[Delerak]

#### your post is so long I don't know where to start, I guess at the beginning.

Originally Posted by Obviously you dont understand my statement....if we're loosing our freedoms then why do we still have the right to speak freely, etc? The only real freedoms that are getting taken away are either by liberals (@nd Amendment and First Amendment via Political Correctness and banning books because it might be offensive) or because of liberal backed organizations. E.L.F. ring a bell? Weather Underground? Also consider that the liberal politicians, mostly in nCalifornia and Arizona are committing felonies and getting away with it..but i wont get into legal issues now..

I don't think we have the right to speak freely anymore. Say something to a lot of people with an influential voice that the government doesn't like, and see what happens.

Originally Posted by Ahh..yes..schools where history is re-written to appease some minority that has a non-profit organization with loads of cash backing it....school systems where liberal run/influenced colleges let in people with NO SAT scores that even come close to the required to enter but turn away those who busted butt, got thaty 4.0 GPA and skimped and saved for the tutition only to get turned down because for reasons I wont even discuss here out of respect for Snoozer and the intelligent regs.

No one can know if history is re-written, you read what you can and either believe it or don't. Now what minority exactly are you talking about? A minority is only a minority if they are in a certain area where their are very few like him/her. I was a minority at my high school, which was 70% black, and 30% asian, I'm white. I don't get what you are trying to say though.

Originally Posted by b. smaller military budget = less intelligence gathering = 9/11. A better example...when Pakistan detonated their first nuke, the CIA didnt know..of course this was while Wild Bill was showing Monica his new cigar and 'the executive branch'

Not if Bush did know about 9/11, or had information on it beforehand. No way you or I can know this, but it is a possibility. Maybe he wanted it to happen, so he can have a reason for war, you must remember, politicans are rich, and rich people love war, it makes them richer, and makes the common man poorer because he has to bleed on the battlefield.

Originally Posted by Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden and the rest of the middle east terrorists/terrorist backers can care less of you support them..you're still an infidel, you still arent an arabic muslim or Islamic extreemist..therefore you must die..just like the rest of us 100+ million americans.

How do you know that? No one knows what goes through the mind of another human being. Saddam Hussein didn't start the war, and there is still no nukes found in Iraq, which was the whole point of starting the war if I remember what I saw on the news, which can't be trusted anyway. Saddam Hussein also challanged Bush to a live debate on television, Bush was afraid. Of what? A bombing? Wonderful, america's leader isn't just an idiot he is also a coward. I think we all knew that though, or else he would be in Iraq fighting. The only thing you or anyone else knows about those two men are what you've seen and heard on television, so don't judge them. All I've got to say to that.

[CSmith_Fan]

were to begin myself......

ok if Saddam didnt want Americans dead, then why did he not only call us 'Dogs of satan" and "The Great Satan" AND call for jihad on us on Iraqi TV? BTW..this was after he invaded Kuwait...Also how any terrorist groups PRIOR to 9/11 have said "Death to America"? Umm..gee...lets see..Hamaas, the PLO, ****te Extremists...anyone else want to add some more terrorists networks?

Ok, if there is  lost free speach then why is there an internet? Why is there protests? Free speach means that..free. Non-free speach (which is what anti-US government home growns susch as yourself) refere to can be shown in the Stalinist era of Russia. Say "the government sucks" and hello gulag. Dont see that here. If we did then there wouldnt be two political parties. Guess my statement was right..people do take freedom for granted. Go to some dictatorship that isnt some so-called 'US puppet regiem" and see how quickly you loose things you take for granted here every day. Now if I'm reading your reply right :

Originally Posted by I don't think we have the right to speak freely anymore.  Say something to a lot of people with an influential voice that the government doesn't like, and see what happens.

I know you're not talking about the radical anarchist types because if so..the the moment they toss one molitiov, they loose the Right to Peacefully Assemble and Protest. If you mean people who illegally tresspass onto private property, then they break the law by tresspassing. If they tell some cop they dont recognize the laws of 'your facist government', then I firmly believe they should loose all rights because 99% of our laws are based on the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If you dont believe in American laws then you dont believe in Miranda Rights,  you allow police brutality, etc..you loose all rights. Simple as that.


As for the minorties-schools bit..I'll tackle each at the same time, First...where's Irish/Chinese/Hispanic/German/Native American Appreciation month or even week in schools? There isnt. Also..since when does a lazy person with a 1.2 GPA who cant even write a single essay (no..not you) have more right to get into a college than someone who busted tail, got a 4.0 GPA, volunteered for various social services and still cant get into college because of race? No not me..but some colleges do that here in the good old US....and it's not right. History gets rewritten and changed to appease the populace by virtue of PC-ness. From history about Native Americans and Early settlers (still think Thanksgiving was like we've all been told? try the pilgrims nearly died and one person resorted to cannibalism. The indians felt pity for them and gave them just enough to survive..not the Hallmark Moment PC crap we've been fed for years)


Bush and 9/11 - Who cars of Bush knew? If Clinton knew, why didnt HE do something about it? Oh yea..he did..he cut military spending, and ignored the problem. Like that worked for the whole Castro/Cuba problem. Funny..even Ari Flichser (sp) said  to "give it a rest" about WMDs..if you thinks that's the only reason why we went there think again. Iraq backed terrorists, causeed inhuman suffering that the US has yet to equal (unless you consider Nagaski and Hiroshima).or were the mass graves, the videos of people getting beaten in prison because they spoke against the government (which btw...this country doesnt do to it's citizens. In fact prisoners have it better than most middle class, 'bust ass for a living' citizens..gyms, cable tv, internet, 3 hots and a cot, free education even at college level...) and the fact Saddam used nerve agents on bedouins not really there?

Originally Posted by and makes the common man poorer because he has to bleed on the battlefield.

Yes..the same man (or woman) who swore an oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution of the UInited States, against all enemies, foriegn and domestic..to die for the freedoms you take for granted each day and complain you dont have (because so many people are blind...as in 'anyone who complains they have no freedoms in this country&#39

Show me, REAL proof that we've become a regiem like Stalin or Hitler had and I'll concede....which you cant do.

( I edited some typoes..sorry...it's almost 1:30am here.)

[CSmith_Fan]

Oh yea..almost forgot....


1. Sorry my initial post is long..i get caught up sometimes.

2. If anyone is thinking of doing some 2nd Grade "You suck because I'm KeWlLer than Ya!" type of post (or the kind where 98% is nothing but ####'s, then dont reply..this is not a childish argument but a debate...the Kid's Flmes Section is over by Shao Long.

[Delerak]

I'll get back into this tomorrow morning, I need sleep first. And I never said we're a dictatorship, where did that come from? Anyways, until tomorrow...

-Delerak

[Lanthum]

Originally Posted by (Delerak @ Sep. 13 2003,01<!--emo&[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img])]I'll get back into this tomorrow morning, I need sleep first.

