The evil that men do.

[Poonani Maker]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=mH3BTaWrQ3I

 

[bigjohnson]

It sounded like a question with a lot of context abrubtly hacked away to me. Never let facts stop a great sound bite.

 

[KontrollerX]

This is surprising?

Its Fox News for christsakes.

The war network.

Pretty sure I've heard that Edie nutjob chick say even worse things on Fox N friends.

 

[Obsidian]

Iran is the enemy of our country, and a dangerous upcoming threat. They're the ones causing most of the trouble in Iraq. The fact that no one in the whole Western world wants to do anything about it just shows you how pussified our society has become. Let's just f*cking roll over for them, why don't we.

President Bush named THREE enemies as being an "Axis of Evil." All of them were third world countries whom we could have and should have confronted. We've only knocked out one. Pitiful. And they call us a superpower.

We're acting like women.

 

[wolf116]

No, you call yourselfs a superpower

 

[spider_007]

ignorance....it's all around us.

It's so anoying too. There is a lot of things i could say about this, but i'm not going to, because its pointless......people here claim to be outside the matrix, but they are not, their eyes are still closed to any other possibility other then the one programed in their head.

it's a shame.
And vary anoying.

 

[Trinitron]

Nobody cares about Iran anyway.

Accept Isreal. Like it or not, you're fighting a war for oil and Isreal in the middle east.

 

[DJDamage]

This thread should have been closed... yesterday.

 

[Obsidian]

You should leave them alone unless they start seriously bothering you. Who cares about Saddam killing his own people, now he's not about there is still chaos, but with an increased risk to the Western countries. Not only that, every time America has a war Britain gets dragged into it. If Iran starts acting very threateningly then they should be destroyed. Nobody cares about Iran anyway.

They are bothering us. As I said, Iran is behind a good portion of the terrorism in Iraq, not to mention Lebanon. Also, they are trying to develop nuclear weapons. Pretty much the whole world realizes that but refuses to do anything about it -- mainly because certain rivals like Russia and China want our enemies to grow stronger.

And we didn't attack Iraq to help out the Iraqi people, whom Saddam was brutalizing. We just used that as an added justification/excuse. We attacked because the Ba'ath party was trying to develop WMDs and because we thought their weapons programs had progressed further than they really had. Also, Iraq was routinely shooting at our planes in the No-Fly Zone.

And yes, Israel is one reason we care about the Middle East. They're our ally so we have a duty to protect them. Our other motive (and a big explanation for why we're allied to Israel) is the region's oil wealth. If Iran took over the whole Middle East, they would control much of the oil supply, and we'd be in trouble.

 

[Nip/Tuck]

Iran is the enemy of our country, and a dangerous upcoming threat. They're the ones causing most of the trouble in Iraq. The fact that no one in the whole Western world wants to do anything about it just shows you how pussified our society has become. Let's just f*cking roll over for them, why don't we.

President Bush named THREE enemies as being an "Axis of Evil." All of them were third world countries whom we could have and should have confronted. We've only knocked out one. Pitiful. And they call us a superpower.

We're acting like women.

If you are so inclined to blow up innocent kids and destroy people's family, why don't you join the army? Please go fight for your country since you clearly believe in the CAUSE. Make sure you have your kids join too. You won't be laughing when their "freedom fighters" aka. terrorists hurt you.

Ignorance is amazing, do you not see what the United States is doing is ILLEGAL according to INTERNATIONAL LAW? Iraq war ILLEGAL no one including the US public does anything to stop this useless war. Yes you are right, the American public are failures for not educating themselves and exercising their political power by voting against the war.

Seriously put yourself in the shoes of a young teenage boy in Iraq. There are foreign "liberators" killing their family and friends. It's basically the something as China having troops here and causing chaos. People wonder why the "insurgents / terrorists" numbers aren't going down... obviously just like VIETNAM they are fighting for their COUNTRY and FREEDOM.

 

[Poonani Maker]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pa3J-L29iT8

 

[Obsidian]

Actually, the insurgents' numbers are going down. No, they are not fighting for their freedom. Like the communist rebels in South Vietnam -- who were being supported by Russia and North Vietnam -- many of the terrorists in Iraq are being supported by Iran. We were too timid to go after the heart of the enemy in Vietnam, and we're equally timid today.

But like I said, the insurgents are losing ground thanks to an increase in American troop levels. Also, the Iraqi population is getting more and more sick of the insurgents.

And I don't believe that war can ever really be "illegal" because that implies there is some overarching world government with a right to make laws. Such a government doesn't exist. You could say the UN is such a government, but you would be mistaken on three counts:
1) We partly run the UN through the Security Council, so we almost by definition cannot violate UN resolutions. If anyone tries to condemn us or attack us through the UN, we can veto their resolutions
2) The UN is a joke, which doesn't enforce its own will and, for the most part, does not promote democracy or discourage tyranny in any way.
3) Our invasion of Iraq coincided with various UN resolutions, even if those resolutions were somewhat vague.

