iraq man ownz a typical war protestor..

base · Outlaw Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 208

these protestors are immoral twats who are so narrow minded they can't see the big picture... it's pathetic really...

http://www.tucko.com/hippypwnd/kvi_aircheck_031003.mp3

Syth · Addict Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 661 City: Brentwood

damn she got pwnd!

Sad, this is the majority of the mentality of protesters

RYDOG · Outlaw Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 163 City: NOR CAL

Yep, I posted that on a different thread. I think it is great.

derrick lenz · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 2:16 pm Post subject:

one thing i found interesting about her argument is how she related that if diplomacy is implemented in iraq it will work out like it has in north korea and palestine (? can't remember if this is what she said but she refered to the place that has been fighting for ever). truth is it hasn't worked out in the middle east. those people are raised to hate each other and will continue to do so until a cultural change comes about.

Zach M · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 2:39 pm Post subject:

Most of the anti-war protesters are people who have no idea what is going on. Many of them are just looking for something to argue about. It makes me angry how ignorant they can be.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 2:49 pm Post subject:

The question isn't will removing Saddam make Iraq a better place, the question is does the US have the right to intervene in another countries domestic struggle?

If the US has the role of the worlds policeman or "justice dispenser" then someone else has to make the law, it is extremely dangerous to have the same body both making & enforcing the law.

The US role in Arab worlds affairs to date is what caused 9/11, I seriously doubt invading a Arab nation is going to reduce 9/11 type backlash.

One thing I do not understand is the US's motivation for removing Saddam, what do they have to gain except a greater control over fuel reserves?

derrick lenz · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 3:04 pm Post subject:

if we pull out of iraq to prevent more terrorist action then the terrorist win. it's a fact that sadam kills his own people. after listening to the link posted above i'm assured that iraq wants freedom and sadam doesn't bring that. if you think this is over fuel reserves your purely ignorant to the reasons. sadam was told not to have weapons, he has them, we must enforce the rules with or without the UN. look back at WW2. hitler did the same thing but it pertained to the treaty of versalies. said he couldn't have a standing army of a given #. he said i'm doing it. why don't you come stop me? france and britain said well we'll give him just this one thing and he'll be happy. that's the concept of appeasement. however after this hitler said well we also don't want to pay the repreation payments. you want em. come get them. britain and france once again backed down. said well now he'll be happy. in light of keeping this post as short as possible the same thing happened with moving his army into the rhineland, invasion of checkloslavacia, and finally poland was the breaking point. my point... if we let sudam slip any more who's to say what he'll do next. if someone would have stepped up to germany ww2 may not have been as sevre or may have been avoided. (i think less sevre ). the U.S. is the police man of the world because someone has to do it. who else will...france? i don't think so. one interesting fact about iraq and france. guess who is iraq's biggest partner in trade? that's right france.

nick e[V]ans · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 3:39 pm Post subject:

she is a completely ignorant stupid woman, she could not admit defeat and could not answer the question. like he said she just kept repeating herself, it had played the whole way through than started playing for another 30secs before i realised it was back at the start thats how repetitive she is.
nick

Ralph · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 3:46 pm Post subject:

Comparing A WW2 Germany to a present day Iraq is not a good comparision, Iraq is tiny compared to what Germany was, the confict between Germany and the allied powers was a war, what we have today is giant squashing a bug.

WW2 was largely caused by the crushing terms of the treaty of versalies. If Germany wasn't strangled so bady after WW1 a nationalistic nutter like Hitler could never have risen to power.

In a similar way 9/11 was largely caused by the US intervention in Arab affairs. The Arab world does not have the resources to mount a war against the US but they can mount an effective terrorist attack from within.

It seems we are unable to learn from our past mistakes, what do you think will be the Arab reaction to Iraq offensive?

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

Ralph you realize that oil is controled by OPEC and no nation truly has any control over the cost of oil. OPEC regualtes production quantities and decides what the market value is for a barrel of oil. Guess what country is not involved in OPEC. That's right the USA is not a member of OPEC. The USA has a majority of it's oil supplied from our own hemisphere. Most importantly Venezuela. Your information is misleading if you believe that the purpose of this war is to control oil. When I see signs that say no war for oil I agree this isn't a war for oil.