Yes, and when you respond, please make sure to respond to what I wrote more than refering to a typo I made (calling Europe a country instead of a continent - right after refering to all the countries in Europe).

I would really like to hear how you think comparing all European and American involvement in wars in the last 300 years makes sense, when most of the European countries have been around far longer than the USA.  Not that comparing makes sense at all - but if you are going to try to prove your stance of "Big Bad Ole USA" by way of comparison, then please at least compare each countries war involvement when they were "baby" countries like the US is.

IE:  How many wars was the Czech Rep, Russia, Germany, France, Yugoslavia, or England involved in during their first 300 years, and for what reasons?  I think you will find our reasons seem a little less barbaric.

After all ...  this shouldn't come down to a comparison of countries - but should be more based on an examination of why the US got into confrontations and if the country has largely achieved it's stated goals for those confrontations.  Because, like it or not - if the US is making the world a safer place overall one small war at a time, then it is accomplishing some of what it set out to do even if you don't agree with it.  Even if there are other hidden agendas as well!

[Delerak]

Simple fact is Lanthum, you can't compare the wars of those countries in their beginning, it was a differnt time, a different Age, and a completely different situation then the present, and just because those countries are older means nothing, America needs to take responsible for it's wars. And it doesn't seem to want to, or the Presidents don't want to, they cover it up with words like equality and the war on terror. Bull**** I say, I don't think their has been a truly noble cause in a war for centuries. With the exception of the Revolutionary War, and possibly the Civil, but the Civil War was decided before it began, the North was destined to win. Either way, if you are going to tell me I can't compare America to the other countries in Europe, then give me a good reason why, not some stupid age theory that has no backbone.

-Delerak

[Lanthum]

Originally Posted by (Delerak @ Sep. 13 2003,14:56) Simple fact is Lanthum, you can't compare the wars of those countries in their beginning, it was a differnt time, a different Age, and a completely different situation then the present, and just because those countries are older means nothing, America needs to take responsible for it's wars.  And it doesn't seem to want to, or the Presidents don't want to, they cover it up with words like equality and the war on terror.  Bull**** I say, I don't think their has been a truly noble cause in a war for centuries.  With the exception of the Revolutionary War, and possibly the Civil, but the Civil War was decided before it began, the North was destined to win.  Either way, if you are going to tell me I can't compare America to the other countries in Europe, then give me a good reason why, not some stupid age theory that has no backbone. -Delerak

Delerak, please don't sit there and try to tell me what is stupid and ridiculous.  Listening to you change the basis for your agrument is weak and has no backbone to me ...

Your entire argument is based on comparison.  I will assume that your education has included Math, Writing and Science, all of which tells us that to compare two or more things, they have to share some common quality or otherwise your argument is mute.  Some factor has to be the same, time frame for the country (IE "age" of the country), reasons for the wars, people, or conditions, or you can't compare these two countries (groups of countries).

Obviously the people aren't the same, the conditions aren't the same (some wars some countries were involved in, others weren't), reasons weren't the same, etc. etc.  So what I was trying do (and you failed to understand) was somehow put this ridiculous comparison on equal grounds so it could make sense!  As I said before, I have no idea why you would want to continue proving your BIG BAD OLE USA theory by comparison.  But if you must - then at least choose something to compare!

As for a weak argument, to me, comparing on the basis of "Age" of the country makes the most sense.  When a country is new, it will almost always be involved in more wars as it tries to assert itself and make a name for itself.  If you don't think so - why don't you compare the Eurpean countries, Russia, China, Africa, and the USA during their infancy as countries.  You'll see what I mean.  Oh wait, that's right - you're majoring in history and you already know this!

And that's why you don't want to compare it like that.  Because as such - you have already lost the debate about The BIG BAD Ole USA vs. All That is Good = Europe"  I wonder, is it England you think so wonderful?  Might explain a few things ....

[Delerak]

Your just a flaming idiot now. I never said what you are claiming I did. My whole arguement is based on America's involvement in stupid wars, compared to Europe's countries since the founding of America. Where did I say that this.

Originally Posted by And that's why you don't want to compare it like that. Because as such - you have already lost the debate about The BIG BAD Ole USA vs. All That is Good = Europe" I wonder, is it England you think so wonderful? Might explain a few things ....

No where. How can comparing America, circa 1776 via the declaration of independance to lets say, to make you happy, these three countries in Europe: Germany, France, and Spain. Any of these, which have been around as countries for over a millenia.



Tacitus, an important Roman historian, wrote the most detailed early description of the Germans at then end of the first century CE.. In doing so, be warned, he was commenting on the Rome of his own time, as much as on the German themselves.

Note that although this is most of Tacitus' text, some of the later sections are not in this text.

read more from:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/tacitus1.html

That is from Tacitus, estimated 1 CE (common era).

Peter Abelard

Dialectician, philosopher, and theologian, born 1079; died 1142. Peter Abelard (also spelled Abeillard, Abailard, etc., while the best manuscripts have Abaelardus) was born in the little village of Pallet, about ten miles east of Nantes in Brittany. His father, Berengar, was lord of the village, his mother's name was Lucia; both afterwards entered the monastic state.

read more from: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01036b.htm

Peter Abelard, a French philospher from a thousand years ago.

and now Spain.

THE Visigothic Code, originally in Latin, includes the laws of a number of Catholic kings who ruled Spain from 586 to 71 1. Reccared (586-601), the first Visigothic King to become a Catholic, was also the first king to pursue an active anti-Jewish policy. Some of his successors in the seventh century went farther and allowed the Jews only the alternatives of baptism or exile. Many Jews thus became unwilling converts and secretly practiced Judaism. These were the "Judaizing Christians." In order to stamp out this secret Judaism some kings resorted to most drastic punishments. These actions were prompted both by religious bigotry and the desire for a standardized Catholicism of all citizens. In addition the prospect of gain through confiscation of Jewish property probably lured some of them. Fortunately for the Jews this legislation was not always carried into effect, for the royal authority met with opposition in many parts of Spain.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewis...sigothic1.html

What do those tidbits of history have to do with it? Everything, trying to compare the war-history of germany, france, or spain to america when THEY were founded is nearly impossible, and not nearly as logical because they were completely different in that time period those many ages ago, when America was founded France, Spain and Germany were all in the same period, they are far more comparable in the 18th, 19th and 20th century because of better history records; we know a lot more nowadays about the middle-ages and maybe that is a comparable source, but Lanthum you think comparing America in it's 3 centuries of war to Germany, Frances, or Spains, estimated 3 HUNDRED centuries of war? Moronic!

