well, I'm amused.....

[epeemike81]

http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

As funny as this is, the seeds of truth in it are quite scary....

-m

[jusplainfencing]

thats pretty darn good i think that deserves its own board game with an age limit of course..... 6+ you know the small peices and stuff

[Aoife]

Heehee, that was great!

All too scarily true though. (well, some parts more than others)

[135711]

very interesting stuff.

I liked Lady Bird better she planted trees and wildflowers, sorry Aofe, [sorry I love the name alfie, it's from a favorite movie: georgie girl! and it's English, have you seen? ] but if more people listed to lady bird, we probably woudnt' have scum missles.

epeemike, where did you get this, it's sort of incredible, i read your home page, didn't like all of it. well, what can we say, in looking at the game, it appeared that absolutely nothing mattered whatsoever, no speeches or explanations from any source had any impact, it all went on as before, with no chance for anyone, read Love in the Ruines by percy walker, [a lapsed catholic shrink prepares for the end of the world]

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by 135711
very interesting stuff.

I liked Lady Bird better she planted trees and wildflowers, sorry alfie, but if more people listed to lady bird, we probably woudnt' have scum missles.

epeemike, where did you get this, it's sort of incredible, i read your home page, didn't like all of it. well, what can we say, in looking at the game, it appeared that absolutely nothing mattered whatsoever, no speeches or explanations from any source had any impact, it all went on as before, with no chance for anyone, read Love in the Ruines by percy walker, [a lapsed catholic shrink prepares for the end of the world]

um.... where i got it is the site I linked to.

that is not my homepage.

-m

[pkt]

another friend sent this link to me last wk.

There's quite a bit of truth to it.

Dubya has succeeded where a lot of brighter minds failed:
Uniting the Arab world.

Y'all must have read about and seen the foto of the Arab men showing their passports in a bus leaving from Lebenon to Iraq to fight for Saddam.

PK

[Fencing Passion]

lol thats pretty cool lol....................

[D'Artagnan1673]

I don't really know what to say other than I am offended. I hope everyone is being tongue in cheek about their support of this rubbish.

[Gav]

I thought it was quite funny! I got this the other week.

It seems to be based on some accurate[ish] predictions we have even seen some of the things it predicted starting to come to pass.

[daeceg]

You know: Osama bin Laden would just love it if we killed Saddam Hussein for him.

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
I don't really know what to say other than I am offended. I hope everyone is being tongue in cheek about their support of this rubbish.

offended?? by what??

what is in there worth being offended by?

this idea that if I oppose the war or speak out against how stupid and wrong I feel it is that I'm somehow unpatriotic or not supporting our troops is crap.

what use are freedoms (like freedom of speech, freedom to peacably assemble) if you imply that it is wrong or inappropriate to utilize them?

-m

[daeceg]

Now wait a second here:
That person has the same right to speak for the war as we do to speak against it.

(even if they are misguided and/or ignorant)

[D'Artagnan1673]

Originally posted by daeceg
Now wait a second here:
That person has the same right to speak for the war as we do to speak against it.

(even if they are misguided and/or ignorant)

I will not reply to your last sentance since your location says it all.

Epeemike:
You sound like Al Gore. You miss the point of freedom of speech. It is your right to disagree with my stance, as it is my right to disagree with yours. I have to say that I do consider anyone to be unpatriotic who speaks out against this war. Those men and women are out there putting their lives on the line for the freedoms in which we pocess. If you think that we are overreacting to the threat to our national security, then you must believe that Nevel Chamberlain's policy towards Germany prior to the outbreak of World War II was sound. To thumb your nose at our government's stance against Iraq is to show a lack of respect for those who have sacrificed their lives in this conflict. In spite of my feelings, I am thankful that we both live in a country where you and I have the right to speak our minds without fear of loss of liberty or life. What would happen to you if you spoke contrary to the government if you lived in Iraq?

Just to let you know, the people who are deciding for you that this war is bad were in full support of military action just a few years ago. This reaction is nothing more than politics.

[pkt]

d'artagnan,

Originally posted by daeceg
Now wait a second here:
That person has the same right to speak for the war as we do to speak against it.

(even if they are misguided and/or ignorant)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I will not reply to your last sentance since your location says it all.


D'art,

You did reply to Daeceg's last sentence afterall.

Here we see a full-blooded example of doublespeak.

What did daeceg's locaton say abot him?

You are prejudging daeceg, aren't you?

You feel that since he's from Texas, he MSUT be for the POTUS and therefore FOR the war.

Daeceg in his other postings shows that he, like a lot of his fellow Texans, IS against the war.

D'art,

your behaviour is that of either
a bully or
a dictator.
make your pick.

