Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Bush & Blair on trial for crimes against humanity

Author
Message
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 17:24
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/3055075.stm

Hmm, Its funny how many people believed the rather 'stretched' case that the reason for invading a desperately impoverished country was for our own safety. Even I was convinced for a while. :-s I mean...Iraq attack America? Have you seen how far that is?!!! The technology to launch missiles that far and acurately is SPACE AGE technology...Iraq doesn't even have working sewage systems.

Regime change? (Regime being a cleverly chosen word because it has associations with Facism and soundbites like "suffered under the new regime"). The US government chooses which regimes/countries it considers acceptable and which it doesn't. Crimes against people isn't a reason to find governments unacceptable. Usually, it is "Do what we tell you!" - "No! We won't! We want things our way." - "Ok, then die."

Iraq doesn't want us there. I don't blame them. We've already killed thousands of them. (The weapons are not SMART - over half of them missed their targets and killed innocent people.) Soon, after thousands more die from disease and starvation because we have failed to deliver anything but nice big oil/agricultural/factory based companies. - Look everyone has jobs now (which means: we can make children 11 years old do 12 hours shifts for 10p a day!! And then sell the things they made to mugs back in US and UK for £80.)

"Trading figures from giant oil company BP (LSE: BP.L - news - msgs) out this week confirmed that crude oil prices averaged their highest levels for more than 12 years in the first quarter of 2003 -- largely because of supply worries linked to the war in Iraq." Hmmm...nice for BP...

"The government(UK) has approved a substantial rise in arms sales to Indonesia and India, despite guidelines stating it will not export weapons if they could be used for internal repression or fuel regional instability." Guardian 7/1/2003 (July) Oooh! Must have been all those adverts-uhhmm-I mean TV footage of the Iraq war...

So erm, I think they should be sitting next to Milosevic in the dock because our governments have killed more people over the last 10 years than all of the other "nasty" governments put together.
Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
[href]www.redmotion.com[/href]
Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 19:35
*Breaking News* The world isn't fair.

I only have one weapon against them - the ballot box, and I intend to use it when I get a chance.

Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 19:42
Ballot boxes take too long - and as we can see now - make no real difference. We (the people) have no power.

Personally, I think they should bring back the dinosaurs. At least they were honest -

Large carnivore: "RROOOOAAARR!" which roughly translatedis: "Hi little creature I'm going to rip you limb from limb!"
Little creature: "Oh Sh-eeeeaaaaahhhhhhh!!! RIP! TEAR! SQUELCH"


No beatin' 'round the bush with them...

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 20:03
The war crimes law they were indicted under was in Belgium, which has since repealed it, because it allows prosecution without standing -- effectively, being charged with a crime despite the fact that you, the crime, or the plaintiff have nothing to do with the legal system of that country, or even the crime itself.

As for Bush and his war, yeah it sucks that governments conduct illegitimate wars.

However, that doesn't play with the American people (who don't deeply give a shit what their government does).

If Bush is going down for anything, it will be crapping the most prosperous economy ever into record deficits. $450 Billion deficit? $350 billion tax cut? $100 Billion for the war? Let's not forget last year's tax cut, too.

Don't the figure kind of add up to at least a much smaller deficit if Bush had just shut-up and kept all his global capitalist policies to himself?

People can say all the want about all this going back to Sept 11.

"Oh, Bush was isolationist before Sept 11!"

WRONG!

Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz (the real powers behind the Bush admin) had drafted documents for waging war in Iraq nearly three years before Bush got elected.

They're all a bunch of neo-Reaganites who plan to refurbish the old Cold War model and stamp it on the Islamic world.

Look up "The Project for a New American Century".

http://www.newamericancentury.org/ Their website.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/pnac_030310.html ABC News report about the PNAC and the war.

http://pnac.info/ A not so supportive site.

"The deficits are a result of the damage from Sept 11!"

In the New York City, this is true. The marked decline in trade -- plus the sheer loss of the WTC -- has badly damaged a city that would not even exist without it.

As for the nation, this is not so much the case.

What has happened is Bush has muddled a recessionary recovery by raping Keynesian economics. At the one time when government spending really is a difference-maker -- an economic recovery -- Bush took it away, and started pumping half our money into weapons systems!

While war is good for the economy, infrastructure is better. Weapons do not have as large of a reciprocal effect as roads, schools, etc.

