? there is a lack of answers to these questions, even all the governments involved (US included) have failed to bring up and talk about this issues.

too many people get caught in the details of specific countries, commadities such as oil, intentions like ruling the world and all the variable small issues. people should look at the bigger picture and disgard all of the above. the picture becomes crystal clear in that we as a world are trying to rid it of something bad, simple as that.

"Better to light a candle than curse the darkness."

Basically my opinion on the whole thing is slowly changing towards no war as well.
Bush isn't finding what he wants in Iraq and even though that country is run by a dictator, he ain't got nothin' (yet).

The problem really isn't if Saddam has anything, its where is he hidin' it?? And until we find it, there's no reason for a war.

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy firstly i want to say that basicly everything i belive in arbiter has already said in his two posts... though i cant let this by without saying it in my words. if bush does indeed now go ahead with war plans then the fact that he is willing to sacrafice his political future and support from the populace shows his convection to what he thinks is right and that he is willing to lose everything for what he belives in (just like the tragic plays of theatre). you might not think it is right to go to war but you have to admire someone who stands up for what he belives is right, through thick and thin. now seeing as the anti-war movement is succeeding to some extent there are a few things that dissapoint me. one is that it seems we are going to be staying in a state of suspense with no end truly coming about and this may last on for years and years. what is the point about dragging on something you can fix today? another thing that gets to me is that no real solution to core problems have been proposed. i feel as if the anti-war movement is stripping away one viable solution without bringing forth a new one to replace it. My impression is that the UN is basicly just out to make sure iraq has no WOMD and most the members in the anti-war movement are trying to save the iraqi people from 'collateral damage' and stop american aggression just for the fact that is america and the actions are aggressive. both of these body's have failed to address and dare i say even bring a solution as to the other core issues at hand. how do you deal with someone who is defying the world? how do you bring about freedom and libirties to those who are suffering from tyranny and oppression? how do you stop a leader who is a genuine threat to world stability? as a person should saddam have to right to continue governing a country? even a simple question like, what should be done? there is a lack of answers to these questions, even all the governments involved (US included) have failed to bring up and talk about this issues. too many people get caught in the details of specific countries, commadities such as oil, intentions like ruling the world and all the variable small issues. people should look at the bigger picture and disgard all of the above. the picture becomes crystal clear in that we as a world are trying to rid it of something bad, simple as that. "Better to light a candle than curse the darkness."

Trust me, Bush wont sacrifice his political interest to do whats right. IF it was so, he would've done it by letting the re-count and or RE-Vote when he was elected, yet he found it more then a fair win, which we all know .. it was a pretty bad dirty win. To another extend, to show you that he wont sacrifice his political re-election, shows it today that he is even softing the U.N. Resolution. This is new news for today. I do agree that if he does find that its the right and moral thing to do and attack Iraq, not mattering what the outcomes for him would be, it would really be a very memorable and rightous moment for Bush. But, Mr. Bush didnt even show his face on Saturday, exept to say to the people not to worry about the ORANGE code alert. The only one, who really stood up and kept up to his saying, was Tony Blair, who actually commented on the protestings, but Bush ? ? Bush was too worried with his administration and thinking on whats the best thing to dofor his interests, and the outcomes. And now, he comes up with a softend resolution. So I doubt now, that he is doing it for the moral and all the right things you said IZZY, which would be neat, but he is not gonna do it. A president does what popular sovereignty tells him .. its democracy, and if the majority of Americans want something, he should do it.. if he doesnt, he does not represent what the Republic of the United States stands for.

quote:

Originally posted by TuanAnh213 the problem is i have yet to see some other culture besides american culture that seems to captivate other cultures around the world. For instance, american movies (hollywood) are well known all around the world while movies from other countries, nobody gives an ass about them. American culture just seems to have the kind of "charisma", i dont' know how to explain it.

Yes movies are a good thing in our culture, but I wouldn't call it a 100% American thing.

The thing is that American culture puts way too much value into wealth, power, and material. Are you acknowledged if you live a happy life, raise a family, and die happily? No. You get applauded for buying things. Cars, movies, TVs, furniture, designer clothing, etc. Being a good consumer is the American dream.

Its not just an American thing really, its a problem with human nature, which is probably why others are attracted to American culture.

quote:

Originally posted by TuanAnh213 the problem is i have yet to see some other culture besides american culture that seems to captivate other cultures around the world. For instance, american movies (hollywood) are well known all around the world while movies from other countries, nobody gives an ass about them. American culture just seems to have the kind of "charisma", i dont' know how to explain it.

America invests alot of $$$ in order to express that culture on a global scale.

quote:

Originally posted by TuanAnh213 can you explain to me how come all of a sudden Iraq is such a big issue as it is when george bush's redneck ass comes tumbling into the presidency by mistake? what a coincidence that george dubbya's pops was also involved in a war with saddam and that saddam tried to kill herbert. this war is a joke, bush is a joke, and non-americans have the right to criticize this government

I beleive it started in the Reagan administration before Bush 1 was president....during he iran/iraq war.

it was also important in the Clinton administration aswell....i beleive Clinton was aware of the CIA planning an assasination of Hussein...

quote:

Originally posted by Mosaic amen. I think the USA is the much more serious issue. I would much rather see the USA disarm themselves of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons instead of Iraq. After all, the USA is the only country to actually use weapons of mass destruction in war.

not true...Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran....

quote:

Originally posted by Mosaic That is a world I do not wish to live in. (I realize many Americans don't share these stereotypical values, but you know what I mean)

I agree many aspects of the American way are bad...however when it comes to prospering finacially and becoming what you want, aswell as having many freedoms, is very important...and how one can live without that is a sin...we ALL deserve to have that.

