Stop the illegal gas price gouging now!
-
MaineExport
- Posts: 3784
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:27 pm
- Car: 95 Nissan 240SX FAL fans AEM intake Hot Shot header Apexi N1 dual Exhaust VLSD ABS NX 50 shot
Dougster wrote:Gosh, I guess the big Dif is Bush allowed 9/11 to happen in much the same way FDR alowed Pearl Harbor to happen to further his political agenda...
HAHA, why do you keep talking abou all of us having our "heads in the sand" when you are just as oblivious? Clinton let people die in Somolia, the Embassy bombings, and worse of all the bombing of the Cole. Clinton ignored terrorlst attacks for about 8 years...at least Bush is doing something, even if it is for the wrong reasons.
I think its too funny that you keep talking about fighting for our freedoms, ect...when will you realize that you CAN'T CHANGE ANYTHING!! Short of becoming a career politician you have NO SAY in the way this country is run. That is left to big businesses and the biggest business of all, our gov't. You're just another annoyingly dirty hippie.
As far as the CIA selling drugs...I'm all for it. I could care less how many junkies die at the hands of the gov't. I say pump more coke and herion into the economy, at least some people will be rich.
[quote=" subculture What I don't understand is where were all the protesters when Clinton bombed Iraq back in '98?[/quote]You don't remember the hew and cry that went up from the right wing when Clinton did that?
Quote »And how come they didn't say anything when Clinton sent troops (who are still there by the way) to Bosnia?[/quote]You've already forgotten the gnashing of conservative teeth while whimpering about "national interests" and exit strategies? Hey, it finally ended the war, right?
Quote »And how come you guys didn't want to be human sheilds when Clinton sent troops to Haiti?
[/quote]So you are the guy who wants more people to flee from Haiti to the US!
Quote »And if this upcoming war is just a oil grab? Why didn't the U.S. just take the Iraqi oil fields back in '91?[/quote]
W Sr. didn't have the mandate from the UN nor a coalition that would hang together for such a brazen act and he also totally underestimated Saddam. He figured that his own people would stage a coupe d'etat. Wrong. Now W the 1st is history and Saddam is still there. Same thing will probably happen to Dubya, too.
Quote »Is it me, or is there some hypocrisy here?[/quote]Plenty. Especially when W and Co. claim they are doing this to free the Iraqi people.
Quote »Maybe you guys should have protested when Hussein gassed the Kurds?[/quote]With the US supplied WMD starter kit.
Quote »Maybe you guys should have protested when Hussein started a 10 year war with Iran?[/quote]The Iraqis were the allies of the US back then remember. Hmmm.... :thinker so was Bin Laden come to think of it!
Quote »Or maybe you guys should have protested when Hussein first violated the ORIGINAL UN charter that he agreed to at the end of Desert Storm?[/quote]That's what the UN is for.
Quote »Ah hell, what do I know?:rolleyes [/quote]
Not much from before last week. W & Co. count on that from their constituency.
Quote »And how come they didn't say anything when Clinton sent troops (who are still there by the way) to Bosnia?[/quote]You've already forgotten the gnashing of conservative teeth while whimpering about "national interests" and exit strategies? Hey, it finally ended the war, right?
Quote »And how come you guys didn't want to be human sheilds when Clinton sent troops to Haiti?
[/quote]So you are the guy who wants more people to flee from Haiti to the US!Quote »And if this upcoming war is just a oil grab? Why didn't the U.S. just take the Iraqi oil fields back in '91?[/quote]
W Sr. didn't have the mandate from the UN nor a coalition that would hang together for such a brazen act and he also totally underestimated Saddam. He figured that his own people would stage a coupe d'etat. Wrong. Now W the 1st is history and Saddam is still there. Same thing will probably happen to Dubya, too.
Quote »Is it me, or is there some hypocrisy here?[/quote]Plenty. Especially when W and Co. claim they are doing this to free the Iraqi people.
Quote »Maybe you guys should have protested when Hussein gassed the Kurds?[/quote]With the US supplied WMD starter kit.
Quote »Maybe you guys should have protested when Hussein started a 10 year war with Iran?[/quote]The Iraqis were the allies of the US back then remember. Hmmm.... :thinker so was Bin Laden come to think of it!
Quote »Or maybe you guys should have protested when Hussein first violated the ORIGINAL UN charter that he agreed to at the end of Desert Storm?[/quote]That's what the UN is for.
