quote:
Faelynn LeAndris had this to say about Optimus Prime:
Because the French started out saying that, and have been against any action allowing force since this started, and said as much. We at least tried diplomatic routes, and followed peacefully for a while behind the UN. The French havn't supported anything proposed from the US or it's allies, we at least tried.
quote:
Germany no so much so, but they were almost as bad. Russia was the most decent about thier withdrawl.
quote:
The rest of the world pretty much either agree's with the US, or is staying nuetral until they see who is gonna come out on top before they make thier bets.
quote:Of course the last 50 years in which we supported you do not count.
After everything we have done for the French and Germans, it's more a we helped you for things less important and severe, and now you turn your backs on us, kinda thing.
[ 03-18-2003: Message edited by: Tarquinn ]
Just give us oil. OIL IS ALL WE NEED!
why yes, this is going to be my way of venting my frustration over some of the moronic conspiracy theories the international community is cooking up.
quote:
Khyron Model 2000 was programmed to say:
Let's see. What facts are we ignoring here?Fact : Iraq HAS the missiles. If they didn't, what were they destroying to appease the security counsel? Ask yourself how many Saddam had and how many of those are left after those he destroyed. Don't know the answer? Neither does the UN.
Fact : Iraq has cluster bombs capable of spreading chemical and/or biological agents over a wide area. He also has the drone aircraft capable of dropping said bombs.
Fact : Iraq has used chemical and biological agents against Iran in the past. How much of those does he still have? Enough for biological attacks?
And the ties between Saddam and terrorism. here's a man who's been PROVEN to have such weapons, who's had ties with terrorist organisations such as the Taliban. The group that held no reservations about slamming planes into our skyscrapers. Let's think about what happens when they get their hands on some bigger toys. Hmmm. Fun thinking material there.
Y'know Tarquinn, I think you're right. I think Saddam poses no threat to the world. Let's just call off this silly little war and let him do whatever he pleases. That'll really work out great ^_^
100 miles.
2. About that terrorist support.
I think it would be almost logical for Saddam to support terrorists, but so far there was no hard proof.
[ 03-18-2003: Message edited by: Tarquinn ]
3. I never said we should allow Saddam do whatever he pleases. I'm just saying that the US government is overreacting.
For whatever reasons.
quote:
Tarquinn probably says this to all the girls:
1. You do know the range of those missiles?
Do you?100 miles.
2. About that terrorist support.
I think it would be almost logical for Saddam to support terrorists, but so far there was no hard proof.
3. I never said we should allow Saddam do whatever he pleases. I'm just saying that the US government is overreacting.
For whatever reasons.
100 Miles is more than enough to endanger other countries. Not to mention that I have also heard estimations of over 200 miles.
And Saddam DOES support terrorist groups. The question is if he supports our particulat nemisis at this time.
He does pay money to the Families of Palastinian Homicide bombers. Something like 25,000 per killing.
Before people start taking things personal, (many already are) I just quit.
Some people think I am a moron because of my opinions.
And I think that some people are morons because of their opinions.
Unless god himself (or whatever diety you do/do not believe in) comes to this forum and decides who is right, we will continue to argue without ever coming to an agreement.
And in the end it won't even matter, as no one of us in a place to make the important decisions.
So before I leave this thread and stay away from future "Iraq-War" discussions I want to clear up a few things:
1) I do not hate or even dislike the United States of America. I have many friends there and all in all the USA are a great country.
I did not forget about how the allies helped Europe and in particular Germany after WW2. However I strongly disagree with Bush and the rest of his government... for whatever reasons.
2) I did not defend Iraq or Saddam Hussein.
I know Saddam Hussein is a problem and he should be dealt with properly. I just think that the UN was doing it "properly". Simple as that.
I think I forgot a thing or two
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Tarquinn was all like:
1. You do know the range of those missiles?
Do you?100 miles.
