quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Really? And which division of front-line infantry will you be fighting with monsieur iron-balls?

awaiting for the position of rifleman in the aus army to open up, currently it is closed until the beginning 2003 financial year, and has been closed since august of 2002.

thats where i'm heading, where are you?

dont be antiwar because you're scared of the challenge that lays ahead

___________________
c o n : f u s e d

I haven't read all this article, but the first three or four paragraphs have me thinking "What the fuck France? Now that you have nothing to worry about you can shit on the US? If it weren't for us, you sorry fucks would be a part of Germany right now."

quote:

Originally posted by Spin Doctor Anyone who is pro-war on this Iraq issue is a brain dead halfwit. The Iraq “Crisis” in a nutshell: The 11th Of September Attacks results in US led military campaign in Afghanistan. Bush, despite all his military might cant find Bin Laden. The US economy is going up the pan, which will seriously harm his chances of re-election, so Bush plays the foreign policy card again, riding off the 11Th of September, pointing the finger once again at Saddam. This is a clever choice for several reasons; 1) Any kind of successful military conflict will produce a strong rally round the flag effect and be excellent for Bush’s re-election campaign, 2) oil Bush himself and many of his cronies have personal vested interests in the oil industry, not to mention the economic factors for the nation. Bush uses his position to whip up a frenzy over Iraq. Everyone forgets about Afghanistan (When was the last time the new told you regularly what was happening in Afghanistan?). Bush goes to war with Iraq and wins, secures oil supply and uses it as a lever in his next election campaign. This Iraq “crisis” is really not an issue of a terror threat to the rest of the world. That’s the cover story the Media and Powers that be are spoon feeding the world in order to justify their real ends.

Yep, with Bush, the ends Justify the means. I'm glad our country (questionably) elected someone who would murder thousands of people to secure the next election. Come to think of it, that doesn't sound so much different than Hitler or Stalin.

"Let's kill the people we think are ruining society, create euphimisms for our actions, and brainwash the public into thinking we are making the world a better place."

quote:

Originally posted by Spin Doctor 1) Any kind of successful military conflict will produce a strong rally round the flag effect and be excellent for Bush’s re-election campaign,

right, so tell me agian why Bush sr. didnt get elected for a second term... your assumption is farce.

quote:

2) oil Bush himself and many of his cronies have personal vested interests in the oil industry, not to mention the economic factors for the nation.

http://tester.tranceaddict.com/foru...?threadid=86894
we all agree it may be a factor but i dont belive it is the factor or even the deciding one.

quote:

Everyone forgets about Afghanistan (When was the last time the new told you regularly what was happening in Afghanistan?).

just because you dont hear of it doesnt mean its not happening.

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Izzy
right, so tell me agian why Bush sr. didnt get elected for a second term... your assumption is farce.

Because Bush Sr. Didn't finish the job and pissed off the entire military. My father (who served during the gulf war) remembers how angry everyone was when he let Saddam go, and still remembers to this day saying "If we leave him there, we're gonna be going through the same shit Ten years from now"

Now Bush is Just LOOKING for reasons to start a war, how constitutional is that? I'm glad all these people who think we should annihilate Iraq because they are a major "threat" live in the US. THe US is obviously the strongest single country in the world, we are technically a threat to everyone. If you lived in say, Afghanistan, and were about to try and annihilate the US for beaing a "threat", what would that make you?

Last edited by DJ_Skaya on Feb-03-2003 at 05:07

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Skaya If you lived in say, Afghanistan, and were about to try and annihilate the US for beaing a "threat", what would that make you?

Stupid. But what's your point? You appear to be comparing apples and oranges.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Skaya I haven't read all this article, but the first three or four paragraphs have me thinking "What the fuck France? Now that you have nothing to worry about you can shit on the US? If it weren't for us, you sorry fucks would be a part of Germany right now."

And if it wasn't for the French in 1776 you'd still be living in an English colony buddy.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Skaya If it weren't for us, you sorry fucks would be a part of Germany right now."

i keep on being amazed on how blindly believing people can be to what they are told in "pearl harbor", "saving private ryan" and all other bullshit movies (they are actually good movies, but they are bullshit in the historical value sense).

USSR lost 40 (!!!!!) million people in that war. Belarus (former USSR republic which was the first that Germans invaded) lost 1/3 of all its citizens! the 2nd front wasn't opened until fucking summer of 1944 - when the war was actually already won by USSR and our soldiers were chasing German soldiers not on our land, but already outside, freeing Hungary, Poland and other countries.

IT WAS NOT FOR AMERICANS THAT THE WAR WAS WON!!!!!!!! get it once and for all!!!

___________________
writing lyrics aint what it used to be

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy just because you dont hear of it doesnt mean its not happening.

Well actually yes it does. What is happening in the world is only what the media is telling us is happening. If the media isn’t covering it then in all respects it isn’t happening, as people are not being informed of it. People rely on the news to find out what’s going on in the world and the media is in the back pocket of the people in command. We don’t hear form Afghanistan because it was f**ked up royally. They don’t want us to ask questions about what’s happening there so they divert the medias attention.

And as for Bush Snr, DJ_Skaya is right. Had the Desert Storm forces finished the job, ousted Saddam and set up a new democratic, US friendly government then Bush Snr’s election outcome could have been vastly different. Secondly, I never said that it would automatically guarantee Bush’s re-election. It would damn well help it though.

Here Here Jocker, the history that they teach in schools is wildly inaccurate half the time missing out great chunks and presenting evidence bias to their side of the story.

quote:

right, so tell me agian why Bush sr. didnt get elected for a second term... your assumption is farce.

Additionally I may add that Bush sr. didn't have the huge public support caused by the terrorist attacks on the US, which Bush jr. has.

quote:

If it weren't for us, you sorry fucks would be a part of Germany right now.

Yeah, right. You really overexaggerate american role in this war. I'd sooner say they'd be a part of USSR now

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by Spin Doctor [COLOR=#808080]Well actually yes it does. What is happening in the world is only what the media is telling us is happening. If the media isn’t covering it then in all respects it isn’t happening, as people are not being informed of it. People rely on the news to find out what’s going on in the world and the media is in the back pocket of the people in command. We don’t hear form Afghanistan because it was f**ked up royally. They don’t want us to ask questions about what’s happening there so they divert the medias attention.

i still stand by that original arguement. just becuase you dont hear of something doesnt mean its not happening, there are tons of news worthy stuff happening on the continent of africa, just becuase its not being reported doesnt mean its not happening. i guess what i said was also to be taken on a personal level as well. if you cared about afghanistan you would have found out that there are plenty of articles one can read about the daily proccess in afghanistan, let me start you off if you need a stepping stone. http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=...cat=Afghanistan (a collection of current articles from agencies such as AP, Rueters, NY times, CBC, etc... specifically about news from afghanistan)

Modern news agencies do not nessicarly report on what is happening but rather report on the issues that will draw them the biggest audience (which in return gives them higher advertisment dollars). right now the majority of the world would rather hear news about the upcoming war with iraq rather then the reconstruction of afghanistan.

quote:

And as for Bush Snr, DJ_Skaya is right. Had the Desert Storm forces finished the job, ousted Saddam and set up a new democratic, US friendly government then Bush Snr’s election outcome could have been vastly different. Secondly, I never said that it would automatically guarantee Bush’s re-election. It would damn well help it though.

i still dont see then how you can say that bush jr. will help his re-election. how do you know it wont hurt it? your example with bush sr. is a good example of what could happen. how can you comfortably predict the future outcome of peoples opinion with regard to this war when there are so so many variables at stake.

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.