Quote »Ah hell, what do I know?:rolleyes [/quote]
Not much from before last week. W & Co. count on that from their constituency.
-
subculture
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 5:50 am
- Contact:
Quote »Sub.... sweeeet NX![/quote]Thank you!
Quote » We don't see very many of them around these boards... welcome!!! Anything special under the hood?[/quote]Just the usual SR20 bolt ons. I/H/C/E/P plus JWT ECU and no p/s, no a/c.I'm working on the suspension for now. I've got GC sleeves mounted onto AGX struts, but I'll need to go with a stiffer spring rate than those that came with the GC kit.
But back to the topic at hand. Quote »You don't remember the hew and cry that went up from the right wing when Clinton did that?[/quote]Yes. Mostly from the usual pacifists.But you didn't see Susan Surandon (or however you spell her last name) making commercials against it.In fact the liberal intelligentsia was pretty much quiet.
Quote »You've already forgotten the gnashing of conservative teeth while whimpering about "national interests" and exit strategies?[/quote]No I haven't. I was talking about those who are protesting now that were mostly silent then.And yes, the conservatives did nash their teeth over that.Howerver;1. That whole Bosnia conflict was something that the UN could have taken care of, if they could have grown a back bone.2. Speking of exit strategies, US troops are STILL there! And when did Clinton say they'd be back?
Quote »So you are the guy who wants more people to flee from Haiti to the US![/quote]Okay, I'll tack that one back.:pface
Quote »W Sr. didn't have the mandate from the UN nor a coalition that would hang together for such a brazen act...[/quote]I know that. I was just trying to show Dougster the fallicy of his argument.
Quote »He figured that his own people would stage a coupe d'etat. Wrong[/quote]Actually they did,at the US urging (via the CIA), do just that. But at the last minute George Bush Sr.pulled US support and they were all slaughterd.George Bush Sr. decision was, for lack of a better word, just DUMB!
Quote »Plenty. Especially when W and Co. claim they are doing this to free the Iraqi people.[/quote]Granted that is a stretch.However the fact is, Bill Clinton did a lot and he got a pass from those on the left.
Quote »With the US supplied WMD starter kit.[/quote]No argument there.
Quote »The Iraqis were the allies of the US back then remember. so was Bin Laden come to think of it![/quote]Yes, I remember. And you should also remember the reason why he was.And yes, Bin Laden too was an "ally". And again, you should also remember the reason why.History is full of instances of former allies who later became enemies.
Quote »That's what the UN is for.[/quote]Really? The same body of do-nothings that let Saddm thumb his nose at them for 12 years?
Quote »Not much from before last week. W & Co. count on that from their constituency.[/quote]Contrary to what you might think. I'm not a conservative. I didn't even vote for George Bush.
But I do believe that Saddam must go.That's just my opinion.Agree, disagree, that's fine with me.
Quote » We don't see very many of them around these boards... welcome!!! Anything special under the hood?[/quote]Just the usual SR20 bolt ons. I/H/C/E/P plus JWT ECU and no p/s, no a/c.I'm working on the suspension for now. I've got GC sleeves mounted onto AGX struts, but I'll need to go with a stiffer spring rate than those that came with the GC kit.
But back to the topic at hand. Quote »You don't remember the hew and cry that went up from the right wing when Clinton did that?[/quote]Yes. Mostly from the usual pacifists.But you didn't see Susan Surandon (or however you spell her last name) making commercials against it.In fact the liberal intelligentsia was pretty much quiet.
Quote »You've already forgotten the gnashing of conservative teeth while whimpering about "national interests" and exit strategies?[/quote]No I haven't. I was talking about those who are protesting now that were mostly silent then.And yes, the conservatives did nash their teeth over that.Howerver;1. That whole Bosnia conflict was something that the UN could have taken care of, if they could have grown a back bone.2. Speking of exit strategies, US troops are STILL there! And when did Clinton say they'd be back?
Quote »So you are the guy who wants more people to flee from Haiti to the US![/quote]Okay, I'll tack that one back.:pface
Quote »W Sr. didn't have the mandate from the UN nor a coalition that would hang together for such a brazen act...[/quote]I know that. I was just trying to show Dougster the fallicy of his argument.