You'll not countenance any contrary opinions in spite of your professed subscription to the US Constitutions' guarantee of freedom of speech, etc.

What Chairman Mao called this kind of behaviour was
"Waving the Red flag to fight against the Red flag."

In other word, in plain English, it's traitorus behaviour.

Have you read "1984" lately?

If we are all in agreement then Craig would have to close down the site and go fence...

In a democracy - we do live in democracies, don't we, still? -dissenting voices, opinions are necessary. Otherwise it would be a monocracy (Government by one person.) or whatever ~cracy it is called.

This is another aspect of the polyslitising i was referring to:
If you do not abide by the official line, let's call in the Spanish Inqusition...

PK



PK

[achilleus]

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
Epeemike:
You sound like Al Gore. You miss the point of freedom of speech. It is your right to disagree with my stance, as it is my right to disagree with yours.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Mike didn't say be quiet, he asked what offended you.

And then asked what use is freedom of speech if he's labeled unpatriotic for disagreeing with the Prez.

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
I have to say that I do consider anyone to be unpatriotic who speaks out against this war.

And you seem to be proving his point with this response.

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
Those men and women are out there putting their lives on the line for the freedoms in which we pocess.

I think it's highly debatably as what they are currently fighting for. The idea of 'Liberating Iraq' was rather recent. Iraq being a threat that needed to be dealt with by immediate force is also very debatable.

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
If you think that we are overreacting to the threat to our national security, then you must believe that Nevel Chamberlain's policy towards Germany prior to the outbreak of World War II was sound.

Overreacting? No. Displacing our fear yes. Those responsible for 9/11 are still at large, or has Osama bin Laden been forgotten? North Korea has nuclear capabilities and poses a much more dangerous adversary than Iraq.

Also, it might well have been possible to follow a policy of containment rather than brute force. Considering that many different muslim factions are uniting to stop the US, it seems that terrorism will only increase.

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
To thumb your nose at our government's stance against Iraq is to show a lack of respect for those who have sacrificed their lives in this conflict.

No. Soldiers who fight and die for the USA are fighting for my right to say that this war is wrong. They aren't fighting for me to have less freedom.

Also, for all you out there who tend to have trouble separating protest against the war with hate towards our soldiers. I pray for their safety, and worry for my friends and family that are over there currently.

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
In spite of my feelings, I am thankful that we both live in a country where you and I have the right to speak our minds without fear of loss of liberty or life. What would happen to you if you spoke contrary to the government if you lived in Iraq?

I agree with you here.

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
Just to let you know, the people who are deciding for you that this war is bad were in full support of military action just a few years ago. This reaction is nothing more than politics.

I think the reason Bush sent us to war is more political than national security. Every time he speaks on the war rather than showing us convincing evidence that Iraq is an immediate threat to the US requiring force to neutralize, he relies on rhetoric about how evil Saddam is, and lies like this war will bring peace to the Middle East

[pkt]

all,

I think our friend d'art's mind is clouded so that he's confusing speaking out against the war with showing hatred for the troops; with showing disrespect for the government, the freedoms that we in N. America enjoy.

When something is wrong it is wrong. The fact that POTUS Dubya and his cohorts say it ain't wrong does not make it right.

I s'pose d'art, like our other friend Moonitic, has not and most likely refuses to read the conversation in the 'Warmonger' thread. Tell me if I'm wrong, d'art.

The evidence simply is not there that Saddam is linked with Al Qaeda. Yes, Saddam may be funding the suicide bombers in Israel, he may be a dictator - so is Mugabe, so is Kim Jung-Il, so is King Saud, ad nauseum, but to think that Saddam can bring imminent attack to continental USA is wishful thinking.

And for d'art to call anyone who don't buy the fantasy that Dubya and his cohorts are selling with Chamberlain simply ... well, I'll let you decide what.

I read that the 'shock & awe' strategy being used in Iraq is the brainchaild of Rumsfeld, not Powell. It first appeared in a book in 1996 called "Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance' by strategist Harlan Ullman, a Vietnam War veteran and James Wade, a former US assistant defense secretary.
Interesting analysis.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...ry=Paul+Koring

I just heard on CBC's National news - the remnants of communism according to fellow Cdn civiltech - that "the US is tops in hypocracy": POTUS and his cohorts want the US PoWs treated according to the Genva convention, but not the guys from the other side because they are not combatants... remember those guys sitting in Guantanamo Bay? ad nauseum.

I'm sure everyone shares my relief that the Special Forces got in to get Jessica the 19 y-o PoW and no one on the rescue team got hurt. She's a cutie. I guess everyone was worried what the dastardly fadayeem would do to her... This is one thing the US is excellent in: the retrieval of their own PoWs. In this the US is first.