As for Blair . . . he's going to get his from Parliament.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
haggisman
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 20:15
Quote: "The weapons are not SMART - over half of them missed their targets and killed innocent people."


I'd would love to know where you got that statistic from...

project: light/obscurance mapper (85% done)
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 20:52
Over half of them? That's one of the stupidest guestimates I'e ever had the pleasure of viewing. Oh please.

Bush did well considering the situation. I commend his handling of the events that took place.

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 20:57
During the Gulf War only one percert of the coverage was about human suffering . A group of children were asked what the remembered most about it. The weapons was the most common reply. We (myself included) were convinced that these bombs weren't hurting many people. But they were. I don't have a quote to hand right now regarding the high-tech weapons...(but I'll quote it when I do).
(We also carpet bombed Iraq during the war ; "intelligence estimates of "in excess of 200,000 civilian deaths." The Times and Nouvelle Observateur, March 3, 1991. Slow news = noone read or wanted to read about it. We all thought every Iraqi was like Hussein.)

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
haggisman
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 21:38
Quote: "Fewer than 10% of the bombs dropped by allied forces in 1991 were smart bombs. A study by the US human rights organisation Middle East Watch concluded that up to 3,000 Iraqi civilians were killed by bombing by the US, Britain and others"


from http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,11816,903866,00.html

project: light/obscurance mapper (85% done)
Hamish McHaggis
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Dec 2002
Location: Modgnik Detinu
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 21:47
Quote: "I only have one weapon against them - the ballot box"


I also have a machine gun !

cuRant PRogekt: a three-de map editer
Why the hell'd you ask me for crying out loud!?!
Athelon XP 1400 Plus - Nvidia Geforce MX400 - 256mb RAM
CrayZemon
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jun 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 15th Jul 2003 21:53
Isn't it amazing how quick people are to poop on Bush and Blair and forget totally about Saddam Hussein. It's almost as if they are defending him and the people like him.

Let's face it, no matter what decision anyone makes in this situation everyone is going to get creamed. We've stopped so many terrorist attacks (or plans for attacks) on our soil over the past several months. I'd like to see you Bush bashers do better. Imagine the consequences of taking our enemies lightly...

QUOTE: "*Breaking News* The world isn't fair."
is correct.

"I need gopher-chucks!!"
the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 01:18
I remember going to belgium about 5 years ago and the farmers still dig up live amunition in the fields. Occasionally they even dig up mustard gas. A lot of people in Iraq are still to die and it will only get a fleeting mention in the news. They where using cluster bombs in Iraq as well as a lot of un-smart bombs (People from Iraq arn't worth a lot).

Quote: "Isn't it amazing how quick people are to poop on Bush and Blair and forget totally about Saddam Hussein. It's almost as if they are defending him and the people like him."


Blair and Bush are the last people in the world who should be doing this type of thing. They are incapable of doing it responsably. The people of Iraq still have a hell of a lot of suffering to go.
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 01:53
Jasonio and 8truths you guys are pretty brave writing the truth about these things, in English!

Now haggisman thinks that you both are terrorists.

CrayZemon you are entirely correct to compare Saddam with Bush and Blair. They are the same.

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
CrayZemon
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jun 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 02:30
@ heatbone

Hmmm, last I checked, I wasn't forced to vote for Bush or face a gun up my nose. Last I checked, Bush didn't nerve gas me or my fellow citizens. Last I checked, Bush didn't want my fellow citizens to worship me. Last I checked, Bush wasn't causing any military problems with Mexico or Canade, or Blair causing troubles in Ireland/Scottland.

C'mon guys, I can't believe you are putting our democrat leaders on the same level as a tyrant pig. And you know what, I really don't care if Saddam and his regime were harboring weapons of mass destruction or not, they had it comming big time!!! Even the Clinton administration entered Iraq more than once to take out targets of military value, including WOMD. Let's also not forget the terrorist camps and lodgings that Iraq hosted.

"I need gopher-chucks!!"
andrew11
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 02:41 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 02:43
I agree. I don't know what peoples' (mostly UK) problem with Bush is. How do you think YOU would handle things in his situation? He can't please everybody.

I hate debates like this. I hope this topic gets locked and deleted.

"All programmers are playwrites and all computers are lousy actors" -Anon
8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 08:13
I sure as hell wouldn't push an unjust war!

C'mon!

Yes, Hussein sucks.