Quote »He figured that his own people would stage a coupe d'etat. Wrong[/quote]Actually they did,at the US urging (via the CIA), do just that. But at the last minute George Bush Sr.pulled US support and they were all slaughterd.George Bush Sr. decision was, for lack of a better word, just DUMB!
Quote »Plenty. Especially when W and Co. claim they are doing this to free the Iraqi people.[/quote]Granted that is a stretch.However the fact is, Bill Clinton did a lot and he got a pass from those on the left.
Quote »With the US supplied WMD starter kit.[/quote]No argument there.
Quote »The Iraqis were the allies of the US back then remember. so was Bin Laden come to think of it![/quote]Yes, I remember. And you should also remember the reason why he was.And yes, Bin Laden too was an "ally". And again, you should also remember the reason why.History is full of instances of former allies who later became enemies.
Quote »That's what the UN is for.[/quote]Really? The same body of do-nothings that let Saddm thumb his nose at them for 12 years?
Quote »Not much from before last week. W & Co. count on that from their constituency.[/quote]Contrary to what you might think. I'm not a conservative. I didn't even vote for George Bush.
But I do believe that Saddam must go.That's just my opinion.Agree, disagree, that's fine with me.
-
Movingviolation240
- Posts: 1681
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
- Car: '95 Nissan 240SX 400hp SR20DET -SOLD
'93 Lexus SC300 w/ SP66 turbo kit
Sadam gassed his people with Russian supplied hardware. Last I checked the US didn't build the Hind (as much as we wish we could have) I've got pics somwhere of a Mil Mi 24 with sprayers attached to it for spreading chem weapons that bellongs to Sadam. Maybe that would cheer you up a little bit.
Also the reasons the conservatives griped about Clinton sending troops out was the fact that he was sending them out to stand there and look good, not to fight and win a war. As much as I hate to relate it to a movie.... Blackhawk Down would not have happend if a gun carrying republican would have been running the show. We would have gone in to win, kicked their butts with everything we had, then left. Just like we did the first time in Iraq. IMHO GW Senior screwed up by not finishing the last 3 days of the war like Powell had wanted him to.
Don't expect the UN to do much, given the fact that the UN welcomes such human rights champions as China I'm suprised they would even give 2 craps about weapons inspectors in Iraq in the first place.
Paul
Also the reasons the conservatives griped about Clinton sending troops out was the fact that he was sending them out to stand there and look good, not to fight and win a war. As much as I hate to relate it to a movie.... Blackhawk Down would not have happend if a gun carrying republican would have been running the show. We would have gone in to win, kicked their butts with everything we had, then left. Just like we did the first time in Iraq. IMHO GW Senior screwed up by not finishing the last 3 days of the war like Powell had wanted him to.
Don't expect the UN to do much, given the fact that the UN welcomes such human rights champions as China I'm suprised they would even give 2 craps about weapons inspectors in Iraq in the first place.
Paul
-
subculture
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 5:50 am
- Contact:
Quote »Sadam gassed his people with Russian supplied hardware. Last I checked the US didn't build the Hind (as much as we wish we could have) I've got pics somwhere of a Mil Mi 24 with sprayers attached to it for spreading chem weapons that bellongs to Sadam.[/quote]Good point, I'd forgotten about that. In fact Most of Hussien's aresenal came from the Russians.
Quote »Blackhawk Down would not have happend if a gun carrying republican would have been running the show. We would have gone in to win, kicked their butts with everything we had, then left. Just like we did the first time in Iraq.[/quote]Another UN fiasco.Although in fairness, George Bush Sr should never had agreed to letting US troops get involved in the first place. And secondly, should not have picked sides. Example: Going after General Aidedes (Sp?).
Quote »IMHO GW Senior screwed up by not finishing the last 3 days of the war like Powell had wanted him to.[/quote]Douglas McArthur once said "There is NO substitute for victory". And the more I look at this whole Iraq mess, the more I see the logic of his words.
Quote »Blackhawk Down would not have happend if a gun carrying republican would have been running the show. We would have gone in to win, kicked their butts with everything we had, then left. Just like we did the first time in Iraq.[/quote]Another UN fiasco.Although in fairness, George Bush Sr should never had agreed to letting US troops get involved in the first place. And secondly, should not have picked sides. Example: Going after General Aidedes (Sp?).