That can be supported by a bomber which can fly non-stop for several hundred miles, they do not need a launch bay as some assumed.
quote:
2. About that terrorist support.
I think it would be almost logical for Saddam to support terrorists, but so far there was no hard proof.
Saddam's own son is a General in the Taliban... He has also been reported by several Turkish institutions for various mishaps.
quote:
3. I never said we should allow Saddam do whatever he pleases. I'm just saying that the US government is overreacting.
For whatever reasons.
Overreacting? The man supports Genocide, hatred, torture, and suffering. He is quite mad, has the arsenal to do potential disasterous things to the world..
Direct quote from Saddam, "We will sacrifice our souls, our children, and our families, but we will not leave Iraq." Also keep in mind Saddam is very fond of the old Vietnam tactic of strapping munitions to children and sending them into the ranks. He did it in desert storm, he will do it again.
quote:
Tarquinn had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
Okay, enough.Before people start taking things personal, (many already are) I just quit.
Some people think I am a moron because of my opinions.
And I think that some people are morons because of their opinions.Unless god himself (or whatever diety you do/do not believe in) comes to this forum and decides who is right, we will continue to argue without ever coming to an agreement.
And in the end it won't even matter, as no one of us in a place to make the important decisions.
So before I leave this thread and stay away from future "Iraq-War" discussions I want to clear up a few things:
1) I do not hate or even dislike the United States of America. I have many friends there and all in all the USA are a great country.
I did not forget about how the allies helped Europe and in particular Germany after WW2. However I strongly disagree with Bush and the rest of his government... for whatever reasons.2) I did not defend Iraq or Saddam Hussein.
I know Saddam Hussein is a problem and he should be dealt with properly. I just think that the UN was doing it "properly". Simple as that.
I think I forgot a thing or two
Just so you know, I didn't take anything personal, and I don't think you are a moron.. I don't AGREE with you, but I don't think you are a moron.
Or something?
Oil!
quote:
Abbikat was naked while typing this:
The US won't take action against Israel, regardless of how many UN resolutions the Israelis break (or how many WMDs they have/use, or whether or not the Mossad still practices the assassinations of suspected terrorists) because the Jewish lobby in the US is far too strong and holds too much influence over American politics...
Actually, that is somewhat untrue, although a very ligical thought. Most Jewish Americans polled lately think Israel should abandon the settlements it took in violation of the most recent peace treaty.
The most powerful lobby in favor of Israel is evangelical Christian leaders, for various reasons. I personally think Israel has a great deal to answer for, so I again break the evangelical Christian trend! oho!
In any event, I will support my President and pray for peace and a quick resolution. While I never want war, I see the reasons for this one and if Saddam is dethroned along with his sons and his "groupies," I think that is crucial to the region and the world.
Thinking about your posts
(and billing you for it) since 2001
quote:
Suddar Model 2000 was programmed to say:
Oil!
Why there's plenty of oil here in the good ol' U.S. of A, boy!
Just take a paper towel, run it over your face, wring it out in your car and bingo! You've got enough oil to last you a lifetime! And it always replenishes, too!
quote:
Tarquinn was listening to Cher while typing:
Before people start taking things personal, (many already are) I just quit.Some people think I am a moron because of my opinions.
And I think that some people are morons because of their opinions.Unless god himself (or whatever diety you do/do not believe in) comes to this forum and decides who is right, we will continue to argue without ever coming to an agreement.
And in the end it won't even matter, as no one of us in a place to make the important decisions.
So before I leave this thread and stay away from future "Iraq-War" discussions I want to clear up a few things:
1) I do not hate or even dislike the United States of America. I have many friends there and all in all the USA are a great country.
I did not forget about how the allies helped Europe and in particular Germany after WW2. However I strongly disagree with Bush and the rest of his government... for whatever reasons.2) I did not defend Iraq or Saddam Hussein.
I know Saddam Hussein is a problem and he should be dealt with properly. I just think that the UN was doing it "properly". Simple as that.