But Hussein is a long way down the list of dictators who have it coming.

The greatest threats to American lives today are in Korea (nukes) and SE Asia (al Qaeda).

What makes Hussein different is:

1: He's an easy mark. Beatable. Whereas the damned Koreans bloodies our noses and dragged us into blizzards, trench warfare and cannibalism during the '50s.

2: OIL. N. Korea is a rock. SE Asia is probably a good 20-30 yrs away from being exploited for its resources.


I'm all for removing evil regimes. But, let's start at the top of the list and work our way down.

Start with China. Oh, wait, we'd lose. And badly.

You show me Zhiang Zemin's head in a plastic bag, and I'll give you permission to do the same to Hussein.

Until then, it is absurd to threaten Iraq, Iran, Syria, or anyone else.

Iraq taught everyone the worst possible lesson: you MUST acquire nukes at all costs, or the US will kick your ass. Otherwise, explain Korea.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
HZence
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Mar 2003
Location:
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 09:53 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 10:02
I'm an American, so trust me on this one - our government is full of crap when it comes to stuff like this. As long as world powers like the United States exist, human beings will never actually be truly free to do what we wish. We go around determining who we like and who we don't like. Whoever we don't like we tear to pieces (all the while actually claiming to be helping - yes, helping the citizens of the country) and turn the nation into a mini-america. The difference is that they're not allowed to become a world power, have an offensive military or any weapons, for that matter.

By the way, I totally agree with the whole idea about the word "regime". It seems like as soon as the U.S. realized that Bush is a total moron, he suddenly started having these great speeches that included words to which he probably did not even know the meaning. Odds are he used our tax money to hire somebody to write his speeches for him.

Quote: "Iraq taught everyone the worst possible lesson: you MUST acquire nukes at all costs, or the US will kick your ass. "


Lol. Actually, I think it should be: "If you do acquire nukes at all the U.S. will kick your ass." Better, yet: "If you don't think that the U.S. is a-ok we'll kick your ass!"

8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 10:54
American military history has always been marked by a willingness to bully and a reluctance to act against those who fight well.

If it's the crippled Spanish Empire, we'll get 'em. Mexico, in a cinch. Guatemala, Chile, the Congo, Greece -- you betcha! Iraq . . . duh?!

On the other hand, we had to be dragged kicking and screaming into WWII; despite numerous previous provocations by the Japanese, we waited until a full assault was made on sovreign territory.

Vietnam we got into because we thought it would be a cakewalk, and suddenly realized -- no the French didn't suck that much -- the Viet Cong were damn good.

Americans have the odd delusion that we are this profoundly martial people, despite the fact we people our military mostly with social outcasts (a lot of guys from ghettos, barrios, and trailer parks end up in the armed services). Our infantry have never matched up well in an unsupported fight, and a lot of this stems from the downsides of the American lifestyle.

Yet, we just ignore things like the Chinese intervention in Korea, Somalia, Lebanon, the Battle of the Bulge, Vietnam, and Iran (1980) because those were just flukes. We're Americans after all! Bulletproof, baby.

The truth is, the power behind the US has been and will always be economic. We can out-produce anyone on this planet. Thus, we build nd build and build weapons systems and assure ourselves these will win our wars for us.

Never mind recent history indiciates we are actually moving into an infantry phase of war (see Bosnia, Checnya, US phase of Afghanistan). Even the Iraq war became more of a mech infantry war than a tank & bomber war.

Why do I say all this?

One, because the Iraq occupation is an infantry war, and at that one that is practically a full page ad inviting every idiot who wants to bag an American to show up.

Also, because American arrogance is getting to such a point we may end up breaking our own rules and picking fights we can't win.

If George W wanted to make the world safe for democracy, I would support it in a heart beat. This is not the case.

Iraq was just an old-school colonial land grab, sponsored by the good people at Halliburton and the PNAC.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
haggisman
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 12:34
Quote: "Jasonio and 8truths you guys are pretty brave writing the truth about these things, in English!

Now haggisman thinks that you both are terrorists. "


Why would anyone consider them brave? They spout out trash with no factual basis, they take away focus from the "real" issues and give the good honest activist people who work for a better world a bad name.

In this whole thread when i have posted i have simply contested their facts/ or lack there of. I have not called anyone a "terrorist" and its not a word i would use lightly either.

project: light/obscurance mapper (85% done)
Solidz Snake
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 12:43 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 12:45
*imagining if one day they'll change the advert, from "Got Milk?" to "Got Nuke?"