Quote »IMHO GW Senior screwed up by not finishing the last 3 days of the war like Powell had wanted him to.[/quote]Douglas McArthur once said "There is NO substitute for victory". And the more I look at this whole Iraq mess, the more I see the logic of his words.
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54541
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
So true - There IS no substitute for victory. In conducting warfare against a country where plowshares are fashioned into swords, we have no business concerning ourselves with "collateral damage". The armed goons headed by Somali warlords were the least of our worries, as everyday citizes, whipped into a frenzy by misinformation and lies, took up arms against US forces. Shouldn't be the case in Iraq, as we saw in '91. One US soldier disarming and taking 100 Iraqis prisoner...
Still, those least likely to participate in armed conflict should be the LAST to dictate how it is managed.
A scorched-earth policy, while distasteful to some, ensures minimal losses and is far more cost-effective in the long run. Has been since the horrifying but effective devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I'm sure Algore would have done a FAR better job, if only he hadn't been robbed by the EC....:rolleyes
Still, those least likely to participate in armed conflict should be the LAST to dictate how it is managed.
A scorched-earth policy, while distasteful to some, ensures minimal losses and is far more cost-effective in the long run. Has been since the horrifying but effective devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I'm sure Algore would have done a FAR better job, if only he hadn't been robbed by the EC....:rolleyes
-
Movingviolation240
- Posts: 1681
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
- Car: '95 Nissan 240SX 400hp SR20DET -SOLD
'93 Lexus SC300 w/ SP66 turbo kit
AZhitman wrote:
I'm sure Algore would have done a FAR better job, if only he hadn't been robbed by the EC....:rolleyes
If Al Gore were president 9-11 would have never happend (since bush put that together) and we wouldn't have a drug problem in this country. We could walk up and down the streets any hour of the night and be safe. Global warming would have reversed itself, LA would have no more smog, and SUV's would be getting 50mpg. Not to mention our economy would be up, we'd all be making 2x the money, but infiation would be the lowest in years. The Beatles would be on tour (complete) and Elvis would be releasing his 'greatest hits live' album...
yea.... we need Al Gore to come save us........
-
deesolballs
- Posts: 446
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 4:57 am
It looks like the simplistic truth of dees' comment has reduced the (self-proclaimed) great Vim to "I know you are but what am I"!
For the record and since this thread was about fuel, I have just hit 320 miles on the same tank of gas (city driving) with my Max. I haven't done that since my dodge omni.
Let the bickering continue...
For the record and since this thread was about fuel, I have just hit 320 miles on the same tank of gas (city driving) with my Max. I haven't done that since my dodge omni.
Let the bickering continue...
Dougster wrote:Moving: Wrong: Their wanting to go to war to control the worlds oil supply, it won't lower the price at all. Its bound to only go up as they seek to scare you into this fake war on terror.Seek the truth & fight for freedom! Fight Bush & Cheney who are stealing our freedoms while wrecking the economy!Impeach them ASAP!History will show they are the most corrupt bunch of scum we have ever seen! (Well along with Bush crook #1 & his CIA cronnies) The people of America deserve so much better then that scum!
this really is hot air.. no regular citizen knows the details and i grow tired of people pretending like they do. DONT BELEIVE EVERYTHING YOU READ, YOU MINDLESS CHIMPS. who would you rather control the world's oil supply? lets think about this one for awhile.... a country who can restrict supply and run up price? or a country that you and i live and drive in? The economy as we citizens know it is thriving in many industries. I dont see too many layoff notices at the local sr20 importer, do you?? You cannot go around calling people names without backing it up with specific, factual evidence to support your position. you should be ashamed for your words. You sound like a child.
AZhitman wrote:If this had come from me, it'd look like sour grapes (or a cheap shot).
Coming from our own wise Mr. Thomkins, it's a gem. Well said, Bionic.
Sorry I upset some guys so much with all my considered opinions backed up by facts and historical precedent. It's upsetting to get news that is "foreign" to the established party line. Remember "Soylent Green is good for you and good for the nation." All I can say to the myopic is :bshake
-
Movingviolation240
- Posts: 1681
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
- Car: '95 Nissan 240SX 400hp SR20DET -SOLD
'93 Lexus SC300 w/ SP66 turbo kit
I thought we established that half your 'facts and historical precedent' were not quite facts or historically correct.
We did not give Iraq anything they've used in their chem weapons program.