I think I forgot a thing or two
I understand that. And I'm not trying to make it personal. As any good arguer... I'm just trying to rebut the arguments you're presenting 
The main arguments being that you claim that Saddam does not have the capabilities to harm his neighbors or his distant enemies (IE : The US).
My argument being that A) With the missiles and stockpiles that Saddam has been PROVEN to have, he himself poses a serious threat to his neighbors, and with the terrorist contacts and ties that he has, he poses a great threat to the rest of the world, especially the US.
The UN has been trying to disarm Iraq for 12 years now, everyone loves to throw that around, and the key point that nobody really seems to be able to answer is that if the UN could not disarm iraq in 12 years, what makes them think that a few more weeks will do it? The most significant progress in disarming Iraq has been in the past few weeks with Resolution 1441 and the threats of war. Yet it wasn't enough; Iraq is still stalling, still evading, still working as hard as they can to avoid taking any of the measures we've been trying to get them to take...
Now the situation has changed, though. We have the Taliban who's a new element to the mix. This is a group that fanatically hates the US. This is a group that killed thousands of US civilians. Saddam has the weapons, the contacts, and the ability the supply those terrorists with weapons of mass destruction. The US can see this and hell if we want any friends of the Taliban (Or the taliban themselves) to have weapons with that level of destructive power.
We see saddam as a threat to himself, his people, his neighbors, and (though indirectly), ourselves. We worked with the UN for resolution, only to find that the UN was slow, was not thorough, was too lenient and forgiving, and in general, not doing a thorough job like they should. The US has a choice; continue to sit back, watch, and let Iraq evade, dodge, and ignore the issues and demands, or we can actually do something about it. We've given him dozens of opportunities to cooperate, we've given him weeks to give in and disarm, and he hasn't done so.
It's not a matter of warmongering or a matter of oil or a matter of just finishing what daddy started, it's a matter of he HAS the capabilities, we need to take those away from him. The UN wasn't doing the job.
quote:
The UN has been trying to disarm Iraq for 12 years now, everyone loves to throw that around, and the key point that nobody really seems to be able to answer is that if the UN could not disarm iraq in 12 years, what makes them think that a few more weeks will do it?
Because I don't think they were trying very hard for the first 11 1/2 years. The last few weeks have yielded good results because we're finally serious about it.
.quote:
Verily, Nicole doth proclaim:
While I agree that Canada is rather dependant on the US, I have to disagree with what Suds said about no one attacking us because they're there. No one's attacking us because we haven't pissed many people off.
That, and what would really be the point?
quote:
Iron Parcelan's unholy Backstreet Boys obsession manifested in:
That, and what would really be the point?
We share a border with the US? We're a militarily weak country that's sitting right beside the US, and that could be a draw.
But yeah. We're pretty safe here .
quote:
Verily, Nicole doth proclaim:
We share a border with the US? We're a militarily weak country that's sitting right beside the US, and that could be a draw.But yeah. We're pretty safe here
The only reason anyone would invade Canada is either for wood or beavers.
quote:
Iron Parcelan impressed everyone with:
The only reason anyone would invade Canada is either for wood or beavers.
We have many Rockies and Bullwinkles to beat them up.
quote:
Iron Parcelan got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
The only reason anyone would invade Canada is either for wood or beavers.
Don't forget hockey and canadian pennies.
quote:
Tarquinn attempted to be funny by writing:
I don't think that Iraq ever had a chance.
It was clear from the beginning that Bush really wanted that war.
If all Bush wanted was war, he wouldn't be giving Saddam 48 hours to get out of Iraq right now. The UN has had 12 years to get off their ass and uphold their resolutions. They haven't done so. Bush identifies the problem and has diplomatically tried to make them see that this is a real program and they continue to ignore it. They only act when he kicks them in the ass and makes them act, and even then they balk.