.. with a lil' green radioactive goo on top of the lips

Snake? What happened? Snake? Snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake!!! - Colonel Roy Campbell

Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 13:21
Quote: ""The government(UK) has approved a substantial rise in arms sales to Indonesia and India, despite guidelines stating it will not export weapons if they could be used for internal repression or fuel regional instability." Guardian 7/1/2003 (July) Oooh! Must have been all those adverts-uhhmm-I mean TV footage of the Iraq war..."

Hmmm, erm. Indonesia is a dictatorship and India has very recently been and continues to be in nuclear standoff with pakistan....

Haggisman:
You rest my case. 10% were smart bombs (actually in the gulf war I have 3% listed as smart bombs.) This is a media manipulation of the highest order. They made us think MOST of the weapons were smart. They showcased the technology so questions would not be raised. MAny "good" journos compounded the propaganda...If fact:

"Seventy per cent of the 88500 bombs dropped on Iraq and Kuwait - the equivalent of 7 hiroshimas - missed their targets completely, and many fell on populated areas. The launch sites of Iraq's Scud missiles were said to have been 'knocked out'. Not one was destroyed. None of this was reported at the time...", The New Rulers of the World, John Pilger. (This is talking about the Gulf War not the latest Iraq war).

I haven't got started on the UN sanctions enforced the UK and US over ten years that resulted in the deaths of nearly a million iraqis or the fact that there is a lot evidence to support the cancer causing effects of dust from depleted uranium shells (heavily used in the Gulf War), which neither UK or US seems willing to clear up (and continuously refutes allegations that the shells cause harm - "no scientific evidence to support the fact"-style remarks from the MOD are not sufficient.)

Everyone:
There was only one reason to invade Iraq and I can't believe no importance was made of the fact. If Iraq has WMD they can be sold willingly to terrorists. North Korea are now on the hitlist because they have started their weapons programme and they will probably quite willingly sell to terrorists. We are now in the age of nuclear terrorism, and it is only a matter of time for millions die in one attack. So I do support America's stance in respect to this. But I don't respect their attitudes to civilians within these countries. I don't think "colateral damage" is acceptable.

I think you guys should read some books in the political science section of your fav bookshop (if you haven't already). You might not agree with everything said but you cannot ignore the seemingly endless array of cover-ups and manipulations of the truth by politicians and the media.

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 13:23 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 13:31
"The world isn't fair"... What a cop-out. What a lie-down-and-take-it -from-the-media/multinationals/politicians attitude. Go live your life in ignorance then!

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
haggisman
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 14:06
Quote: "You rest my case. 10% were smart bombs (actually in the gulf war I have 3% listed as smart bombs.) This is a media manipulation of the highest order. They made us think MOST of the weapons were smart. They showcased the technology so questions would not be raised. MAny "good" journos compounded the propaganda...If fact:"


No i didn't make your point. This was your point:-

Quote: "(The weapons are not SMART - over half of them missed their targets and killed innocent people.)"


You were making the claim that Smart weapons missed half of their targets, how you made this assumption god knows. I was pointing out the inaccuracy of the first war came from the use of non-smart weapons.

I also quoted a source that disputes your figure of 200,000 civilian casulties.

So how did you come to the conclusion that HALF of the smart weapons used during the latest Iraq conflict miss the intended targets?

project: light/obscurance mapper (85% done)
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 14:12 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 14:36
Haggisman: I AM QUOTING A WELL KNOWN, AWARD WINNING POLITICAL/SOCIAL COMMENTATOR!!! He wrote it in his book! But glad you quoted the Guardian - it's one of only 2 newspapers funded by NON-PROFIT organisation/s. EDIT: in England.

I didn't write this to be "brave" - haha! or to be "a terrorist" - hehe! LMAO! (now that IS ignorant). I have no plastic explosive in my shoe! I wish to kill noone. I am voicing my right to free speech. Which our countries/policians are slowly eroding away in the name of big business and through the lowering of educational standards.

"Dumbing down" of the media and education is essential to keep everyone in their place - it also allows education figures at election time to be better than they really are and it stops people from questioning...New Labour is the worst thing ever to happen to Britain. Obolishment of free education - top up fees = exclusion of the poor. I think having the word "Labour" in their party name is an insult.