People who don't support this war truly believe it is about oil. Research what is going on. This war is about the violation of the 14 reslolutions passed since 1991 that the UN has failed to enforce. The USA has watched appeasement before. We will not sit around and allow the situation to develop like we did prior to WW2.

Derrick- I totally agree... France is Iraqs biggest trade partner and Germany is trying to present a united EU political stance.

derrick lenz · Posted: Mar 21, 2003 4:07 pm Post subject:

ralph i never said that this is on the same level of germany and ww2. what i meant is that the circumstance are similar. if the UN doesn't enforce the rules that they set forth then why implement them at all.

i agree with you when you said...WW2 was largely caused by the crushing terms of the treaty of versalies. If Germany wasn't strangled so bady after WW1 a nationalistic nutter like Hitler could never have risen to power. however hitler was elected with out any conflict or scandals (because of the then current state of germany he did have a big boost). however, and please correct me if i'm wrong, sadam is not in a position to get re-elected or not elected. he's a dictator. i see a difference in this. if the people of iraq want a change they pretty much have no way of going about it.

base · Outlaw Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 208

play da ping pong little girl... Laughing

DaveBrowning · Posted: Mar 22, 2003 10:05 am Post subject:

hahaha... "your little nickelodeon diplomacy"... you "chirping bird"... hahaha! she should go hug a rainbow.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 22, 2003 1:18 pm Post subject:

Nor*Cal the price of oil is set by demand & supply, at the moment the price is artifically high because of supply side manipulation by OPEC. It is not important where the US buys its oil from the price is still set by the general market for oil.

Nor*Cal here's some info about oil from The Economist, September 14, 2002 U.S. Edition:

...America is by far the world's biggest oil-user, burning up a quarter of the
total consumed. Its imports have risen in recent years, to more than half
its total consumption...Saudi Arabia is the chief supplier of those imports.

Iraq's reserves are the second-biggest in the world, after Saudi Arabia's...

...It is producing a fraction of its potential. If it were to produce oil at a rate to match its reserves, say some geopolitical strategists, it could end Saudi Arabia's domination....

In my view:
The short of it is the US has a lot to gain by controlling a friendly oil producing government, especially one with the potentical of Iraq.

There are tin pot dictators all over the world who harm there own people at least bad as Saddam and the US doesn't blink an eye, take a look at the cruel "shizzle" going on in Zimbabwe.

Appeasment of WW2 Germany and Iraq and are two different things, the former was a super power the later a pest. Sufficent time wasn't given to the inspectors to tell if Iraq was complying or not, but if there weren't complying it was with nick nacks of small importance, not warranting a large scale invasion, if he had ICBM then thats something different.

And for the record I haven't decided that the reason the US are invading is because of Oil, all I'm saying is it looks like the most likely reason or at least a big factor and it irks me that most people discount it with out even giving it real consideration, instead thinking the US are doing it out of the goodness of there own heart or for a sense of "justice".

Yes the French are dicks, have a look at "Rainbow warrior" if you want to know why I think so.

So yes, I've done some research & that's what I found, what did your research discover?

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

I discovered that Venezuela has refined about half of USA's oil since 1986. This means that a 3 month oil strike with zero production significantly impacted the price of oil in the USA

The fact OPEC can control the supply side means they can set the market price. The supply side in the USA has only really changed due to the strike in Venezuela. The strike ended last week and Venezuela is producing again. This can be seen at the gas pump in the coming weeks. The price of gas has already begun to drop.

Khidir Hamza, former Chief of the Iraqi Nuclear Commission- Iraq is about 5 years from completing a nuclear bomb. -1995

Germany was NOT and I repeat NOT a superpower when they first violated the treaty of Versailles. Iraq is a dangerous country with a history of invading its neighbors, Iran and Kuwait. The instability in Iraq causes instability in the region. Saddam has used Weapons of Mass destruction against the Kurds in his own country.

You realize there was a cease-fire in 1991. The cease-fire was contingent on the disarmament of Iraq. This never took place

ohsix · Posted: Mar 22, 2003 2:00 pm Post subject:

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

Well said Wes...

ohsix · Posted: Mar 22, 2003 2:42 pm Post subject:

you too nor*cal. i hadnt seen your post when i posted mine.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 23, 2003 12:22 am Post subject:

Ok, I obviously need to do some more research, can I ask you some questions?

Do you guys disagree that the US will benefit greatly from the installment of a US friendly govt and US companys in Iraq harvesting oil?