And it doesn't make sense to compare us to China because we are a democracy and China is a tyrannical oligarchy.

I think all this talk about "illegal" wars is mainly another way of talking about "immoral" wars. But the difference is that, in the past, people could analyze the subtleties of morality and determine that a war, based on several criteria, was not objectively immoral. Even a war to attack another country might be just. But "illegality" is more clear-cut and simplistic. Saying a war is "illegal" requires very little thought or in-depth analysis. Some people go all the way and just say all wars are illegal. It seems overly simplistic and almost feminine to me.

Finally, I'm not inclined to join the army because I can contribute more to the American economy doing what I'm currently preparing for -- which is to practice law. If there were a shortage of soldiers such that I was actually needed, I probably would sign up to fight. But in our circumstances, my talents can be better used elsewhere. Your attack on me is like saying that anyone who advocates tough-on-crime policies should sign up for the police. It just doesn't make much sense.

 

[Nip/Tuck]

Actually, the insurgents' numbers are going down. No, they are not fighting for their freedom. Like the communist rebels in South Vietnam -- who were being supported by Russia and North Vietnam -- many of the terrorists in Iraq are being supported by Iran. We were too timid to go after the heart of the enemy in Vietnam, and we're equally timid today.

But like I said, the insurgents are losing ground thanks to an increase in American troop levels. Also, the Iraqi population is getting more and more sick of them.

And I don't believe that war can ever really be "illegal" because that implies there is some overarching world government with a right to make laws. Such a government doesn't exist. You could say the UN is such a government, but you would be mistaken on three counts:
1) We partly run the UN through the Security Council, so we almost by definition cannot violate UN resolutions. If anyone tries to condemn us or attack us through the UN, we can veto their resolutions
2) The UN is a joke, which doesn't enforce its own will and, for the most part, does not promote democracy or discourage tyranny in any way.
3) Our invasion of Iraq coincided with various UN resolutions, even if those resolutions were somewhat vague.

And it doesn't make sense to compare us to China because we are a democracy and China is a tyrannical oligarchy.

I think all this talk about "illegal" wars is mainly another way of talking about "immoral" wars. But the difference is that, in the past, people could analyze the subtleties of morality and determine that a war, based on several criteria, was not objectively immoral. Even a war to attack another country might be just. But "illegality" is more clear-cut and simplistic. Saying a war is "illegal" requires very little thought or in-depth analysis. Some people go all the way and just say all wars are illegal. It seems overly simplistic and almost feminine to me.

Finally, I'm not inclined to join the army because I can contribute more to the American economy doing what I'm currently preparing for -- which is to practice law. If there were a shortage of soldiers such that I was actually needed, I probably would sign up to fight. But in our circumstances, my talents can be better used elsewhere. Your attack on me is like saying that anyone who advocates tough-on-crime policies should sign up for the police. It just doesn't make much sense.

Ok explain to me why you are in Iraq? But not in North Korea, Iran, Darfur and Somalia? North Korea has weapons of mass destruction, we all knew it.. they actually shot a missile over JAPAN that has US bases in it.

Yes UN is a joke since it's basically the US. The way is still illegal even in the US. Did they actually declare war? No I don't think we did. What's the mission anyways?

Doesn't it seem wrong that no one supports the war but it keeps on going regardless? Seriously no one supports the war in the US and around the world. The anti-war protests in DC was actually bigger than the Vietnam. Of course you won't read or hear about it because media would rather cover Britney Spears here.

Actually if you really cared then you would join the fight because you would want to support your brothers. It's common sense that tax dollars don't go to the soldiers. They have shortage of supplies for chrissake, ever read about the soldier's family having to send bullet proof vests cuz the Army couldn't provide them? Also look at the number of Army and Navy recruiting ads, ever since the start of the war it had steadily increased. The number is stretched thin and need more people, the reserve is exhausted after the surge. That's why they let people with criminal records join now too. So please stop making excuses and join if your so inclined to kill the enemy.

Oh please, China's economy is more capitalistic than the US. It is SO EASY to set up a business and start. In the US it takes so long, paying taxes and getting "licenses." The government is communist not an oligarchy, if you want to stretch it you could say a monopoly. But I don't know how you can use an economic ideology to characterize a government structure. People need to understand that there is a difference.

If you want an oligopoly just look at the US MARKET and MEDIA. Microsoft, Apple, FOX, CNN all part of the same matrix.

 

[Nip/Tuck]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Pa3J-L29iT8

Just a puppet to corporate America. I'm impressed though he used to do cocaine and is the only president with a criminal record. If you can do drugs, arrested for DUI and be president... what can't you do! He is so motivational... :crackup:

 

[Obsidian]

In China, the government still controls more than half the GDP, they don't have free elections, and they don't allow freedom of religion. Communism.

And I said oligarchy, not oligopoly.