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 14:43
I think it should have read "The weapons were not ALL smart" but there you go - one word missing and you're lying. Its like really being a polician in this forum!

So we have two quotes about 1991 civilian casaulties in Iraq...Hmmm..
I wonder what the real figure is then...

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
Solidz Snake
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 15:09
3

Snake? What happened? Snake? Snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake!!! - Colonel Roy Campbell

haggisman
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 15:11 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 15:19
Quote: "New Labour is the worst thing ever to happen to Britain. Obolishment of free education - top up fees = exclusion of the poor. I think having the word "Labour" in their party name is an insult."


I am just about to go to univserity. Hopefully i will end up going to UMIST. My family is not poor, but we lie well under the threshold for having to pay fees. In effect I pay absolutely NOTHING, and so how anybody can say it excludes the poor is beyond me...

Edit:-
Heres the actual numbers
less than £21,000 - you pay nothing
between £21,000 and £31,230 - you pay partial fees
more than £31,230 - you pay the full fee £1,125

So you only contribute if you can. Seems fair to me.


Also during the whole of my sixth form life i recieved an Education maintenance allowence every week. I also will recieve money for passing my exams. All thanks to New labour.

project: light/obscurance mapper (85% done)
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 16:33
So why are people constantly complaining about it? It surely can't be the rich kids can it? Marching in the streets complaining because of the large debts they have. (£8000+ ouch!) The fees are different everywhere. I paid my uni fees because I am working and before I changed jobs they paid for me. So personally I don't have a big bone to pick with government about it. Your figures seem quite fair. Is that figure total family income? But fees are not £1125 across the board. So are you going to an exclusive university? Or a normal one?

The title of this post should be taken with a pinch of salt by the way - It's a dig towards "scape goat" culture, etc - you know one person held account for the acts of hundreds.

Just because I speak out against the wrongs inflicted on the civilians of these targeted countries, I am in no way denying Saddam Hussein is a sick **** or supporting him, but I think it is still hypocritical for our governments to punish one regime and not another (eg: sell arms to one and bomb another - both dictatorships - although it could be argued that one likes us and one hates us...one will sell arms onto terrorists-one won't.).

It has been clear from the start that there are other unspoken motives (oil, military strategic position in the east) that won't get read until they are declassified in 50 years time. Maybe it is a brutal but neccessary solution but I resent being patronised by politicians who think they can fob us all off with half truths. Maybe they feel they cannot divulge the real reasons for fear of an even greater backlash than a million+ protesters (- say 2 million) all over the country!

Have you read/heard about the state of Afghanistan since we "changed" their regime? (Yes - I know, we did it to get rid of Al Quada - but we made promises to help the country in the aftermath and have much not lived up to them so far.). Very little has happened:

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/07/15072003131701.asp

Will the west supply the extra money needed? I hope so. But would it not be difficult to find out later that after clothing and feeding the wretched in Afghanistan we also clothed and fed terrorists because they had come back? Do we help them or don't we? It's VERY complicated now.

We made the same promises to Iraq's people too - can we help them? Did we really make a correct prediction on how much help they would really need after we destroyed Saddams regime? Will we end up giving food and services to the few people there who will try to kill us in the future? Is this why the US needs to keep a check on every country that holds or wants to hold WMD? To be honest, I can't say I wouldn't do the same - they've made a lot of people very bitter.

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
Solidz Snake
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 17:45
Okay, so if u r the most powerful person of the planet (US President i mean), what would be ur course of actions?

*this question is not just for Jasonio, to everyone also

Snake? What happened? Snake? Snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake!!! - Colonel Roy Campbell

heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 17:57 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 17:57
Okay, so if u r the most powerful person of the planet (US President i mean), what would be ur course of actions?

If I were George W. Bush I'd do the planet a huge favor and kill myself. (just myself and maybe poppy too)

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
haggisman
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 18:17
The figures that i put above are for the whole of the UK. Though they are only for Publicly funded universitys. I intend to go to a normal university, called UMIST (which is merging with university of manchester).

The £1125 is actually only a quarter of the actual course cost, which the rest is paid by the goverment.

I guess the thing people don't like the most is 'Top-up' fees that are going to be brought in. So the "elite" universities can charge even more if they wish to, though this should still not effect poor students.