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX Arbiter, if it werent for 9/11, Bush's administration wouldnt even be attacking Iraq, he would have way to many domestical problems.. he had many before 9/11, but 9/11 was like a SAVE BY THE BELL kind of thing.

how can you say such a horrendous thing...to refer to 9.11 as being "saved by the bell".....

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX then he would be all over other countries such as North Korea for an example, China , and most recently, Venezuela or better yet, Colombia.

One thing at a time...

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX the US helps, yes, but they always , as I see it, help, but yet, the US will win something as it helps..

show me one country that is selfless...everyone has a hidden ajenda of some wort.

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX If Saddam gives the US the OIL fields, I can BET that Bush will not take Saddam out .

well the U.S. gets only like 17% of its oil from Iraq....so i doubt it...

Best thing the U.S. could do ..would be to send in CIA or Navy Seal or Army Rangers to asasinate Hussein...no civilians die...no soldiers on either side die...and Hussein is removed and we can all move on...

But thats my thoughts......

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 Best thing the U.S. could do ..would be to send in CIA or Navy Seal or Army Rangers to asasinate Hussein...no civilians die...no soldiers on either side die...and Hussein is removed and we can all move on... But thats my thoughts......

there was an act...fuck i forgot what it was which was passed by congress during the 70s when the CIA tried to assasinate some dictator but failed. basically the CIA has no right to conduct assasinations like it did during the 60s and 70s...those times are over

quote:

Originally posted by TuanAnh213 there was an act...fuck i forgot what it was which was passed by congress during the 70s when the CIA tried to assasinate some dictator but failed. basically the CIA has no right to conduct assasinations like it did during the 60s and 70s...those times are over

too bad...they should start it again...it would save hundreds of thousands of lives....and money..and time....

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 too bad...they should start it again...it would save hundreds of thousands of lives....and money..and time....

what the fuck? what gives them the right to?

quote:

not true...Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran....

he used them against the Kurds in northern Iraq, again America sold him the chemical weapons, and sold him more when they found out he was doing it.......

quote:

how can you say such a horrendous thing...to refer to 9.11 as being "saved by the bell".....

Everyones gotta stop tip toeing around 9/11. Do you possibly think that anyone in the US would support attacking Iraq if it wasn't for 9/11? thats why the link between Iraq and Al Qaeda is so damn important to Bush and Powell.......
on an interesting note, something I read in renegades post.
Nearly 1,500 contracts for iraqi oil were put forward to the UN sanctions committee the day after George W Bushs pro war speech. Not for oil my arse

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 how can you say such a horrendous thing...to refer to 9.11 as being "saved by the bell".....

I know this is a very controversial issue for the conservatives. But its true. If you look back, Bush was in a popular discontent, economy going down the hills, his popular acceptance was at around 57% , which is very bad. Right after 9/11, his acceptance, for means of been patriotic went up to the 80's, if not the 90%, then it gradually began to go down. As Bush saw this coming, he then began linking Al Quaida to Iraq, whiching to, in the other hand, in my opinion, distract all the domestic problems( bankrupcys, economy , stock market and so on ). Been patriotic, keeps your rating up in the clodus, but Bush has been so into that, that he's forgotten the effects ( like as if he cared ). Soyes, 9/11 was one of the worst days in world history, but thats what actually kep Bush's rating up in the clouds ( which is what politicians want ) . And now, Bush is seeking re-election, and if you didnt know, WAR, as shown in history, has brought in better economy, and acceptance in the long run if they win, but as I see it, thats not going to happen to Bush, something his probably realizing.

quote:

One thing at a time...

The problems with the countries I mentioned were on loooooong before Iraq. So is not like one thing at a time. Bush hasent given no concerns to Venezuela, where great part of the oil comes from, and you know that Chavez has the same beliefs as Cuba ? .. Venezuela is the next Cuban like nation on this hemisphere, and Bush is doing crap ! .. as of Colombia, come on, thats where one of the biggest concentrations of terrorist are, and I rather not talk about the drugas, where the greatest percent of the drugs coming to the US comes from Colombia. CLinto was fighting all this, but then Bush came .. and all that colombian issue got left out. As of Cuba, Cuba is got weapons also, and terrorists.. why not bomb them and go to war with them ? they are neighboring country .. ?

quote:

show me one country that is selfless...everyone has a hidden ajenda of some wort.

I never said that the other countries dont have hidden agenda, did I ? .. but this scene is always most seen coming from the USA.

quote:

well the U.S. gets only like 17% of its oil from Iraq....so i doubt it...

Not 17% comes from Iraq. NO OIL comes from Iraq comes to the USA. We buy from Russia and some arab countries, as well Venezuela. Look at this, why do you think that Bush hasent wanted to go and fix the oil situation with Venezuela ? ? Because he is so sure he will beat the crap out of Saddam and get all the oil firms to sign on the Iraqui oil fields .. which it would eventually bring down the price.. but, on Friday, Bush got in between a a very hard situation .. so I dont know what would happen now.

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