-Delerak

[CSmith_Fan]

Well first off...if we're going to get nitpicky then I have to amned myself as I ask not to include the Korean War because the US didnt go as The US but as part of the UN. Yes we were involved, yes, we consider it one of our nation's 'wars' but it was a UN Police Action per the United Nations.

Next up..CE? Common Era? By what timeline are you refering to? AD or BC is the standard timeframe references. Must be some of that so called 'liberalized education' but anyhoo..going back to part of our discussion Delerak, know all this 'loosing your freedoms?" Well, the Partiot Act is that..an act..not a law. It still had to be voted on by congress and approved by the supreme court to be enacted against citizens. They didnt, and the Dems have the majority. In fact, many of the modern laws and lawsuits are being backed or created by liberals here in the US. From RIAA lawsuits of 12yr old kids (but still not ONE lawsuit against some 30yr old guy in BFE USA who copied 1000s of casset tapes from his dual cassett deck which btw..predates file swapping but falls under that 'copyright violations' umbrella) I think your roman example, Tacitus gave the perfect comment for this situation...The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. [
Tacitus (A.D. 55?-130?)

People whining that the captured Al-quedda prisoners were not given fair trials in a civilian court are brain dead. A week after 9/11 Congress gave it's approval for a war on terrorism, ergo a terrorist now falls under POW status and does not need a civilian court. Of course, there is a Catch-22..the Geneva Conventions do not recognize terrorists as soliders. Still...terrorists always strike a first blow and could care less if you are military form Country A or B because if you follow thier ideals, you're a martyr, if you dont you are a threat anyways and must be eliminated. This is the mindset of a terrorist.

Now mind you..yes I bash the liberals in most of my posts. Probably because they try to cover their screwups and make themselves look the victim, but the COnsertives have also screwed up alot. Just sided with Bush because simply I'm just irritated at all the finger pointing and no one taking responsibility for their own actions (like giving illegal aliens welfare, medicade, food stamps, driver's licences, etc..which amounts to several fraud, and felony charges yet not one senator or congressman or governor has been arrested by the US Marshals. Why? Easy...3 words..'special interest groups&#39

Also, in a prior post, I just used Hitler and Stalin as modern examples of people who's governments had very little if no freedoms for it's populace..and since you said we had no freedom....

[Delerak]

I never said America had no freedom. Freedom can be defined in many ways. The Freedom we do have I am grateful for. You can do whatever you want in the career industry here in America, it's great. But you can also get tired with the bull**** in America. Sometimes people don't need freedom, most people are happy with having food, clothing, shelter and a passtime. I am. And some aren't. That's why America is the way it is, too many greedy people, especially our leaders (politicians).

-Delerak

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Next up..CE? Common Era? By what timeline are you refering to? AD or BC is the standard timeframe references. Must be some of that so called 'liberalized education'

Uh, it's a substitute for AD, duh.

-Delerak

[CSmith_Fan]

You did state we are loosing our freedoms, and a few times you've stated in one way or another that the newer version of America (not the mid-20th century version unless you agree with the Birch-Putch plan of..erm..I believe 1973 +/- a few years.) that wants to spread freedom is stupid (which pro-equal rights anti government types call a New World Order when in fact having no countries but instead say, regions under a unified governemt where every person of every region was equal, would also decrease the seperatism the liberal left imposes on us)
As for

Originally Posted by and makes the common man poorer because he has to bleed on the battlefield.

I made a point about that and freedom. To slap an addition to that, I beleive Thomas Jefferson once said

Originally Posted by The tree of freedom must occasionally be watered by the blood of patriots

Death happens in war but who is at more of a loss..the dirt poor man who dies for freedom or the anti-american who abuses their freedoms while protesting about the man that died so they could protest? I agree..some people dont need freedom. I wish marshal law would be instated for a brief time..say a week. Let people feel and expierence what a life with no freedom is like. A life where the government is run like they say it's allegedly run already.

[CSmith_Fan]

Originally Posted by (Delerak @ Sep. 13 2003,20:50) Originally Posted by Next up..CE? Common Era? By what timeline are you refering to? AD or BC is the standard timeframe references. Must be some of that so called 'liberalized education' Uh, it's a substitute for AD, duh. -Delerak

What'd they do? Sneak that into the Metric System conspiracy or something?

Ok..gotta toss some humor before getting back to debating...

[Delerak]

Hehe, well as far as I know CE is just a substitute for AD for the people who don't believe in Jesus. Who is historically recognized hence the BC, AD usage in history. I'm tired of debating, so I'm going to take a break, and go use my freedom of gaming and play xbox.

[Lanthum]

1-->

Originally Posted by (Delerak @ Sep. 13 2003,18[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]1)]Your just a flaming idiot now.  I never said what you are claiming I did.  My whole arguement is based on America's involvement in stupid wars, compared to Europe's countries since the founding of America.  Where did I say that this. Originally Posted by And that's why you don't want to compare it like that.  Because as such - you have already lost the debate about The BIG BAD Ole USA vs. All That is Good = Europe"  I wonder, is it England you think so wonderful?  Might explain a few things ....

You're the flaming idiot Delerak.  You say "Where did I say this" right after saying it.

You started your crusade against the US in this post by comparing histories to prove that the US is somehow evil or bad in it's military exploits.  And the histories you were originally using were that of the countries in Europe.  As for the rest, it is plainly some humor poking at you and England.

If you can't figure this out, don't debate.  And if you can't remember what you are argueing or what you have said in the debate, it proves who is "moronic" and an "idiot".  If you think I am wrong, go back and reread what you have posted so far, and reread what I have said.

This thread is so far off topic, it's really kinda funny.  I was merely trying to suggest that you prove your point (of which seemed like you were saying that  The US is horrible) without using comparison.  It seems ridiculous to me to compare many countries histories, so since that is what you insist on doing - kudos.

[Tavish]

Originally Posted by Delerak: How can comparing America, circa 1776 via the declaration of independance to lets say, to make you happy, these three countries in Europe: Germany, France, and Spain. Any of these, which have been around as countries for over a millenia.

The comparison would still be the same if you started from America's inception. France, Spain, Russia, Germany and Britain were not exactly isolationist saints. Now if you want to say that the US is overly hostile compared to Belgium then be my guest, the price all these countires pay for being a major world power is being drawn into (or creating) war.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by (Lanthum @ Sep. 14 2003,00:56) You're the flaming idiot Delerak. You say "Where did I say this" right after saying it. You started your crusade against the US in this post by comparing histories to prove that the US is somehow evil or bad in it's military exploits. And the histories you were originally using were that of the countries in Europe. As for the rest, it is plainly some humor poking at you and England.