TBH i think most debt comes from living costs. For accomidation at the UNI i want to go to its something like £1,250 at the very least per year. Which is the prime reason im comuting from home.

project: light/obscurance mapper (85% done)
Shady Simpson
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Mar 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 18:57
My view is Saddam was a vicious arsehole who deserved to get the shit kicked out of him.
We found masses of dead bodies in warehouses and stuff just because they said something like "hello" *lol*.
Anyway, just look at the pictures of the Iraqi people celebrating and dancing when his statue was torn down, that just proves that we did a good thing.

the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 19:12 Edited at: 16th Jul 2003 19:13
Quote: "just look at the pictures of the Iraqi people celebrating and dancing when his statue was torn down, that just proves that we did a good thing."


You do know how few people there where chearing when the statue came down. We won't know if we did a good thing for a few years yet.

http://images.indymedia.org/imc/nyc/saddam3.jpg
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 19:22
Solidz snake and Heartbone:
I don't think Bush has to go as far as shooting himself. He could just publically apologise on behalf of the US government for the countless(yes, noone bothered properly counting them - so many bits, see?) deaths of civilians caused in middle east in the last ten years. Pledge a transparency of government - eg: all government documents available via the internet. A focus on the disadvantaged rather than an easy life for multinationals. Bring back welfare but up penalties to anyone who tried to cheat the system. Enforce a minimum wage for prison workers but double the cost to companies taking advantage of them through tax.

I'd stop the US agribusiness companies trying to take over the rest of the world with their agricultural might and accept that the US will have to import a certain percentage of grain and other food crops from 3rd world countries every year - even though it will drive up basic food costs a little - and cancel a half of all 3rd world debt. I would also advise N Korea to cancel it's processing of weapons grade nuclear material...or threaten to kick it's ass - I mean, THEY REALLY ARE MAKING WMD. Osama's waiting at the gate!! Saying "are they ready yet?" "Oh no, of course not, they're just for defence. Someone going to attack my Cave/caravan/palace(?)"

And then I woke up... :-s

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
Solidz Snake
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 20:00
*woke up because i pour some water on ur face!*

hehe! u gonna make one fine leader one day

(err.. i didn't say anything about Presidential suicide!)

Snake? What happened? Snake? Snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake!!! - Colonel Roy Campbell

Damokles
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th May 2003
Location: Belgium
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 21:34
Here a lil ironic sentence from a GLA worker :
"Can we not live in peace ?"

"Begin at the beginning, and go on till you come to the end: then stop." - Lewis Carroll
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 21:43
No, of course we can't . No matter what the people who had the situation in their hands (Bush, Blair) had done, there will always be people b*tching about how they're evil criminals and murderers, etc, ad infinium. But let me tell you, they'd have a lot more reason to if we'd waited for another 9/11-- an event many people here seem to have simply forgotten, or not care about.

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 16th Jul 2003 22:36
But, the underlying fact is YOU CANNOT CONDUCT PRE-EMPTIVE WARS!

What eventually happens is you will find a justification for every deed you do.

By that standard, the Chinese have right to attack us, and India and Pakistan each of the right to attack each other.

Also, if Iraq supplying our enemies entitles us to attack Iraq, then maybe the Palestinians should attack us -- since we supply their enemies!

The world cannot, and will not work that way. The US has lost a ton of credibility in a fight that did not need to be fought.

The Arab world is not exactly thrilled at our presence in the Middle East, and every Muslim with a gun knows the exact street address in Baghdad to go to if he wants to haul off and kill one American a day.

But . . .

If you want to read something real funny (uh-oh funny, not hah-hah funny) look up al-Qaeda's original mission staements.

They include:

Removing US troops from Saudi Arabia (almost done)
Attacking America (done)
Removing Saddam Hussein (done)

By the time this whole speil with the Arab world is over, we will have achieved another Vietnam -- numerous tactical victories, and no strategic victory.

The bad part is, Vietnam is one country.

The current global war on terrorism / to expand American imperialism is convoluted and pointless and aimless and it has the potential to engulf a quarter of the world's people.

And, just about the time we have everyone seeing things our way (Afghanistan) we go and do some knucklehead thing like attacking Iraq.

Worse, we leave N. Korea off the hook! This, despite the fact they have a dozen weapons-grade plutonium warheads, and missiles capable of reaching Japan and Taiwan. It won't be long before they test a missile capable of reaching the American West Coast.