We did not help Bin Ladden in any war, we sponsored certian Afgan rebel groups, but not specifically him. We never did have any official ties to him.
The reason the right wing complained at Clinton's attack on Iraq (at least in my opinion) was that he let him get off too easy. Sending a million dollar crusise missle to hit a few tents in the desert is just dumb. His response was typical left wing BS. A smokescrene to make it look like he really cared what was going on, when in reality he just shot off a few tomahawks so he wouldn't have to get involved with troops, but he would get plenty of coverage on CNN with none of the bad press that some dead americans on the ground would have brought. But the attack didn't accomplish much from a military prospective. (kinda like when Jimmy bombed Tokyo in '42... looks good in the papers but accomplished nothing).
Clinton sent off more troops to more places than any other president. What did he accomplish? nothing.... we sent young men off all over the world to get shot at, but didn't let them defend themselvs. At least Bush is sending them in to kick a$$ and take names, just like his Dad did.
War is never a popular thing, but if you have to do it you should go in swinging and not stop till the job is done (unlike his dad 10 years ago). This 'let's go in and stand around to look good but not accomplish anything' policy of the last 8 years has gotten us nowhere. I think one or two well laid out spec ops 5 years ago could have put all this to bed a long time ago. 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure' maybe that should read 'a S.O.G. team is worth a megaton of H.E.'
Paul
We did not give Iraq anything they've used in their chem weapons program.
We did not help Bin Ladden in any war, we sponsored certian Afgan rebel groups, but not specifically him. We never did have any official ties to him.
The reason the right wing complained at Clinton's attack on Iraq (at least in my opinion) was that he let him get off too easy. Sending a million dollar crusise missle to hit a few tents in the desert is just dumb. His response was typical left wing BS. A smokescrene to make it look like he really cared what was going on, when in reality he just shot off a few tomahawks so he wouldn't have to get involved with troops, but he would get plenty of coverage on CNN with none of the bad press that some dead americans on the ground would have brought. But the attack didn't accomplish much from a military prospective. (kinda like when Jimmy bombed Tokyo in '42... looks good in the papers but accomplished nothing).
Clinton sent off more troops to more places than any other president. What did he accomplish? nothing.... we sent young men off all over the world to get shot at, but didn't let them defend themselvs. At least Bush is sending them in to kick a$$ and take names, just like his Dad did.
War is never a popular thing, but if you have to do it you should go in swinging and not stop till the job is done (unlike his dad 10 years ago). This 'let's go in and stand around to look good but not accomplish anything' policy of the last 8 years has gotten us nowhere. I think one or two well laid out spec ops 5 years ago could have put all this to bed a long time ago. 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure' maybe that should read 'a S.O.G. team is worth a megaton of H.E.'
Paul
-
Movingviolation240
- Posts: 1681
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
- Car: '95 Nissan 240SX 400hp SR20DET -SOLD
'93 Lexus SC300 w/ SP66 turbo kit
Did anyone see the Dan Rather's interview?Hussein is one charismatic guy...he even interrupted his interpreter so he didn't say "Bush" instead of "Mr. Bush", that cracked me up.
The only thing I'd like to believe from that interview is that he won't blow the damns, or light his oil fields on fire. Which I don't think he'll do.
He's also got a LOT of balls, wanted to have a debate via satelite with Bush... Why did the US say no? Because Bush is an idiot, if he didn't have a prepared answer to a question, he'd look foolish, and Hussein is obviously one smart guy.
The only thing I'd like to believe from that interview is that he won't blow the damns, or light his oil fields on fire. Which I don't think he'll do.
He's also got a LOT of balls, wanted to have a debate via satelite with Bush... Why did the US say no? Because Bush is an idiot, if he didn't have a prepared answer to a question, he'd look foolish, and Hussein is obviously one smart guy.
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54541
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
VimyJ wrote:Sorry I upset some guys so much with all my considered opinions backed up by facts and historical precedent. It's upsetting to get news that is "foreign" to the established party line.
Once again, gentlemen, we're the idiots here. Vimy's opinions are based on facts, ours are just recycled propaganda.
I've had enough of your pompous proselytizing. At first you were interesting and informative - Now you're just irritating.
Moon me again and you'll see hw far your freedom of speech really extends.