I never said it. I started in the thread againsttccpa, by saying I don't like America for all the blood it has spilt in the name of freedom and other words. Then I went from there, comparing it to countries in Europe, ALL the countries in europe. No where did I say america is the worst country ever and europe is gods land of holy men and all things great. Europe has it's share of tainted and nasty history; salem witch trials, joan of arc, englands opression in scotland and ireland, and many more, but never once did I say I was talking about those things, I am talking war. And America's war history is daunting, if you don't think so then YOU should go back and read what you wrote to me, all I was doing was comparing america's wars to european countries, giving chances to anyone to reply and prove me wrong. The fact that I was comparing one country to an entire continent was going to be difficult because I didn't lay down any rules, but I still believe america has destroyed more in wars than many of the european countries. Save the world wars, which I never wanted to count since america and germany and a myriad of countries did a lot of killing there.

-Delerak

[CSmith_Fan]

Originally Posted by (Lanthum @ Sep. 14 2003,00:56) Originally Posted by This thread is so far off topic, it's really kinda funny.

I figured that the topic would stray off from the topic of the other thread (some corp trying to snoop inside people's computers who would get ****ed and crash the corp's systems for even trying) and moved it here.



I would post some more, but i just got home from work and have yet to shower, eat dinner and see The Core that I just rented.
Sorry guys..Hillary Swank is a tad more fun to watch. Besides, I'll probably post tomorrow AM before work.

[Delerak]

Yes she is. If you havn't seen Insomnia get that next, it's not a sci-fi like the core, but it's got al pacino and robin williams as well.

[CSmith_Fan]

Yes American has had some wars BUT..stupid? Please..the first one was the Revolutionary War which began our 'birth' as a nation. Blood was spilt because all other options failed....much like the options that modern democrats wish could be used. Britan wouldnt give us up so easily. Tea, crumpets and a peace treaty wouldn't have solved it. They tried that already. Britan was a monarchy (note : today it's more like a Democratic Monarchy..the Queen is just a figurehead where as Parliment is the real ruling power) still and of course, no one goes against the royal family in a monarchy. India..land of Ghandi and peaceful resolution had to go through a war to gain their independance.

All countries have to go through war to become a country, and at times, go into war to maintain their status as a country for whatever reason.It's part of the 'birthing process'. Now since we've all decided to compare America and Europe for whatever reaasons, consider this...America, in all it's wars, has only asked for land to bury it's dead in. No global conquest. Talk of puppet regiems? Look at the Middle East. There's so much corruption and not by American hands. (OPEC ring a bell? Hey! Let's gang up on non-arabs and **** them off because we own the oil! Also, you know the UK in it's 'glorious history' as the kingdom where the sun never sets has made a few governmental changes..all in the name of Civilized Society because her majesty's people are civilized peoples among heathens (at least that was the mentality in the Victorian Era).

Another Euro/American comparison. Ok, Europe is thousands of years old. Most of europe went through a generalized process of social evolution to reach their (so called) pinnicle at this time. From fuedalism to fundementalist expansionism to fascism/socialism to whatever they are at today. Now, how can anyone expect America to become like say Belgium or Lichtenstein (or whatever) in a little over 200 years when it took them 2000 years (and some of those countries arent even done yet)?

War stupid? At times yes, but also at times necessary. The lastest "war" was it? Depends...we had the chance to overthrow a psychopath of a leader back inn the first Gulf War. In fact we were 25 miles from Bagdahd, until Clinton told us to pull back and he'd handle it. Right..talk and embargos really break a leadership. Right....look at Cuba. Castro is still in power and all his comrades are still happy that they are one of what? 3 almost pure socialist (leaning towards communist) nations left? Negotiations dont always work, a 'peace treaty' is just paper. Look at Isreal and Palastien (sp..sorry). First a Cease Fire..then and Hamass car bomb, then Isreali tanks blow crap up, then whining from bleeding hearts and then postering by Hawks, then a Cease Fire. War has been going on for thousands of years in thart region. It's what those countries only know and understand. Sometimes you have to spill blood so that others can at least taste some freedom. Afghanistan? Things could go quicker there if America wasnt the only country there trying to do something about it. Same for Iraq and trying to gets it's government up. ####, people here complain that it should already be up, but we, as in America didnt have our government fully running until when? 1795? That isnt overnight like these so called 'political experts in the name of peace' (read : liberals) think it should and could be.

Anyhoo..coffee is done brewing and I need a cup.

[malaclypse]

Originally Posted by Same for Iraq and trying to gets it's government up. ####, people here complain that it should already be up, but we, as in America didnt have our government fully running until when? 1795? That isnt overnight like these so called 'political experts in the name of peace' (read : liberals) think it should and could be.

I just think its pathetic and sad that the US goes in and destroys Iraq without any idea of what to do afterwards, at the protest of the rest of the world. Then they have the nerve to demand that other countries come in and help pick up the bill? The bill to pay Halliburton and other US multi-nationals with close ties to the Bush administration who just -coincidentally- got no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq. Its just ludicrous. First the Bush companies siphon off our tax dollars into this scandal of a war and into their coffers, but now they want the rest of the worlds tax dollars?

As far as the government not being set up, thats because the Bush administration foolishly convinced themselves that the Iraqi people would welcome our occupying force with flowers and open arms. Either they didn't plan on what happened after the war, or they decided not to tell us the true costs of this war. Either they're incompetent or liars. It wasn't your liberal boogeymen who said a government would be replaced in no time, that was the Bush administration.

And regarding your ignorant comments about Israel and Palestine, I encourage you to do some reading on their history before you spout off some more nonsense.

- Ryan

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Either they're incompetent or liars. It wasn't your liberal boogeymen who said a government would be replaced in no time, that was the Bush administration.

Actually, they are both incompetent and liars.

[CSmith_Fan]

Malaclypse,

Where to begin with that pathetic excuse for a reply? Shoot Delerak gave at least plausable posts that required some thinking. Your reply was just an accident waiting to happen..ok, here we go...

Originally Posted by As far as the government not being set up, thats because the Bush administration foolishly convinced themselves that the Iraqi people would welcome our occupying force with flowers and open arms.

Welcome them? Well..seems a majority of the country has welcomed them and the idea of FREEDOM over a regime that beats their citizens and goes by archaic laws. Today, in the paper, a guy was beheaded in Saudi Arabia for drug smuggling. Gee..here in the facist regiem knows as Amerika drug dealers get to go to jail, get a college education, a movoe of the week and 3 hots and a cot. Guess you didnt hear about the numerous tapes of people getting beaten because they opposed Saddam. Dont see that happening here in America do you? Heck no because the Civil Liberites union would throw a fit. As for others footing the bill, well consider..this is actually a conti8nuation of Desert Storm. That was a mostly NATO operation. The US foots 75% of the NATO bills, equipment and manpower. Has any of the NATO nations even tried to pay back their debts for that? A few but not all. Speaking of which...how many countries that protested the US involvement have gotten US tax dollars in the form of economic aid for the last decade or more and still have yet to pay it back?
 You might to check this out then..
UNCHR to Vote on Iraqi Human Rights Violations
unless you're going to claim it's some Bush Jr. Propaganda tool..if so..check the date. It was proposed and discussed on 05 March 1991.