He has done his duty by the UN. If they refuse to act, as they have for 12 years, then it's time someone else stepped in and did the job they have decided they are not going to do.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
He is a fanatical lunatic that believes he can do whatever he wants to anyone with no repercussions. He needs to be removed from power before he causes more trouble.
quote:
People in these nations hate America because they envy us. Their societies have failed while democratic capitalism has succeeded. Such societies have failed in the Middle East because of a restrictive religion, the lack of education, the subjugation of their population (especially women), socialist economies and government control over of information. In their rage, subjugated people strike back at Americans and Jews, who have done much better than they have. Have we not the right to protect ourselves against such attacks--and also to address the tyranny that is their root cause?
That has to be the must bullshit reasoning i have ever heard.
"They hate us because they are envious"
whatever.
If that won't solve it, I don't know WHAT will!
1. Canada doesn't want to come? That's cool. I bear Canada no ill will. Canada has been there with us in just about every major conflict the world has ever known. They need to sit this one out. That's okay. Seriously. I bear no ill will, I won't crack any jokes about Canada's military or anything else. Americans have, jokingly, said that Canada could be the new northern states. We would never, of course, threaten Canada's sovereignty, and our comment isn't meant to insult the independence of Canada. But let's face it...Canada is a brother to the north. You (mostly) speak our language, your actors, tech professionals, etc come down here to help enrich our country, and we generally like the same things. No worries, no harm done if you all sit this out.
2. Britain/England/Mort and Leckie's country. Tony Blair is putting himself in a REALLY rough political position for us. But do you know who the first person to call on Sept 11 was, offering aid and assistance? England. Know who, unquestioningly, unfailingly got our back when we went into Afghanistan? England. Know who felt our pain and tried to help? England. England may not be the colonial superpower it once was, and the royals can be kind of embarrassing at times, but be damned if the people don't have that same noble honor about them. If Tony Blair couldn't make it on this one, I would salute the guy and say "no hard feelings" because when we got a bloody nose and a black eye on Sept 11th, Blair's country passed has a handkerchief for our nose, put some ice on our eye, and was there when we went in for round two. Britain has nothing to prove to me.
3. I, speaking as an American, am sorry about that whole "Freedom Fries" thing. A lot of us think it's stupid, too, but patriotism is important, even if it's sometimes embarrassing in how it's instituted.
4. I'd like to hear Tarquinn's honest analysis of things, to be honest. It occurs to me that in all the threads we've seen him interject his opinion into, save for very early on I can't remember him laying out his opinion of matters. He's responded, and argued one-sentence points, but I would very much like to hear his collected overall point of view, without interruption from we Americans. Tarq, if you'd like to send me a PM with your extended point of view, I would be more than happy to discuss it all with you. Though I would still like to see you explain your points on the board. There's no guarantee that we'd agree with each other at all, but at least neither side would be stuck thinking the other is bouncing rhetoric around.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael's account was hax0red to write:
Okay...a few things.1. Canada doesn't want to come? That's cool. I bear Canada no ill will. Canada has been there with us in just about every major conflict the world has ever known. They need to sit this one out. That's okay. Seriously. I bear no ill will, I won't crack any jokes about Canada's military or anything else. Americans have, jokingly, said that Canada could be the new northern states. We would never, of course, threaten Canada's sovereignty, and our comment isn't meant to insult the independence of Canada. But let's face it...Canada is a brother to the north. You (mostly) speak our language, your actors, tech professionals, etc come down here to help enrich our country, and we generally like the same things. No worries, no harm done if you all sit this out.
One of the things I find interesting (in my own almost completely uninformed opionion) is how over the past few decades, Canada seems to be determined to both go her own way and to do her best to make this UN thing work.
Our stance on the Iraq issue ("No go without UN Resolution") just seems to be one of the latest things where we've either shown our strong support for the UN, or done our best to make the UN framework work. (Landmines, the World Court are two other things I can think of off the top of my head, both of which are things Canada has given its full support for but the US has been firmly against)
It seems to me that Canada's role is increasingly less of a frontlines fighter and more of a support/cleanup group, ie the ones who go in after the fighting's mostly done and start trying to clean up the place and maintain the peace.