You're obviously not reading what I wrote very carefully, because I already said that the reason we're not in Iran or North Korea is because we're pussies. We're not on Somalia because we have very little interest there, and we never went to Darfur for the same reason (and also because the UN won't pass any resolutions to fix the problems there). Actually, the last I heard, Darfur was engaged in peace talks.

 

[Nip/Tuck]

In China, the government still controls more than half the GDP, they don't have free elections, and they don't allow freedom of religion. Communism.

And I said oligarchy, not oligopoly.

You're obviously not reading what I wrote very carefully, because I already said that the reason we're not in Iran or North Korea is because we're pussies. We're not on Somalia because we have very little interest there, and we never went to Darfur for the same reason (and also because the UN won't pass any resolutions to fix the problems there). Actually, the last I heard, Darfur was engaged in peace talks.

Yes since US is only interested in helping when they benefit. Just like genocide in WWII and Rwanda. They waited out to see it would fix itself.

The difference now is that US is waging war, rather than trying to WIN the war. If they really wanted to win, they could have but that's not what they're there for. Corporations are making huge profits by selling weapons and oil to the US military. There is a reason why US is called a military industrial complex. Their interest is totally based on corporate greed.

The media doesn't engage the public to give a sh*t about what is happening. All they care about is profit. Which is why the US public deserves to have an idiot president.

Didn't you just say that UN is the US? If the US really wanted they would have pasted a resolution already. They just don't want to waste the troops or the money to save some blacks.

 

[Obsidian]

Think of the US in the UN as a conservative republican president who has to put up with a liberal-dominated Congress. He can veto stuff, but he can't do sh1t.

Umm, why would we waste our tax dollars helping out areas when we don't even benefit? We put up with enough nonsense from detractors like you when we take actions that WILL benefit us. Governments should always look out for their own interests if they can do so morally. If looking out for your own interest can ALSO help someone else out, then by all means look out for your own interest.

And if you really thought about it, you would realize how ridiculous it is to assert that that the Bush administration is intentionally prolonging the Iraq situation. Bush doesn't even have any associations with the weapons developers, only with the oil people.

 

[Nip/Tuck]

Think of the US in the UN as a conservative republican president who has to put up with a liberal-dominated Congress. He can veto stuff, but he can't do sh1t.

Umm, why would we waste our tax dollars helping out areas when we don't even benefit? We put up with enough nonsense from detractors like you when we take actions that WILL benefit us. Governments should always look out for their own interests if they can do so morally. If looking out for your own interest can ALSO help someone else out, then by all means look out for your own interest.

And if you really thought about it, you would realize how ridiculous it is to assert that that the Bush administration is intentionally prolonging the Iraq situation. Bush doesn't even have any associations with the weapons developers, only with the oil people.

You clearly don't get how military industrial complex work do you? YOU NEED FVCKING OIL TO WAGE WAR YOU MORON. Tanks, plains and battle ships all run on OIL.... wow. Why do you think Japan attacked Pearl Harbor? US was their oil supply and they stopped shipping them oil. So they couldn't their conquest in China.

Yes everyone is and should look after their self-interest. I never argued with that, I just don't like when people b*tch about other people doing the same thing. Like when Iran was trying to get themselves nukes. Why can't they? US has nukes... not really their fvcking business telling how other countries should run their country. If they had such a big problem, they should invade the country. Oh yea wait, they already have their hands full with insurgents in Iraq armed with some rocks and AKs.

 

[Obsidian]

Iran signed a treaty whereby they agreed not to develop nukes. They're abusing the technology they acquired from the treaty -- and using it to develop nukes!

US has nukes... not really their fvcking business telling how other countries should run their country. If they had such a big problem, they should invade [Iran].

Yeah, that's exactly what I said we should do. And I don't think the Iraqi instability is a good reason to hold off the invasion. As I said before, if we dealt with Iran, the insurgents in Iraq would lose much of their support.

And besides, they're both third-world countries. We oughta be able to take on them both. The only reason we don't do it is because we want to be popular. Wouldn't want to tick anyone off...after all, dude, let's just go with the flow...

 

[Mad Manic]

Iran is the enemy of our country, and a dangerous upcoming threat. They're the ones causing most of the trouble in Iraq. The fact that no one in the whole Western world wants to do anything about it just shows you how pussified our society has become. Let's just f*cking roll over for them, why don't we.

President Bush named THREE enemies as being an "Axis of Evil." All of them were third world countries whom we could have and should have confronted. We've only knocked out one. Pitiful. And they call us a superpower.

We're acting like women.

Iran's the best country in the world. I can't see how what happens in Iran has anything to do with the West. Why isn't America checking out Africa? Too dangerous? Iran isn't a 3rd world country. You're right they don't have a huge military base to kill people like the USA (Atomic Bomb on Japan killing half a million, thousands dead in Iraq and Afghanistan, thousands dead in Vietnam war, yes thought I'd remind you about this 'threat' America poses). You've never even been to the Middle East and Iran hasn't ever attacked America, shows what an idiot you are.

MM