-
MaineExport
- Posts: 3784
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:27 pm
- Car: 95 Nissan 240SX FAL fans AEM intake Hot Shot header Apexi N1 dual Exhaust VLSD ABS NX 50 shot
[quote=" Movingviolation240 We did not give Iraq anything they've used in their chem weapons program.[/quote]It is a known fact that when Iraq was having problems dealing with Iranian "Human Wave Attacks" that the Reagan administration set Iraq up with a nice little starter kit for creating chemical weapons.
Quote »We did not help Bin Ladden in any war, we sponsored certian Afgan rebel groups, but not specifically him. We never did have any official ties to him.[/quote]Bin Laden was a leader of the Muja Haddine (sp?) during the Soviet occupation of Afhanistan. Fact. The Reagan administration supported these guerilla groups with weapons and money.
Quote »Clinton sent off more troops to more places than any other president. What did he accomplish? nothing.... we sent young men off all over the world to get shot at, but didn't let them defend themselvs. At least Bush is sending them in to kick a$$ and take names, just like his Dad did.[/quote]
Kosovo is an example of a successful aplication of military force that ended Milosovic's reign of terror. How I remember the screaming of the rigt wing over that one. Conservatives also screamed about involvement in Somolia and that was why US troops were sent in "low profile".
Things are never black and white. They are always differing shades of gray.
Quote »We did not help Bin Ladden in any war, we sponsored certian Afgan rebel groups, but not specifically him. We never did have any official ties to him.[/quote]Bin Laden was a leader of the Muja Haddine (sp?) during the Soviet occupation of Afhanistan. Fact. The Reagan administration supported these guerilla groups with weapons and money.
Quote »Clinton sent off more troops to more places than any other president. What did he accomplish? nothing.... we sent young men off all over the world to get shot at, but didn't let them defend themselvs. At least Bush is sending them in to kick a$$ and take names, just like his Dad did.[/quote]
Kosovo is an example of a successful aplication of military force that ended Milosovic's reign of terror. How I remember the screaming of the rigt wing over that one. Conservatives also screamed about involvement in Somolia and that was why US troops were sent in "low profile".
Things are never black and white. They are always differing shades of gray.
APEXi240 wrote:He's also got a LOT of balls, wanted to have a debate via satelite with Bush... Why did the US say no? Because Bush is an idiot, if he didn't have a prepared answer to a question, he'd look foolish, and Hussein is obviously one smart guy.
Sadly, I concur. Saddam would mop the floor with W in a debate. The campaign showed that he doesn't think to well on his feet.
-
deesolballs
- Posts: 446
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 4:57 am
-
subculture
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 5:50 am
- Contact:
Quote »Did anyone see the Dan Rather's interview?Hussein is one charismatic guy...[/quote]Hittler, Stalin, Musolini (sp?), Idi Amin, they were "charasmatic" too.
Quote »The only thing I'd like to believe from that interview is that he won't blow the damns, or light his oil fields on fire. Which I don't think he'll do.[/quote]I'd like to believe that. But he's already done that before. Remember the Kuwaiti oil fields were set on fire by retreating Iraqi troops. Hmm, no one from Greenpeace protested that one.
Quote »He's also got a LOT of balls, wanted to have a debate via satelite with Bush... Why did the US say no? Because Bush is an idiot,[/quote]More like he sees the debate challenge for what it is. Posturing on Saddam's part.Saddam's playing the US media. And doing a good job of it too.
Quote »It is a known fact that when Iraq was having problems dealing with Iranian "Human Wave Attacks" that the Reagan administration set Iraq up with a nice little starter kit for creating chemical weapons.[/quote]Yes, he did. And the Soviets gave their eastern bloc satellite states chemical and nuclear weapons.There were a LOT of "starter kits" giving out at the time, by BOTH sides.
Quote »Bin Laden was a leader of the Muja Haddine (sp?) during the Soviet occupation of Afhanistan. Fact.[/quote]That's right. "A" leader. Not "THE" leader. And no one could have predicted that he'd turn on us.But like I said before, history is full of allies becoming enemies. And vice versa.
Quote »Kosovo is an example of a successful aplication of military force that ended Milosovic's reign of terror.[/quote]Keep in mind that was a NATO operation.
Quote »Conservatives also screamed about involvement in Somolia and that was why US troops were sent in "low profile".[/quote]Another UN success.
Quote »Things are never black and white. They are always differing shades of gray.[/quote]On that much we can agree.
