Terrorism (23 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Majed

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,630
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
You've probably seen Bowling for Columbine. It's all about the fear.

Keep 'em scared, and you can pull just about any agenda.
I actually haven't seen the movie.... is it worth watching?

I watched Moore's F 9/11. I liked a lot of the facts that he pulled out. I just wasn't impressed at all when he kept making fun of Bush. I don't see how that helps the argument or the cause (I doubt he wanted a comedy... then again, maybe he just wanted to get more people to see it).

Is BFC the same type?? I havn't heard much about it..
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
83,515
I actually liked BFC better than F9/11. It was a little more coherent, even if -- like all Moore movies -- its underlying foundation is entertainment and nothing of really solid, critical analysus.
 

Majed

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,630
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
I actually liked BFC better than F9/11. It was a little more coherent, even if -- like all Moore movies -- its underlying foundation is entertainment and nothing of really solid, critical analysus.
Good... I'll try to see it whenever i get the chance. His material really needs to be more coherent.
 

Vinman

2013 Prediction Cup Champ
Jul 16, 2002
11,481
++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++



False cause fallacy if i ever saw one.

No the USA hasn't been attacked since. This doesn't mean we are any safer. It doesn't mean that Americans aren't still afraid. It doesn't justify the Iraqi invasion.
Of course ppl are still afraid...its almost inevitable that we'll be hit again in the future...

But I can say that this administration is doing a good job (besides the war with Iraq) of keeping us safe at home

I have no confidence in Kerry...our safety is NOT his #1 concern..he has said so himself
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,703
++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++


When people are afraid, their minds can easily be molded to agree with you. no matter how stupid your argument is.

over simplification of what happened...
USA: We're under attack!!
US Gov: We need to fight terrorism.
**Note: So far so good...
US Gov: Iraq is a threat, let's attack them to stay safe.
USA: OK
A little too simply stated my friend, almost mocking the U.S. Government and its citizens. Yes it was the wrong choice, but I would like to see what President Majed, Swag, or Bes would have done in that same situation. And don't say "well of course I wouldn't attack Iraq" because you already know the outcome. Everyone is quick to judge after the fact, something that plagues our society at present time.
 

Vinman

2013 Prediction Cup Champ
Jul 16, 2002
11,481
Why was it the wrong choice ??

- he funded terrorists (Hamas and Hezbollah), and gave money to suicide bombers families

- He invaded Kuwait, his soldiers raped and pillaged the ppl

- He gased his own ppl, killing anyone and everyone in his way

- he tried on several occasions to obtain WMD (we may all find out later if Syria is "safekeeping" his arsenal)

- He didnt follow any of the rules of surrender to the US after the Gulf War, and gave the UN constant problems with letting the inspectors do their jobs

- he attacked our planes several times in the "no fly" zone, another breach of the agreement, and not to mention, an act of war

- several intel sources say that he had met Bin Laden on 2 occasions prior to Sept 11 (the enemy of my enemy is my friend)

ppl say Iraq has nothing to do with Al Queida. Tell that to the families of the headless victims. Al Queida didnt just show up there now...................
 

Majed

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,630
++ [ originally posted by Vinman ] ++
Of course ppl are still afraid...its almost inevitable that we'll be hit again in the future...

But I can say that this administration is doing a good job (besides the war with Iraq) of keeping us safe at home

I have no confidence in Kerry...our safety is NOT his #1 concern..he has said so himself
It's doing a decent job here at home, yes. But the Iraq war is going to backfire. Bush can't worry about saftey, make it his top priority, then go for oil and make more enimies and thus jeopordize our security. It defeats his whole purpose of focusing on secuirity!

Kerry is no angel either... but at this moment, it's hard for me to imagine someone doing a worse overall job than Bush. The Iraq thing is just too much.
 

Majed

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,630
++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


A little too simply stated my friend, almost mocking the U.S. Government and its citizens. Yes it was the wrong choice, but I would like to see what President Majed, Swag, or Bes would have done in that same situation. And don't say "well of course I wouldn't attack Iraq" because you already know the outcome. Everyone is quick to judge after the fact, something that plagues our society at present time.

I wouldn't mock my second home for the sake of it. It's the truth and it hurts me as well. What i mean is that this can't continue.

In the same situation!!? common Andy!?! What situation!? Bush created the whole Iraq situation from scratch.
There was no evidence to begin with!! There's no way in hell that i would even agree to invade Iraq. I didn't agree then and I don't now.

Read the reasons to attack Iraq... None of them made sense to begin with!?!
It was obviously for the oil!
I've known that Saddam and BL can't stand each other.

a president that put US soldiers in harms way (not to mention 1000+ of them dying for nothing :rolleyes: ), bombed thousands of Iraqies (many of them women and children), and put two countryies in chaos, and is making more enimies is the plauge.
 