Originally Posted by Either they didn't plan on what happened after the war, or they decided not to tell us the true costs of this war. Either they're incompetent or liars. It wasn't your liberal boogeymen who said a government would be replaced in no time, that was the Bush administration

Sadly, you didnt comprehend my post because as I said...a government wont spring up fully ready to go over night. Shoot, Rome wasnt built in a day so why are all the Anti-Bush people and anti-American types think it's going to happen in Iraq..get a clue and buy a vowel. Even Chaney said to the press a few dozen times he didnt know how long it was going to take because starting a governemt from scratch takes time. Of course the current generation of liberal press junkies are in that "now now now" phase.

Originally Posted by First the Bush companies siphon off our tax dollars into this scandal of a war and into their coffers, but now they want the rest of the worlds tax dollars

Oh like the millions each year democrats GIVE to illegal aliens in the form of welfare, medicade and food stamps? Can you say welfare fraud and aiding and abeting known felons? (last I heard..comming into the country illegally is a felony) What about the Congressional 'pay raises'? Seems the Democrats in power wanted that and got that. How many starving American kids are going to go hungry as you read this post because tax payer money that Democrats and their so called 'better social reform' are going to fatten their wallets? And you complain about Bush..please...every politician in DC is guilty no matter how you look at it and it's not just an American problem..you can find governmental corruption in some form or another in any country in the world.

Originally Posted by It wasn't your liberal boogeymen who said a government would be replaced in no time, that was the Bush administration.

Ok, look at what yoo posted besides that (I used the quote as sort of a bookmark) and look at what really said. As I'll say again...the anti-bush politicians are whining and complaining about "Where's this new government in Iraq??" and comments like yours. Again..look at what I said...a government does not just sping into being overnight. So basically you contradicted your piont and proved mine more.

Originally Posted by And regarding your ignorant comments about Israel and Palestine, I encourage you to do some reading on their history before you spout off some more nonsense.

Oh..so they havent been at each other's throats for centuries?? Wow..guess a ton of sources are wrong then. Ignorant? I dont think so...

Hrm..you're right..it's pretty much Isreal and everyone around them that's been at war. I guess using a current (as in the last 20yrs as current) timeframe was wrong...
**1948 War of Independence
**1956 Sinai Campaign
**1967 Six-Day War
**1973 Yom Kippur War
**1982 Operation Peace for Galilee

Even though UN Security Council Resolution 242, which called for "acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." the Arab position, as formulated at the Khartoum Summit Conference (August 1967) called for "no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel and no recognition of Israel."
Also...(takes a deep breath)....
Arafat and his PNC has yet to change the |PLO Covenant| contradicting all signed agreements to date:

This decision fails to meet the obligations laid out in Article XXXI (9) of the Oslo II accords in two respects. First, the actual amendment of the Covenant has been left for a future date. As of now, the old Covenant, in its original form, remains the governing document of the PLO, and will continue in this status until the amendments are actually approved. In legal terms, there is a sharp difference between calling for something to change and actually implementing the changes.

According to various assessments, this understanding would require the removal of anywhere between 10 and 28 of the Covenant's 33 clauses. Palestinian officials, on the other hand, have spoken of changing far fewer clauses, and the PNC decision leaves open the question of which articles will be amended

Arafat has raised a large army, the size of which far exceeds his peace accord commitments.  The enormous quantity and increasingly deadly quality of the weapons he has accumulated also exceed all the limits that he had promised.  The terrorist infrastructure under his control has not been dismantled. There has been no hand over of the PLO's illegal weapons, nor has there been extradition to the US or to Israel of PLO murderers of Jewish Americans and Jewish Israelis.  All of this is in flagrant violations of the letter and spirit of Arafat's signed international agreements.

(PLO and Arafat

Recent Isreali Wars)

All of this of course does not begin to cover Hamaas and their 'fun little outings' (yes..that was sarcasim)
of course there's also false moslem claims that just adds fuel to the "Let's go to war with Isreal" fire.

Ignorant? Nonsense? Pleae..go back to the school district where you graduated from and sue them for the education they robbed you of. When you're ready to debate like a big boy, you can come to the table with Delerak and I.

(edited because I had 2 links next to each other *blush*)

[malaclypse]

Originally Posted by Welcome them? Well..seems a majority of the country has welcomed them and the idea of FREEDOM over a regime that beats their citizens and goes by archaic laws.

Freedom at the end of a gun? Have you even looked at the news lately? There are massive demonstrations just about daily in Iraq protesting the US occupation. And this is only the stuff that gets onto our media, I'm sure there are a lot more going on that we don't hear about.

What are we doing instead? We're running around in circles looking for "baathist remnants" and "al qaeda cells". Rubbish, we need to establish a legitamite government of Iraqi nationals, not assume control of all their infrastructure and commence on a wild goose chase of "terrists", to use Dubyas slang.

Originally Posted by Today, in the paper, a guy was beheaded in Saudi Arabia for drug smuggling. Gee..here in the facist regiem knows as Amerika drug dealers get to go to jail, get a college education, a movoe of the week and 3 hots and a cot.

We're not debating the pros and cons of the US justice system, we're talking about its foreign policy. Don't try to pull the same distraction tactics that your shock jock radio hosts do. I would hope you could treat the TMS audience with more respect.

Originally Posted by how many countries that protested the US involvement have gotten US tax dollars in the form of economic aid for the last decade or more and still have yet to pay it back?

Probably about the same number of countries the US owes. Check your facts, the US is currently in the largest deficit in its history, and thats down from one of the best surplus' we've had in recent history (under the evil Clinton *g*). Note that deficit equals money owed to foreign countries, in case you weren't aware.

Originally Posted by Sadly, you didnt comprehend my post because as I said...a government wont spring up fully ready to go over night. Shoot, Rome wasnt built in a day so why are all the Anti-Bush people and anti-American types think it's going to happen in Iraq..get a clue and buy a vowel.

Read what I said again. It is not the anti-Bush and "anti-American" types who are saying that it would have been done shortly. That was the Bush Administration. I know that governments aren't built in a day, and thats one of the many reasons I opposed this war in Iraq. Our government cannot afford an empire.

Originally Posted by Oh like the millions each year democrats GIVE to illegal aliens in the form of welfare, medicade and food stamps? Can you say welfare fraud and aiding and abeting known felons?

Excuse me, but in this country illegal aliens are not eligable for social services. What illegals do for this country, however, are enormous. For instance, Californias agricultural economy would crash in a day if the illegals were all deported. We depend on their labor, and give them virtually nothing in return. But regardless, even if millions were spent here, it DWARFS the billions spent on thousand dollar hammers and hundred dollar screws that are paid to pentagon defense contractors. Did you know the pentagon has brought in accountants to try to fix its books, but they couldn't do it because it was so screwed up they couldn't begin. But really, that isn't a partisan issue, why are you dressing it up as such?