Quote »The only thing I'd like to believe from that interview is that he won't blow the damns, or light his oil fields on fire. Which I don't think he'll do.[/quote]I'd like to believe that. But he's already done that before. Remember the Kuwaiti oil fields were set on fire by retreating Iraqi troops. Hmm, no one from Greenpeace protested that one.
Quote »He's also got a LOT of balls, wanted to have a debate via satelite with Bush... Why did the US say no? Because Bush is an idiot,[/quote]More like he sees the debate challenge for what it is. Posturing on Saddam's part.Saddam's playing the US media. And doing a good job of it too.
Quote »It is a known fact that when Iraq was having problems dealing with Iranian "Human Wave Attacks" that the Reagan administration set Iraq up with a nice little starter kit for creating chemical weapons.[/quote]Yes, he did. And the Soviets gave their eastern bloc satellite states chemical and nuclear weapons.There were a LOT of "starter kits" giving out at the time, by BOTH sides.
Quote »Bin Laden was a leader of the Muja Haddine (sp?) during the Soviet occupation of Afhanistan. Fact.[/quote]That's right. "A" leader. Not "THE" leader. And no one could have predicted that he'd turn on us.But like I said before, history is full of allies becoming enemies. And vice versa.
Quote »Kosovo is an example of a successful aplication of military force that ended Milosovic's reign of terror.[/quote]Keep in mind that was a NATO operation.
Quote »Conservatives also screamed about involvement in Somolia and that was why US troops were sent in "low profile".[/quote]Another UN success.
Quote »Things are never black and white. They are always differing shades of gray.[/quote]On that much we can agree.
[quote=" AZhitman Once again, gentlemen, we're the idiots here. Vimy's opinions are based on facts, ours are just recycled propaganda.[/quote]The word "idiot" is yours not mine. I also included the word "some" and did not say "all".
Quote »I've had enough of your pompous proselytizing. At first you were interesting and informative - Now you're just irritating.[/quote]Have I complained of your pompous proselytizing on this and other threads? No. It is your right in a free society to say what you wish. Wrong or right. Quote »Moon me again and you'll see hw far your freedom of speech really extends.[/quote]That sounds like a threat. Surely, you wouldn't be threatening a member would you? No, that wouldn't be smart.
You live in a democracy so I would have thought you were used to opposing and contrary views. See how tough it would be to set up such a system in Iraq? It's difficult enough for members of a democracy to keep their emotions in check even with a long tradition of that form of government. You wouldn't want to fall in step with a long line of despots, tyrants and dictators who have used their power, Mr. Moderator, to silence the opposition. We in the free world don't approve of that sort of activity. It's unAmerican.
Quote »I've had enough of your pompous proselytizing. At first you were interesting and informative - Now you're just irritating.[/quote]Have I complained of your pompous proselytizing on this and other threads? No. It is your right in a free society to say what you wish. Wrong or right. Quote »Moon me again and you'll see hw far your freedom of speech really extends.[/quote]That sounds like a threat. Surely, you wouldn't be threatening a member would you? No, that wouldn't be smart.
You live in a democracy so I would have thought you were used to opposing and contrary views. See how tough it would be to set up such a system in Iraq? It's difficult enough for members of a democracy to keep their emotions in check even with a long tradition of that form of government. You wouldn't want to fall in step with a long line of despots, tyrants and dictators who have used their power, Mr. Moderator, to silence the opposition. We in the free world don't approve of that sort of activity. It's unAmerican.
-
deesolballs
- Posts: 446
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 4:57 am
VimyJ wrote: We in the free world don't approve of that sort of activity. It's unAmerican.
Oh boy, I deleted the rest of that refuse so I could focus on the above. Vim, you sound like Michael Jackson. He has done all within his power to become a white woman and when he feels he is getting slapped around by Sony he calls upon Al Sharpton and cries to the black community about racism.
You have been b.itching about the US and its practices, dumb leaders, ignorant citizens and soiled history for weeks now. Keep in mind that you came here (USA) on your on free will so canuckville must leave something to be desired. You have said nothing good about the US or its people but when you feel like you have been wronged you scream "WE"?! Who the hell is "WE"?!:thumbd You define un-American Vim. You may commence to quote and dissect, inserting your contrary nonsensical diatribes.
Quote » posted by deesnuts "] DimyJ is un-American! [/quote]
DimyJ's reply "] I know you are but what am I!