Historically, this fits us too, since IIRC, Canada was one of the first countries to supply men for the first UN Peacekeeping mission (to Cyprus I believe, an island we still haven't left 30+ years later. :/ ), and we are still heavy in the UN Peacekeeping forces to this day.
Oh well, just my more or less unrelated 2 cents on this view. Not sure why I'm even typing this.
quote:
Nicole spewed forth this undeniable truth:
We have many Rockies and Bullwinkles to beat them up.
But they were from Minnesota.
quote:
Taeolas wrote this stupid crap:
One of the things I find interesting (in my own almost completely uninformed opionion) is how over the past few decades, Canada seems to be determined to both go her own way and to do her best to make this UN thing work.Our stance on the Iraq issue ("No go without UN Resolution") just seems to be one of the latest things where we've either shown our strong support for the UN, or done our best to make the UN framework work. (Landmines, the World Court are two other things I can think of off the top of my head, both of which are things Canada has given its full support for but the US has been firmly against)
It seems to me that Canada's role is increasingly less of a frontlines fighter and more of a support/cleanup group, ie the ones who go in after the fighting's mostly done and start trying to clean up the place and maintain the peace.
Historically, this fits us too, since IIRC, Canada was one of the first countries to supply men for the first UN Peacekeeping mission (to Cyprus I believe, an island we still haven't left 30+ years later. :/ ), and we are still heavy in the UN Peacekeeping forces to this day.
Oh well, just my more or less unrelated 2 cents on this view. Not sure why I'm even typing this.
Can think of worse people I'd want to have covering the back-end of an operation (cleanup and support).
See I believe in this war, and I believe some countries are being dicks just to be dicks. But some countries don't want to or can't make it this time and I'm not comfortable crucifying them, especially when they've covered our butts in the past. The Canadians and the Brits have done that.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
We were all impressed when Taeolas wrote:
Our stance on the Iraq issue ("No go without UN Resolution") just seems to be one of the latest things where we've either shown our strong support for the UN, or done our best to make the UN framework work. (Landmines, the World Court are two other things I can think of off the top of my head, both of which are things Canada has given its full support for but the US has been firmly against)
The problem with this, though, Tae, is that Canada is supporting something that doesn't work. And as long as you throw support behind something that isn't working like it's supposed to, then it won't change. The UN needs to realize that it's not doing its job, people are dissatisfied with its apathetic attitude, and that it needs to get its act together because it is not in a good place right now.
Not meaning to criticize Canada, but I just don't think that's the way to go. Saying you don't want to go to war without proper reason, and you felt the US hadn't provided that, and you'd explained what you felt hadn't been provided, that's okay. But making a lazy, puffed-up organization feel that its doing a good job is a Bad Thing.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
quote:
Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
The problem with this, though, Tae, is that Canada is supporting something that doesn't work. And as long as you throw support behind something that isn't working like it's supposed to, then it won't change. The UN needs to realize that it's not doing its job, people are dissatisfied with its apathetic attitude, and that it needs to get its act together because it is not in a good place right now.Not meaning to criticize Canada, but I just don't think that's the way to go. Saying you don't want to go to war without proper reason, and you felt the US hadn't provided that, and you'd explained what you felt hadn't been provided, that's okay. But making a lazy, puffed-up organization feel that its doing a good job is a Bad Thing.
Actually, I see it differently.
It looks to me like Canada's still trying to get the UN to get off its ass and do what needs to be done.
If everyone that's for the war just leaves the UN in the dust and fights without them, then the UN doesn't do anything. By staying with the UN, Canada keeps it an issue that they have to deal with. It's the only hope for getting them moving, faint hope that it may be.
I recall that someone mentioned in an earlier thread that Canada and the USA trade troops back and forth some. Unless Canada has pulled their troops out of that swap deal, Canada is still putting some people on the line during this war. That, and saying that they're ready to fight just as soon as they get a UN "Ok" tells me that they are, at least somewhat, willing to support us in this war.