Originally Posted by And you complain about Bush..please...every politician in DC is guilty no matter how you look at it and it's not just an American problem..you can find governmental corruption in some form or another in any country in the world.

Oh right, democrats pocketing money: EVIL!! Bush pocketing money: Hey, what can you expect from a politican? Come on, CSmith, I don't even expect this kind of two-facedness from you.

Originally Posted by Even though UN Security Council Resolution 242, which called for "[i]acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

Funny you should mention this. After we carved up the map after WWII, we displaced thousands upon thousands of people off their land to establish Israel. The promise at the time was a Jewish state next to an Arab state. Israel was founded shortly after with much international aid. The arab state still doesn't exist.

Now Israel has been occupying the lands of the arab state for quite some time, and you're trying to tell me Palestine is the agressor?

The rest of your post is clever misinformationt hat I don't have the time to answer rtight now.... I'm supposed to be clubbing!

- Ryan

[Delerak]

Muaha, the argueing, I love it! Love it! Muahaha!

[CSmith_Fan]

ok my fingers hurt from the last post I did here so I'll make it sweet and so simple even this smiley    can understand it..

My so called mis-information? If it's refereing to the tail end of my post, check those links. I believe that site is more ' in the know' than you'll ever be..

Originally Posted by Today, in the paper, a guy was beheaded in Saudi Arabia for drug smuggling. Gee..here in the facist regiem knows as Amerika drug dealers get to go to jail, get a college education, a movoe of the week and 3 hots and a cot. We're not debating the pros and cons of the US justice system, we're talking about its foreign policy. Don't try to pull the same distraction tactics that your shock jock radio hosts do. I would hope you could treat the TMS audience with more respect.

Since the the orginal theme of the post from elseboards was about American barbarianism, etc..i merley pointed out a FACT about the Middle East. Dont need demoracy? Ok, I guess a land that sill uses laws from over 1000 years ago is so well ahead of it's time. Please, sentencing like the aboved mentioned example and others like public stoning of women who might want an education or whatewver else irritated some male (like maybe cooking his dinner 1 minute too long..they dont need a reason) are human rights violations..like what was done in Iraq. hence why some countries want to bring Freedom to that part of the world.  Of course, someone like you wouldnt undersatand freedom.

[quote= ]how many countries that protested the US involvement have gotten US tax dollars in the form of economic aid for the last decade or more and still have yet to pay it back?

Probably about the same number of countries the US owes. Check your facts, the US is currently in the largest deficit in its history, and thats down from one of the best surplus' we've had in recent history (under the evil Clinton *g*). Note that deficit equals money owed to foreign countries, in case you weren't aware.

The Best Surplus was due to programs initiated by Regan and Bush..check your facts. Also..what countries do we owe? Please..list them and have links to credible facts. Some raver's page on Tripod doesnt count.

Originally Posted by Our government cannot afford an empire

Our government isnt building an empire. Show me where we've taken land in a war and named it AMERICAN soil (embessies do not count because foriegn embassies here in the US share the same perk). other than soil to bury our dead, it hasnt.

Originally Posted by Excuse me, but in this country illegal aliens are not eligable for social services.

The  why are liberal politicians especially from Cali doing it anyways? If they can aid a felon and not go to jail then ####..I guess I can too right? And if you believe that.....
..as for crashing their economy. Then they deserve it. Illegal means that..illegal. I say deport them and get AMERICANs to do the work. Oh wait..I forgot..most of the unemployed have become whiners like yourself that would rather sit around and get hard earned tax dollars in the form of welfare checks than to actually get a job. Typical social parasites.

Originally Posted by Oh right, democrats pocketing money: EVIL!! Bush pocketing money: Hey, what can you expect from a politican? Come on, CSmith, I don't even expect this kind of two-facedness from you.

If you have even read my posts, you'd know I only sides with Bush because it seems everyone is blaming him for everything under the sun, when in fact others have been doing it as well. Bush got blamed for 9/11 (false) Bush is called a war monger (though Democrat presidents have led us into war more thsn Repub presidents).

Originally Posted by Freedom at the end of a gun? Have you even looked at the news lately? There are massive demonstrations just about daily in Iraq protesting the US occupation. And this is only the stuff that gets onto our media, I'm sure there are a lot more going on that we don't hear about.What are we doing instead? We're running around in circles looking for "baathist remnants" and "al qaeda cells".

You mean the small demostrations by baathist/al quedda supporters? Btw..they are not that 'massive' unless you think 100 or so is 'massive'..by those measurements, the WEC protests in Seattle were an exodus to the land of Starbucks and Nirvana.

As for trying to establish an intrim government..it would be faster if NATO and the UN helped..but it seems far more important things are going on in the EU..like making mandates that only white wine from champaign can be called that, etc..How big do you think Iraq is? Did you know Baghdad is at least 2x the size of Chicago? Now try and take say, 5000 people and :restablish electricity, ruinning water, sewage, the concept of democracy, a police force (including training) and then try to get a working government up quick enough to appease the anti-american masses.

Originally Posted by The promise at the time was a Jewish state next to an Arab state. Israel was founded shortly after with much international aid. The arab state still doesn't exist.

I guess Syria and Egypt dont exist then eh? Or Saudia Arabia.

Ok..enough for me tonight. It's 1am and CSmith_Fan has work tomorrow (not sponging off the tax payers like some people in society). I'll reply (if warranted) tomorrow.

[Silrathi]

Originally Posted by Please, sentencing like the aboved mentioned example and others like public stoning of women who might want an education or whatewver else irritated some male (like maybe cooking his dinner 1 minute too long..they dont need a reason) are human rights violations..like what was done in Iraq. hence why some countries want to bring Freedom to that part of the world.

So ummm... you are advocating the use of armed force to orchestrate an ethnocentric cultural imperialism in the Middle East and - simultaneously - seek to decry the expense of your much vaunted 'human rights' by sneering at the fact that in the US we educate our felons in hope of reforming them.  That we give aid and support to our poor in the hope that they can provide benefit to their society.  Did I get that right?

Originally Posted by Of course, someone like you wouldnt undersatand freedom.

This sort of petty, inappropriate, attack is the hallmark of a defeated debater.  Please either concede now, or refrain from such derogatory commentary in the future.

Originally Posted by The Best Surplus was due to programs initiated by Regan and Bush..check your facts. Also..what countries do we owe? Please..list them and have links to credible facts.