I don't think removing Saddam Hussein was a bad thing.

However, we needed to get our priorities straight -- and Saddam was a long way from being our #1 priority.

#1 is al-Qaeda and #2 is N. Korea. Saddam probably makes #5, after China and Russia.

Now, ever time we need to conduct operations, the whole world is going to snicker and go "YEAH! Just like that whole Iraq THING WAS SO DAMN NECESSARY!"

All we have done is fed into what these ridiculous oligarchs like the Bushes, Cheney, and co. want.

They want global war because that is what has built their families' power.

The new economy scares them, because they realize that the military-industrial complex is becoming a dinosaur.

And, like any smart animal, it does what it does well -- wage wars and build new weapons systems.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
Solidz Snake
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 01:00
makes one wonder.. what would happen to Bush when he step down later..

*thinking: it is advisable that he should go learn the bullet-time move from the Wachowski Bros.*

Snake? What happened? Snake? Snaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaake!!! - Colonel Roy Campbell

Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 01:07
'wage wars and build new weapons systems'


Naturally. Wars happen, bud. Humans don't live in peace. Look at history for a minute-- has there ever been a straight 20 years where every single locale in the world was free of war? Be happy we aren't going and nuking Canada because they build their churches with the wrong type of spires, as is quite usual in the mideast, or just blatently running off and conquoring the world.

Put things into perspetive.

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 02:43
So we let them run free unchecked? What happens when they are wrong? The leaders (especially US leaders) need constant opposition and questioning about their actions and aims. The temptations to abuse their positions must be huge and politions haven't exactly earned enough trust to leave one with a lot of power to their own devices.
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 03:00
'constant opposition and questioning about their actions and aims'

So do all the other world leaders-- and they're getting it. Very few people trust each other, and, considering we're all human, that's the way it should be. Can we get on with life now?

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 03:49
What passes for opposition these days is nothing. You think the media addressing a counterpoint is opposition?

And do the politicians listen?

No. Because the majority of people do not vote. Thus, it is the minority of idiots passionate enough to swing the votes that swings our system. We get stuck listenbing to a dueling banjoes routine between people like the NAACP, the ACLU, the NRA, GOPAC, and so forth despite the fact that very few people evr agree with any of them.

Mouse -- As for war being a common state of affairs . . .

What a charming view of the world. The world sucks, so there is no reason to not just make it worse!

Yes, war is natural to man's behavior. There are necessary wars. Iraq was not one of them. The Iraqi people needed to solve the Saddam problem on their own.

They're not going to be a successful democracy. There will be tons of interferance -- from the US and Iran especially, as we turn Iraq into a referendum between Islamic republicanism and capitlist democracy.

The Iraqis needed to be inculcated with a national sense of remorse for letting a bastard like Saddam come to power and ruin their lives. This is essentially what shaped Germany and Japan after WWII (if you want a good read on the subject, fiction tho, try Kenzubora Oh).

Instead, they will blindly blame everything on Saddam, and take no hand in how they helped him. Their old sins, and their sins of the future, will mean nothing to them, and they will not hesitate to repeat those sins.

As a rule, nations usually end up with the leadership they deserve -- look at America . . . GW, Dollar Bill, Goerge H. "W is for Wimp" Bush, senile Ronnie, complete moron Carter, Gerald Just for Now Ford!

Ever since Nixon tipped the apple cart, people have been afraid of real leaders with real vision.

Even as a hard-core Democrat, I'd wish we could take Watergate back, because evil leadership is better than the clumsy joke we have had since Nixon.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 04:38
Quote: "So do all the other world leaders-- and they're getting it."


They are not getting it. There is always room for improvement there is always a better/cheaper/quicker way. You can't expect people to stop trying to find the perfect way just because you are comfortable. The constant search for new better ways to do things is as much a part of mans behaviour as war.
Puffy
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 06:01
o_O You guys really shouldn't care... theres nothing you can do about it... its not like protesting ever does any good... without force at least... get this... there building a new bio-lab at the university... (I live in Davis so... UCD...) and people are bitching and moaning... "THEY WILL DEVELOPE ANTHRAX THERE"... my reply would be "WHO GIVES A DAMN"... people should really stop caring... why would they develope Anthrax... in Davis... wtf is the point of that...