If all the nations that will do what needs to be done just leave the UN to do whatever it wants, then the UN will do nothing. The UN will never be better than the countries that work with it. Canada's just trying to do the right thing here, even if it's a different "right thing" that some of us would like to see.
Why do I have the feeling that made no sense whatsoever?
Enough countries withdraw their support temporarily from the UN and it'll get the message that it better get its ass into gear and stop fucking around. But the more support it receives, the less incentive to improve.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
The thing is, Canada has to handle diplomatic stuff like this differently. We are a nation that exists on the support of other nations. All through our history we have been like a brother to other nations... Britain, USA, and we try to be good. We're not saying we won't get involved; we just want to make sure we don't throw off relations with other countries. Especially the US.
You'd be surprised how paranoid some people are up here, saying by taking this stance we're endangering our relationship with the US and might even have to find someone else to latch on to. Normally rational people are being all pessimistic about this. Me... though he's been slipping, I have trust in our leader. Situations like this, Chretien can prove how wise he is; I support his decisions.
In fact, methinks it's time for a sig change... *tinker tinker*
quote:
Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael had this to say about Punky Brewster:
Okay...a few things.1. Canada doesn't want to come? That's cool. I bear Canada no ill will. Canada has been there with us in just about every major conflict the world has ever known. They need to sit this one out. That's okay. Seriously. I bear no ill will, I won't crack any jokes about Canada's military or anything else. Americans have, jokingly, said that Canada could be the new northern states. We would never, of course, threaten Canada's sovereignty, and our comment isn't meant to insult the independence of Canada. But let's face it...Canada is a brother to the north. You (mostly) speak our language, your actors, tech professionals, etc come down here to help enrich our country, and we generally like the same things. No worries, no harm done if you all sit this out.
What about us Aussies?? We gave you Nicole Kidman, Sam Neill, Russell Crowe... ok well... maybe not Russell Crowe... We speak English (in some cases better than even Americans or Canadians j/k)
.. and we been in every major conflict in the world since our founding as a nation, 202 years ago..
quote:
2. Britain/England/Mort and Leckie's country. Tony Blair is putting himself in a REALLY rough political position for us. But do you know who the first person to call on Sept 11 was, offering aid and assistance? England. Know who, unquestioningly, unfailingly got our back when we went into Afghanistan? England. Know who felt our pain and tried to help? England. England may not be the colonial superpower it once was, and the royals can be kind of embarrassing at times, but be damned if the people don't have that same noble honor about them. If Tony Blair couldn't make it on this one, I would salute the guy and say "no hard feelings" because when we got a bloody nose and a black eye on Sept 11th, Blair's country passed has a handkerchief for our nose, put some ice on our eye, and was there when we went in for round two. Britain has nothing to prove to me.
True, Tony was first. But I'd bet Johnny Howard was on hold waiting before George and Tony finished their call. We were the ones that gave Tony the Handkerchief, and shipped the ice out of the freezer! 
We also sent in our SAS troops into Afghanistan, and from all the reports I've seen/heard the US troops thought the Aussies were by far the best guys to send out for a lot of scouting missions etc.
Don't forget the Aussies!!!
It won't happen, but I just want to see the questions asked.
"Hey! Aren't you guys neutral?"
'We are. We just have France now.'
quote:
Soldar had this to say about the Spice Girls:
Just waiting for the Swiss to ski down their mountains into France laying down an unknown amount of firepower, and take over France in a couple of days.It won't happen, but I just want to see the questions asked.
"Hey! Aren't you guys neutral?"
'We are. We just have France now.'
It would only be an improvement.
quote:
Nicole had this to say about Cuba:
Putting pressure on a system like the UN will never work. If more countries pull out, it won't get off it's ass; it will crumble. I got a great giant surge of Canada loving after this, as we're trying to serve as an example.
Yah, that's part of what I was trying to say, but couldn't get out.