What the chances of democracy being installed in Iraq?

Does Iraq have any links to Ben Laden?

Do you think that invading Iraq will lead to more or less US based terrorism?

ohsix · Posted: Mar 23, 2003 10:19 am Post subject:

I think the U.S. will deffinately benefit if Iraq becomes an ally. I dont think that the oil situation will be any different as long as Iraq is a member of OPEC though.

More than likely a democracy will be installed in Iraq.

We are finding more and more evidence that Iraq does/did have links to al-quaida, but why is that important? We know saddam's iraq promoted terrorism in many ways. One of them being his open offer of $25,000 to families of suicide bombers. Al-quaida is not the only terrorists in the world.

No one can give you a deffinate answer on the last question but i'm going to say it will lead to less terrorism. Any country would be stupid to promote terrorism against us after seeing what we have done/will do to Afghanistan and Iraq. Terrorism will most likely be from private parties and no country will allow these parties to be based in their country. At least if they want their country to be around much longer.

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

Due to the fact that business controls oil and not countries I doubt a US friendly government will help oil prices. Not to mention the fact that the USA recieves about 75% of it's oil from Venezuela, Canada, and Mexico. It's just cheaper to get oil from your own hemisphere. Plus OPEC will always regulate the supply side and control the market.

I believe some form of democracy will replace the dictatorship in Iraq. This will hopefully also help give the USA a friendly government in the muslim world.

Wes makes a good point about terrorism. I remember hearing something about Saddam offering a safe haven to Al quaida. I can't find my source on that though. I've heard the $25000 thing also.

I think this war is more than it comes off as. First thing is the USA is eliminating a threat in the region. Iran, a country not on great terms with the USA, has made agreements to provide medical care and return our pilots if they need to ditch over that territory. Saddam is not well liked in the region. Another friendly area could give us the foundation needed to start relations with the muslim community. This is also a showcase of our military power. N. Korea wants to talk now and they want to avoid involving the UN. There are a lot of hidden advantages. It also shows that despite outside pressure the USA is going to do the right thing. 12 years of UN violations is enough. Saddam had his chance.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 23, 2003 12:53 pm Post subject:

I predict there is zero chance of democracy being installed in Iraq. I also predict US based terrorism will mushroom after the conflict is over. I hope I am wrong about both things.

base · Outlaw Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 208

think positive ralph...

Ralph · Posted: Mar 23, 2003 8:01 pm Post subject:

I'm trying dude, I'm trying.

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

Ralph- What is the evidence supporting this belief?

Reagan hammered terrorist nations with military actions and terrorism attacks fell during that time period. He was taking a hard line on an issue that Carter handled poorly.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 24, 2003 1:16 am Post subject:

See link http://forums.wakeboarder.com/viewtopic.php?p=55805#55805 for a back
ground to my thinking, a small extension specifically about why I think why terrorism will increase is basically this:

Invasion of Iraq has not lessened the ill feeling of the Arab world towards the US

9/11 was an extremely effective display of guerrilla warfare, low resource, high impact.

There issues have not been addressed, what other options do they have to further there cause?

Please understand I am not saying terrorism is justifiable, all I'm saying it is the only effective way these people have of engaging the US in warfare. They feel they are being attacked, they respond in like. I don't even really understand what there problem is, I just know they have a problem because of the way they act. These people have families just like you and I.

impulse · Addict Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 807 City: Snyder,TX

Still very proud to be an American.

Leggester · Posted: Mar 24, 2003 12:04 pm Post subject:

Ralph, you should at least watch the news. Iraqi citizens dancing in the streets when the coalition forces come in.

The commonwealth, France, Russia and the US will benifit from a free(er) Iraq.

Why do you think Democracy is so good? Iraq already had a Democracy. Unfortunately, you only had one candidate and you were forced to vote.

Now we're seeing why Fr and Russia wanted no part of the war - guess who's supplying military arms to the Republican Guards?

BTW, if you think Bush would spend one US life for oil, you're way off base.

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

Leggester- Very well put. Concise and yet very pertinent. I think France and Russia are going to be backpedaling in a diplomatic sense. I'm sure the UN will drop any complaints that were brought up against this action as the facts come t light.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 24, 2003 12:51 pm Post subject:

Leggester, that's not the news we get here. All we get is reports of guerrilla warfare in street to street battles and American POW's getting paraded around like a circus show. I hope the war doesn't turn into a Vietnam.