OK d'art, don't say that I didn't praise the US, that's 2 firsts I just gave the US thought hte first one is a back-hand compliment...

Good night.

PK

[epeemike81]

Originally posted by D'Artagnan1673
You sound like Al Gore. You miss the point of freedom of speech. It is your right to disagree with my stance, as it is my right to disagree with yours.

Agreed. which is why I am not offended when you express support for the war. again I submit that to imply that it is inappropriate for me to express that view publicly is missing the point of freedom of speech.

I have to say that I do consider anyone to be unpatriotic who speaks out against this war.

The opposite of patriotism isn't opposition, but apathy. It is BECAUSE I care about this country and about the course it takes that I speak out when I feel our policies are wrong. your definition of patriotism is more like jingoism. If we all blindly accept injustice in the name of "patriotism", then our country is doomed. what other injustices should we ignore? should we sit idly by while the "patriot" act (how aptly named!) erodes our privacy and fundamental rights to be secure in our persons and possessions? should we say nothing as the government rounds up muslims wholesale? should we not ask foolish questions like "where are they?" and why are you holding them?" Should we do all this in the name of "patriotism"?

Those men and women are out there putting their lives on the line for the freedoms in which we pocess.

no, they are over there fighting because they are ordered to. they may have joined the armed forces due to a belief in those rights, and I commend them. however, this particular war is very much NOT about those rights. Hussein is NOT a threat to my rights. Ashcroft and Bush are through things like the Patriot act and the Domestic Security Enhancement Act. Sadaam Hussein is a bully and a tyrant. he will do ANYTHING to protect his life and his power. that anything includes NOT attacking the US. As much as he would like to, he will not, because he knows he wouldn't survive him. one thing that this war does is take away that disincentive. if we are hell bent on his destruction anyway, there is no reason to not attack us.

If you think that we are overreacting to the threat to our national security, then you must believe that Nevel Chamberlain's policy towards Germany prior to the outbreak of World War II was sound.

wow. that is VERY specious reasoning. First of all, Nevel Chamberlain's policy was appeasement, whereas mine is containment. I feel we should continue to inspect in Iraq. were he to "annex" one of his neighbor's, it would CLEARLY be grounds for war. Chamberlain allowed the annexation of Germany's neighbors. that is NOT what ANYBODY is suggesting

second of all, these are VERY different situations. It was reasonable to envision that Germany and Japan could pose a very direct threat to England. It isn't at all reasonable to think Iraq could pose a direct threat to us.

Third of all, just because I believe a strategy is correct in one situation doesn't mean I feel its correct in all situations. If you think war is correct in Iraq, then you must think that war was correct in Vietnam. see how unreasonable that is??

To thumb your nose at our government's stance against Iraq is to show a lack of respect for those who have sacrificed their lives in this conflict.

on the contrary. I respect those men and women enough to think that this unjust war is NOT worth their lives.

In spite of my feelings, I am thankful that we both live in a country where you and I have the right to speak our minds without fear of loss of liberty or life.

you are thankful to live in a country where I can speak my mind, yet feel its inappropriate when I do so?? thats kinda contradictory.

What would happen to you if you spoke contrary to the government if you lived in Iraq?

about the same that would happen in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, both of which we support. However, you are relatively free to speak your mind in Iran, which we oppose. clearly, this is NOT about freedoms or human rights. this government has repeatedly shown a lack of interest in human rights issues. it is disingenuous to claim we know are champions of human rights.

Just to let you know, the people who are deciding for you that this war is bad were in full support of military action just a few years ago. This reaction is nothing more than politics.

NOBODY decides ANYTHING for me! In fact, most of the politicians I voted for are solidly behind the president. IMO, this is because they ARE playing politics and won't take a chance on disagreeing with the "majority" who "support" the president. It should be noted that these polls ask if you support the president, not agree with him.

-m

[Philistine]

Originally posted by pkt

{snip}
What did daeceg's locaton say abot him?

You are prejudging daeceg, aren't you?

You feel that since he's from Texas, he MSUT be for the POTUS and therefore FOR the war.

Daeceg in his other postings shows that he, like a lot of his fellow Texans, IS against the war.
{snip}

One thing...take a look at D'Art's location.

To Texans, Austin is almost as bad as New York City! (Take it from someone who went to school there).

--Philistine

[Gav]

How does the quote go?

"No-one will miss Democracy till it's gone..."

[latenight]

I think D'art is referring to the perception pf a lot of Texans that Austin is a very liberal city in a conservative state. When I was there on business several of the local company folks made comments sort of to that effect with quite a bit of conviction and distain.

I don't know about all of that and don't know that I care, but I will say that Austin is a great town to party in! ;-)