What facts?  It's your assertion, back it up.  As for what countries we owe, perhaps a primer in macro-economics is in order.  When the government needs money, they order the US Treasury to issue securities (bonds) which are sold to whomever wishes to buy them.  Many Americans buy them as they are a very secure form of investment, and quite inflation proof, albeit not typically large earners.  These bonds can also be purchased by financial institutions both here and abroad, as well as any other foreign interest as may desire them.  Thus assembling a comprehensive list of 'who the government owes money to' is not very useful to this discussion.  However, if you are really curious, here is an editorial on the topic TradeAlert.org.

Originally Posted by Our government isnt building an empire. Show me where we've taken land in a war and named it AMERICAN soil (embessies do not count because foriegn embassies here in the US share the same perk). other than soil to bury our dead, it hasnt.

This is pure semantics.  There are plenty of valid points to discuss here, lets not get sidetracked with terminology.

Originally Posted by The  why are liberal politicians especially from Cali doing it anyways? If they can aid a felon and not go to jail then ####..I guess I can too right? And if you believe that.....

It's exactly this kind of hypocrisy (if it is, in fact, occurring as I have no information on the topic either way) that leads me to believe that we shouldn't be overseas shoveling our values and way of life over other peoples' culture.  

Originally Posted by Then they deserve it. Illegal means that..illegal. I say deport them and get AMERICANs to do the work.

So by this you mean to say that we should go to the expense of capturing known felons just to let them run free to offend again?  Which side of the law are you arguing?

Originally Posted by Oh wait..I forgot..most of the unemployed have become whiners like yourself that would rather sit around and get hard earned tax dollars in the form of welfare checks than to actually get a job. Typical social parasites.

In California unemployment benefits are paid for by witholding a portion of the workers wage and placing it into escrow against the chance that they will claim it.  After a time (one year, maybe two?) the money reverts to the government.  In this case I'd have to say it's the Unemployment office that is leeching off the Californian worker for their own existence.

Originally Posted by Bush is called a war monger (though Democrat presidents have led us into war more thsn Repub presidents).

This argument has no validity.  It is indisputable that Bush is a warmonger.  I'm sure I don't have to recount the entire list of wars the man has initiated to prove this point.  Your argument that democrats are more likely to go to war than republicans is not relevant.

Originally Posted by As for trying to establish an intrim government..it would be faster if NATO and the UN helped..but it seems far more important things are going on in the EU..like making mandates that only white wine from champaign can be called that, etc..How big do you think Iraq is? Did you know Baghdad is at least 2x the size of Chicago? Now try and take say, 5000 people and :restablish electricity, ruinning water, sewage, the concept of democracy, a police force (including training) and then try to get a working government up quick enough to appease the anti-american masses.

Okay, now here we have something to work with.  
I don't believe that any interim government is possible in Iraq as long as the US refuses to surrender control.  Currently we insist on dominating every decision made, and our efforts to stabilize the government have been toward the exact same flavor of 'stability' we've created in every other country we invaded... puppet governments.  Maybe the EU is right to be more concerned with protecting their interests than with electing some marionettes in Iraq.

As for the difficulties of reestablishing services within the country, why did you pick 5000?  Why not 5,000,000?  Are the Iraqi's too busy, lazy, stupid, barbaric to repair their own sewers or power lines?  For the sake of brevity I won't beat that horse any further.  I would like to know where you derived that number however.

Originally Posted by I guess Syria and Egypt dont exist then eh? Or Saudia Arabia.

Actually, what they were supposed to create was a new state for the displaced Palestinians.  Palestinians, evidently, haven't donated enough money to the election coffers of American politician however.  (Okay, cheap shot, I admit it)

Silrathi

[Jazuela]

Originally Posted by Our government isnt building an empire. Show me where we've taken land in a war and named it AMERICAN soil (embessies do not count because foriegn embassies here in the US share the same perk). other than soil to bury our dead, it hasnt.

Puerto Rico. Florida. The entire Midwest. New England. Need more? And since this is the flames folder, I'll get picky: it's embassies, not embessies, and foreign, not foriegn. Nya.

Originally Posted by Oh wait..I forgot..most of the unemployed have become whiners like yourself that would rather sit around and get hard earned tax dollars in the form of welfare checks than to actually get a job. Typical social parasites

I don't know about "most" unemployed, but I do know that I've been trying to find productive work for a couple of years now. Living in Connecticut, looking for work is a full time job, with no pay unless you happen to be lucky enough to qualify for unemployment compensation. Your tax dollars aren't paying for this. My prior employer is. A whopping $72 US dollars a week. Enough for groceries, but not enough to pay for the gas (at $1.90 per gallon) to get me to the supermarket. So I walk most of the time. When you get laid off from work due to cutbacks or the company moving their operations overseas, come back and tell us again how unemployed people are lazy whiners, hmm?

As for the rest, I didn't read it. I don't even know what this topic is about, since all flames are just sorta thrown in together as one big mishmosh comprising six pages of stuff. Those two points did scream at me to reply, however, and so I did just that.

Flame on, folks.

[malaclypse]

Originally Posted by Since the the orginal theme of the post from elseboards was about American barbarianism, etc..i merley pointed out a FACT about the Middle East. Dont need demoracy? Ok, I guess a land that sill uses laws from over 1000 years ago is so well ahead of it's time. Please, sentencing like the aboved mentioned example and others like public stoning of women who might want an education or whatewver else irritated some male (like maybe cooking his dinner 1 minute too long..they dont need a reason) are human rights violations..like what was done in Iraq. hence why some countries want to bring Freedom to that part of the world.  Of course, someone like you wouldnt undersatand freedom.

You're repeating yourself... run out of propaganda?

Regardless of their culture, it is not the US governments place to go into their country, bomb them and destroy their infrastructure, place them under martial law, and take control over all their national resources... destroying ancient artifacts from the cradle of civilization in the process. This is the face of your freedom??

Originally Posted by The Best Surplus was due to programs initiated by Regan and Bush..check your facts. Also..what countries do we owe? Please..list them and have links to credible facts. Some raver's page on Tripod doesnt count.

China. Link. Note that the Nation magazine has been a beacon of honest journalism for well over 100 years.

Also, the fact that you attribute a budget surplus to Reagan's (its spelled Reagan not Regan, you big dummy) trickle down economics shows a complete lack of any idea of how economics works on your part. How is it that cutting taxes, cutting the governments income, in other words, is going to lead to a surplus of budget? Give me a break, as soon as Bush took office, he enacted Reagan's economic model, and look where we are now. Reaganomics bleeds the government dry so that there is valid reasoning to cut back social services and shift money to the defense sector.

Originally Posted by Our government isnt building an empire. Show me where we've taken land in a war and named it AMERICAN soil (embessies do not count because foriegn embassies here in the US share the same perk). other than soil to bury our dead, it hasnt.

Alright, so we haven't named Iraq "New America", but that doesn't change the fact that we took a military force over to destroy their country, without provocation, and the publicly given reason is "Regime change". The regime has changed, and who is in power now? The American Military.