EVERYONE LOVES THE PUFF!... =\
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 06:05
' The Iraqi people needed to solve the Saddam problem on their own. '

You have obviously done almost no research into this. Iraqi citizens were killed if they even suggested opposing Saddam. They were completely powerless to stop his reign. And you can speak yourself all you want, but if you ask Iraqi citizens if they're glad about the US coming in and disposing of Saddam, you'll get a resounding yes for an answer.

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
heartbone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 06:22 Edited at: 17th Jul 2003 06:23
Mouse if you ask the Iraqis if they want the Americans to leave, you'll get a resounding yes for an answer.

Suicide watch for many depressed American troops in Iraq.
http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=m&board=37447170&tid=nypostgiswhycantwecomehome&sid=37447170&mid=1

A real crime. At least Bush could stop stealing and cutting their benefits and giving it away to his rich 2% buddies.

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 08:30
heartbone -- Amen

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 15:43
The most important thing for a nation of people is that they have pride and control over their own destiny and land. At some point between the gulf war and the recent iraq war they rose us in large numbers with the belief that they were going to be assisted. They were not. The allies changed their minds. They were crushed and many were killed (1000s). The last 20 years of Iraqs history is a horrible mess which, we the west, propagated.

It is a very narrow view to assume that Iraq wanted to be invaded to get rid of Saddam. They wanted rid of Saddam I am sure - but really they wanted rid of the FEAR that he generated. They still fear Saddam, because we did not find him. He was very wealthy. He paid for plastic surgery and lives on a sunny island with all the perks of a retired millionaire. In 20 years time, someone will come knocking on his door but we will pity him then - old and frail and of ill health.

8truths: Strategically, Iraq's invasion means we have a major foothold in the middle east. I'm sure a number of well armed bases have been established now which give US the ability to strike at all major countries (and threats) very quickly and without the nead for full long-range nuclear weapons. So I think it WAS #1 on the agenda.
I think we have been conducting PRE-EMPTIVE wars for the last 50 years?!!! I thought that was the COLD WAR.

I feel sorry for the troops out there with wifes/husbands and children. I really wouldn't want to live with the fear of someone I loved dying for 4 years (or however long it takes).

I also think world peace (eg: peace between nations) is possible. I think that if people made a lot of compromises and followed what their holy books taught them (like they always righteously claim they do) they could give up some of their materialistic pleasures (eg: really large petrol guzzling station wagons). (By the way I am not religious... ) It's a very sad state of affairs when many peoples perception of "quality of life" revolves around how many cars they have in the driveway. The nicest people you meet in the world are the people are grateful just to have shoes on their feet, friends around them and hope for the future.

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG
8truths
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 20:10
Isn't it all just wonderful?

Isn't amazing how the more humans you take into account, the less you want to take them into account?

Any one person can pretty much give you hope. Sure there are a few misses.

But, once you get people to a number that their tribal urges start kicking in, there is no way you can have any faith.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
Redmotion
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2003
Location: Mmm mmm.. Marmite
Posted: 17th Jul 2003 20:28 Edited at: 17th Jul 2003 20:32
Yep...They all join in and think the same...think they're called rednecks?!!!

I had faith again after I went to Kosovo. I felt very humbled when I was there. I spoke to a few people living there as part of our university project (we were with some students from Pristina University) and they all pretty much had nothing. But they seemed very optimistic about the upcoming elections and that things could and would get better. They seemed a lot happier than I was at the time! Even though they had been through so much and had so little left - they got by and made the best of it.

But...and this filled me with a slow growing dread... everywhere were pirated music Cds from the west for £1-2 each. And jeans and clothes - all branded for £5 or £10. (The students had parents in wealthy jobs and could afford stuff like that. The people I spoke to in this village were scraping by selling fake-brand cigarettes and tea in small cafes. ) I made a few friends who were really into western culture. I could see why - they were getting free MTV - full of adverts and glamour and THINGS that could be bought! And thought you have everything you need NOW (a community that talks and helps each other out without expecting anything in return) and now you're looking towards the west for their things because you see the wealth and success! Before you know it they'll be slaving away earning 10 times what they get now and STILL only scraping by...All the leaches will appear and drain the money and the deeply strong community spirit and trust would disappear as people start to guard and protect their THINGS...their POSSESSIONs...

Dual athlon 2000 MP - 1GB ram - Quadro4 550 XGL - SW1000XG

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-23 11:44:53
Your offset time is: 2024-11-23 11:44:53