France & Russia are doing quite nicely from the current Iraq thank you very much, it's US that has a lot to gain from a free Iraq, the interesting question is how free? I very much doubt democracy will be installed in Iraq, just look at the population base there and it will tell you why. (And by the way I never commented on the merits of Democracy!)

You put a lot of faith in your presidents, I don't know what to make of it.

Anyway I'm done, I've tried to make my point but I don't think anyone really got it, I will make a quick summary for those who wouldn't wade through my ramblings:

The US must protect it's domestic shores, Chem's & bio agents represent a big enough threat to justify invasion.

The reason "rogue nations" want these agents is because of previous US foreign policy.

Current policy is an extension of old policy.

Until new solutions to conflict and foreign policy is found there will continue to be terrorist attacks of large scale against the US.

I love the US society, it's way of life and it's principles of freedom & equality. In these times I'm glad my family doesn't live there.

Oh and something to think about: In the past conflict has essentially been governments fighting each other using the people as the tools of war, once the government is subdued the people can be spared and return to normal life. With international terrorism it is now not governments who wage war but the people directly, unless all the people themselves are killed how is resolution achieved?

Leggester · Posted: Mar 24, 2003 1:10 pm Post subject:

OK, Ralph, I guess I see your point, but watch CNN, or FOX news if you get it.

Do you realize "parading prisoners" is against the Geneva Conventions? That's a war crime mate! Yet, we still hear the continuous lies from Iraq that the prisoners will be treated according to them!

As to the "We caused this by our own actions", no. I'll not even respond there. It's completely rediculous.

Do you appease the robber in your house? What if it's a neighbor who continously plays extremely loud music and revs car engines at three and four in the morning? You've called the cops, made the proper complaints and have injunctions against them - well they keep on doing it. Hmmm, more injunctions? Or, does the court start fining them and eventually come and put them away?

I will say, Iraq has caused this action by their continious and deliberate violations of treaties. Period. Nothing much more to it. We got tired of it, went the way of the International Courts, got tired of that and we have now started to finish what we promised.

"Our international policies" goddam, now you have me pissed! I wasn't going here, but it seems 'our' international policies have helped the commonwealth to no end, also Japan, Germany, France, Russia, Damn near every country in Africa, South America... ...

What Policies exactly? What country spends as great a portion of their GNP in aiding others? No one! That's who! We spend BILLIONS around the world in aide, food, medicine, disastor recovery, you name it, we've helped! But yet, we're the bad guys. So be it. I wouldn't have it any other way. I'd rather have helped and be a cast away for it, than to mouth platitudes derived from the misinformed.

This is not personal against you Ralph, but I object to the kind of mindset presented here. As you can tell.

Ralph · Posted: Mar 24, 2003 6:28 pm Post subject:

Your not getting my point Leggester, I don't have a problem with US foreign policy, Arabs do, getting mad about it doesn't change anything.

It's not about being right or wrong, it's about cause and effect, you can berry your head in the sand and say "we are right, they are wrong, we are justified in bombing them" all you want, it does not change the world or change the circumstances which has caused terrorism to grow. Wake up man, if something doesn't change you are doomed to more conflict.

*chris* · Addict Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 982

LITTLE GIRL... Laughing

she sounds like shes 12 years old. wtf is up with that?

Leggester · Posted: Mar 25, 2003 8:43 am Post subject:

Ralph, with all due respect, I've been awake longer than you've been alive.

Read history. It's true. Those that ignore history are bitten by it.

Arabs hate us? Yep. So bad that in the 60s and 70s, they begged our oil companies to come in and develop their fields. Note, they had not done so on their own. We did. They nationalized, we lost out. Now they hate us.

BFD! Arab and arab countries have been fighting themselves and anyone else for thousand of years, yes that's right, B.C.. What is going to change them? Getting their ruling families out. Letting their own people decide what entity rules them. Getting thier people ecudated and out of the tribal stages.

Yuo don't get it my friend. You stated very precisely that our Foreign Policies were to blame. I rebutted. You went off topic and stated you didn't mean what you wrote.

Sorry man, but I don't play those games.

Nor*Cal · Ladies Man Joined: 12 Jan 2003 Posts: 9479 City: Sac

Baghdad = Babylon