This is not an empire in the classic sense of the word, it is a New World Order, to quote Bush Sr, where America supplies all the goods, and the rest of the world buys them. If they don't buy them, we kill them until they agree to buy them, or we set up a brutal dictator who will do anything we ask in return for some good ole american weapons.

Originally Posted by ..as for crashing their economy. Then they deserve it. Illegal means that..illegal. I say deport them and get AMERICANs to do the work. Oh wait..I forgot..most of the unemployed have become whiners like yourself that would rather sit around and get hard earned tax dollars in the form of welfare checks than to actually get a job. Typical social parasites.

I've never collected any form of government cheese, actually. I've been working since I was 16.

But the fact that you would rather see California's economy collapse than allow a few mexican citizens to live here and pick our crops for us shows that you are just blatantly racist.
Typical of a Bush republican

Originally Posted by You mean the small demostrations by baathist/al quedda supporters? Btw..they are not that 'massive' unless you think 100 or so is 'massive'.

Try getting your news from more than just Faux, I mean Fox news. There are more than 100 people gathering at these daily protests, and the fact that they are against a foreign occupation does not make them baathists and al qaeda supporters. Thats typical "with us or against us" mentality, and its juvenile.

Originally Posted by The promise at the time was a Jewish state next to an Arab state. Israel was founded shortly after with much international aid. The arab state still doesn't exist.

Originally Posted by I guess Syria and Egypt dont exist then eh? Or Saudia Arabia.

I was refering to the Palestinian state. The one they've been promised for over 50 years, and systematically denied, usually by Israeli aggression. Do you mean to imply that one state is enough for all Arabs?

I'll end by quoting the Lords of the New Church

Video games train the kids for war.
Army chic in high-fashion stores
Law and order's done their job.
Prisons filled while the rich still rob
Assassination politics
Violence rules within' our nation's midst
Well ignorance is their power tool.
You'll only know what they want you to know.
The television cannot lie.
Controlling media with smokescreen eyes
Nuclear politicians picture show.
The acting's lousy but the blind don't know.
Open your eyes see the lies right in front of ya.
Open your eyes.....

[CSmith_Fan]

Since the uneducated can not digest no more than a paragraph with large words in it, I will make my reply in two posts...and this is going to be fun because it seems stupidity has run rampant since some people here dont know how to read...here we go...

Malaclypse,

Originally Posted by You're repeating yourself... run out of propaganda?

Since you decided you say I was misleading the people with shock-jock tactics, I decided to point out my example of some of the harsh treatment people in the Middle East get now and then by their own people since they have no freedom. No freedom like oh say, due process, civil rights, etc that people here in America take for granted. Over there, public stoning, beheading, summery executiuons..all a part of life. Dont believe me? The UN's Commitie on Human Rights had brought before them a decesion to investigate further into Iraq's human rights violations in  March of 1991

In the same month, they were shown documentation by witnesses about the atrocities.

In July 1991, the UN said Iraq's answers on the human rights abuses were unsatisfactory.

Want more? Amnesty International has some interesting info over there. Oh..and yes, I know you'll point out some print about the US there, but those far outweigh the non-US ones. Like banning a single firecracker because Canada built a nuke.

As for going into Iraq..again..it was business unfinished. Had Clinton continued the momentum, there wouldnt have been a recent war in Iraq. There wouldnt be mass graves filled with innocents made by Iraqi's Republican Guard's  or dead Kurds because of nerve agents dropped on them. Of course, you'll probably say this is all moot.

Originally Posted by Alright, so we haven't named Iraq "New America", but that doesn't change the fact that we took a military force over to destroy their country, without provocation, and the publicly given reason is "Regime change". The regime has changed, and who is in power now? The American Military. This is not an empire in the classic sense of the word, it is a New World Order, to quote Bush Sr, where America supplies all the goods, and the rest of the world buys them. If they don't buy them, we kill them until they agree to buy them, or we set up a brutal dictator who will do anything we ask in return for some good ole american weapons.

If you want to be an Anarchist, then at least get your facts straight..the US is joining the WTO which is "a coalition of facist nations bent on world domination and bringing the freeman down" or something along that description. Depends on who you ask...but still..it's the WTO.

As for a resposen to that..####..I think I've discussed freedom enough..just scroll back and reread where the words freedom are because I'm tired of repeating myself to people how dont listen (or refuse to)

Originally Posted by I've never collected any form of government cheese, actually. I've been working since I was 16. But the fact that you would rather see California's economy collapse than allow a few mexican citizens to live here and pick our crops for us shows that you are just blatantly racist. Typical of a Bush republican

reply in 3 parts :
1. After reading my initial reply, even I thought I meant one thing..only meant 'whiners like you', never intended to call you a social parasite (unless you are) BUT therer are still social parasites out there that commit welfare fraud, etc and hide behind PC-dom and so called "rights" though I've never seen anywhere in the Constitution that says a woman can get paid for having 10 kids by the time she's 30 for a nice fat check for each. Of course, that's part of the oh-so-great social services system that liberals like to protect at any given moment.
2. I'm not a racist. I'm a realist. I personally dont give a frag if someone is from korea, canada, or mexico or Exampleton. IF you enter this country illegally it is against the law. Period. There is nothing racist about that comment. Deport them the first time caught. Second time caught, send them to a corporate owned prison where previous unemployed american workers now have jobs with benefits.As for politicians wanting to give illegals welfare checks, etc..guess you never heard of Proposition 182 that stopped this from happening. If people want into this country, then do it legally. Plain and simple. Besides, if I was racist, I wouldnt be here and would be over at some site like Stormfront.com or whereever.
3. I'm not a Republican..nor am I 2 faced..again..as I've said at least 4 times already..I only defended the current president because so many people have accused him of doing the same thing liberal presidents have done (some have done worse). If anything..I'm an independant-libertarian-neo-democratic-socialist.

I wont discuss the demonstartions because a) I dont watch Fox news either and b) if I have to describe the best way to encite a riot and show how it's being done in Iraq then I know you might need the picture version of Hooked on Phonics (which btw..you dont because unlike some other twit, you actually post some replies that make me think about my replies.Kudos..and NO I am not conceeding) Here is something to think about..if someone isnt in Organization A but does actions and views like said Organization and know about that organization, are they not by defination supporting it?

Originally Posted by I was refering to the Palestinian state. The one they've been promised for over 50 years, and systematically denied, usually by Israeli aggression.  Do you mean to imply that one state is enough for all Arabs?

Well, as soon as everyone over there adheres to the Khartoum Resolutions, and Arafat eliminates the PLO (which he heads in case you forgot and also, in case you forgot, the PLO bombs pretty much anyone who isnt with them). Isreal is only defending itself.