Majed

Senior Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,630
++ [ originally posted by Vinman ] ++
Why was it the wrong choice ??

- he funded terrorists (Hamas and Hezbollah), and gave money to suicide bombers families
This has no direct connection with US secuirity. Hamas and Hezballah have no links with Al-Qaeda. These people are fighting for the land. Whether their method for doing so is ethical or not is a whole other issue. There's not much difference between them and the uniformed, armed, and equiped soldiers of Israel are any different. Both are terrorizing people.

- He invaded Kuwait, his soldiers raped and pillaged the ppl
Yep... that's why the gulf countries paid the US to fight him the first time. That was done pretty successfully.

- He gased his own ppl, killing anyone and everyone in his way
Yep... now the poor US soldiers are doing it with DU ammunition and bombs thinkig that they're making us safer.

- he tried on several occasions to obtain WMD (we may all find out later if Syria is "safekeeping" his arsenal)
tried but failed. UN could have proved that if they were given more time.

- He didnt follow any of the rules of surrender to the US after the Gulf War, and gave the UN constant problems with letting the inspectors do their jobs
This is not grounds for invasion.
Israel has and still is violating more UN resolutions.

- he attacked our planes several times in the "no fly" zone, another breach of the agreement, and not to mention, an act of war
US Christian peacekeepers have been shot and beaten by Israeli soldiers. What are we doing about that?

- several intel sources say that he had met Bin Laden on 2 occasions prior to Sept 11 (the enemy of my enemy is my friend)

ppl say Iraq has nothing to do with Al Queida. Tell that to the families of the headless victims. Al Queida didnt just show up there now...................
They have nothing to due with each other. I'll say it a couple more times if you want. Saddam and BL can't stand each other.

I can't stand Saddam either, but his people should overthrow him when they ware ready.


Conclusion:
1. We are not safer.
2. It was all about the oil.
3. We got punk'd! :rolleyes:
 
OP

Zlatan

Senior Member
Jun 9, 2003
23,049
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #517
    ++ [ originally posted by Vinman ] ++
    You'll be happy to know that on sunday, in the NY Times magazine, John Kerry said that terrorism is a "nuisance"

    Didnt Clinton say something similar in 2000, after the bombing of the USS Cole (which happened exactly 4 years ago today), and did NOTHING about it !!!!

    If John "Scary" wins, America is in deep shit............................

    Yeah, well, if Bush "I've got the mental capacity of a 4-year old" wins then America is in even deeper shit.


    ++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


    A little too simply stated my friend, almost mocking the U.S. Government and its citizens. Yes it was the wrong choice, but I would like to see what President Majed, Swag, or Bes would have done in that same situation. And don't say "well of course I wouldn't attack Iraq" because you already know the outcome. Everyone is quick to judge after the fact, something that plagues our society at present time.

    We already saw it Andy. We saw what the rest of the world would do. We saw what France and Germany would have done, so it's not a question about judging afterwards, people were saying it was wrong even before the invasion started.


    ++ [ originally posted by Vinman ] ++
    Why was it the wrong choice ??

    - he funded terrorists (Hamas and Hezbollah), and gave money to suicide bombers families

    - He invaded Kuwait, his soldiers raped and pillaged the ppl

    - He gased his own ppl, killing anyone and everyone in his way

    - he tried on several occasions to obtain WMD (we may all find out later if Syria is "safekeeping" his arsenal)

    - He didnt follow any of the rules of surrender to the US after the Gulf War, and gave the UN constant problems with letting the inspectors do their jobs

    - he attacked our planes several times in the "no fly" zone, another breach of the agreement, and not to mention, an act of war

    - several intel sources say that he had met Bin Laden on 2 occasions prior to Sept 11 (the enemy of my enemy is my friend)

    ppl say Iraq has nothing to do with Al Queida. Tell that to the families of the headless victims. Al Queida didnt just show up there now...................
    1. Hamas and Hezbollah are active only in Palestine and Israel and hence have nothing to do with US security.

    2. True, but so did Karadžić and I dont see the US chasing him.

    3. He probably had WMDs years ago, probably US made WMDs too sold to him by the US government.

    4. Why should he surrender to the US, a country thousands of miles away from him?

    5. The no fly zone is aczually Iraqi sky, so I see nothing wrong with him flying there. How would you feel if someone declared a no fly zone over the east coast?

    6. It has been said many times before that there is no link between Saddam and Osama. In terms of religion, Saddam is one of the most moderate muslim leaders in the Arab world, and Osama hates him because of his modern thinking and "not following Kur'an"
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 20)