chemistry_geek
Registered
The real reason we are going to war with Iraq (Satire):
http://www.democracymeansyou.com/satire/explainified.htm
http://www.democracymeansyou.com/satire/explainified.htm
Is war ever justified?
- Thread starter TommyWillB
- Start date
habilis
Ministry of Re-Education
ok, I apologize for the Hitler crack, that was a low blow.
But, toast where did you get the idea that we are going to colonize Iraq? Colonize Iraq!? O yeah like we colonized Afganistan? Afganistan is much better off now, just ask it's citizens. Iraq will be better off too, with no American colonization whatsoever. The oil and it's revenues will be left to the Iraqi People. The poeple will no longer be oppressed, the children will no longer be starving and dying in the streets, the kurds will no longer have to live in daily fear of their lives and toture.
Why is this bad? Why do you resist this change so stridently? I am simply amazed.
We will be welcomed with open arms.
Iraq will serve as a beacon of hope for all opressed people of the middle east.
But, toast where did you get the idea that we are going to colonize Iraq? Colonize Iraq!? O yeah like we colonized Afganistan? Afganistan is much better off now, just ask it's citizens. Iraq will be better off too, with no American colonization whatsoever. The oil and it's revenues will be left to the Iraqi People. The poeple will no longer be oppressed, the children will no longer be starving and dying in the streets, the kurds will no longer have to live in daily fear of their lives and toture.
Why is this bad? Why do you resist this change so stridently? I am simply amazed.
We will be welcomed with open arms.
Iraq will serve as a beacon of hope for all opressed people of the middle east.
TommyWillB
Registered
It is my impression that the criminal justice system seeks justice for the victim and not so much the criminal... If the criminal comes out rehabilitated, that's a bonus.
chemistry_geek
Registered
And the cycle continues, no one is helped, society is no better off, and the victim is no better off. It's a lose-lose situation. Sure the victim feels good because "justice" was served (revenge by the state placed on the criminal), but the root cause of the crime goes uncorrected in most cases, and it will be committed by the same person or a different person. History repeats itself and people question why society or world is the way it is.
This further extends to war with other nations. There is more than enough psychological science to explain the thinking and rationale behind politics, political motivation, power, greed, acquisition of resources, etc... that we should recognize when certain people come into power who abuse their power and try to manipulate public opinion to sustain their power. This serves no good (leads to political and economic instability) and has previously lead to war. The rise to power of Hitler is an excellent example.
I've given it all so much thought. I've listened to so many politicians and political science educated people in the past few weeks... I've heard the pros and the contras. But it all boils down to some very, very simple things for me. Yes, I know, simple ain't good, but:
1. War is bad. People get hurt, they even die sometimes. On both sides.
2. The Bush government says they'll go and attack Iraq even if the UN says 'no'. This is something that makes me think the UN should start and restrict the USA's weapons of mass destruction. Some resolution for this USA-problem MUST be found.
3. People say that Iraq will be better off after a war than before. (They certainly can't mean the dead bodies, though, can they?) Wonder what they'd say if somebody was to bomb their home town with an argument like that...
1. War is bad. People get hurt, they even die sometimes. On both sides.
2. The Bush government says they'll go and attack Iraq even if the UN says 'no'. This is something that makes me think the UN should start and restrict the USA's weapons of mass destruction. Some resolution for this USA-problem MUST be found.
3. People say that Iraq will be better off after a war than before. (They certainly can't mean the dead bodies, though, can they?) Wonder what they'd say if somebody was to bomb their home town with an argument like that...
edX
mac shaman
the cross cultural ignorance of the average american is still appalling. we still want to decide what is 'best' for other peoples based upon on our norms and beliefs. we fail to grasp that anyone would possibly have their own views on their own culture that differ from ours. the people of vietnam were going to be so much better off for our presence there, but the mass majority of vietnamese were fighting against us. and the ones we were supposedly helping, were primarily abandoned when we pulled out - more victims of our occupation than recipients of a better way of life. if a people are not strong enough nor motivated enough to 'liberate themselves', there is likely little chance that lasting change would take place. instead, in 50 years or less, we simply have a different minority oppressing the majority. but wait, isn't that the history of Iraq as is? didn't Sadam come to power thru one of our supported, so called 'liberations'?
doemel
Mac addict since 1993
this thread is very hard for me to moderate as i am so involved in it. but i would like to ask everyone to read back over their last few posts and pplease remove any comments that belittle or question the intelligence of other members participating in it. there are no reasons for us to start throwing verbal stones at each other here.
I think those who have to sink to the level of throwing verbal stones at others discredit themselves since it is very often a sign of lack of better arguments.
It's frustrating but true that instead of questioning a person's intelligence you have much more reason today to question their source/lack of information. Although I'm from Switzerland I am currently in Toronto, Canada and I get to compare the Canadian TV coverage of the whole Iraq issue with their US counterpart. I also read European print media on the web. I have come to realize that I can't blame any American of lack of intelligence or anything of the like when I see how one sided their media coverage is! Watching CNN for more than 15 minutes gives me a headache and I won't even start trashing FoxNews.
So, again, it's not about intelligence, it's about lack of adequate information!
P.S.: Did I just throw a verbal stone at US media? Well, if I did, it's nothing personal in any case...
I think those who have to sink to the level of throwing verbal stones at others discredit themselves since it is very often a sign of lack of better arguments.
It's frustrating but true that instead of questioning a person's intelligence you have much more reason today to question their source/lack of information. Although I'm from Switzerland I am currently in Toronto, Canada and I get to compare the Canadian TV coverage of the whole Iraq issue with their US counterpart. I also read European print media on the web. I have come to realize that I can't blame any American of lack of intelligence or anything of the like when I see how one sided their media coverage is! Watching CNN for more than 15 minutes gives me a headache and I won't even start trashing FoxNews.
So, again, it's not about intelligence, it's about lack of adequate information!
P.S.: Did I just throw a verbal stone at US media? Well, if I did, it's nothing personal in any case...
edX
mac shaman
just to reinforce this idea that we can't always assume that others see the world the way we do -
for the complete story,
click here.
of course, it must be noted that the leader of this statement is a communist, so i suppose their views don't really count.
on the other hand, these are people who have experienced the oppression first hand. something no one here is able to claim i believe.
for the complete story,
click here.
of course, it must be noted that the leader of this statement is a communist, so i suppose their views don't really count.
on the other hand, these are people who have experienced the oppression first hand. something no one here is able to claim i believe.
habilis
Ministry of Re-Education
lol, right, we want to colonialize a wasteland in the middle of a dessert, surrounded by 300 million proud muslims, kill off all the men and children, rape the women and create our own breed of sand loving superamerican.
lol, right, so you're saying that anyone that says their proud to be an American is a colonialist! HA! that statement is screaming bitterness, hatefullness, unhappiness, and above all, jealousy.
It's only a matter of a few weeks now before the Iraqi's are throwing down their weapons and kissing their American Liberators. There will always be anti-america people like you around, and after this war is won and the world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity, you and your ilk will become a vestigal organ, a curiosity, like all these thug dictators comming to an end.
You can expect to see a lot of this in the months to come:
Attachments
doemel
Mac addict since 1993
lol, right, we want to colonialize a wasteland in the middle of a dessert, surrounded by 300 million proud muslims, kill off all the men and children, rape the women and create our own breed of sand loving superamerican.
lol, right, so you're saying that anyone that says their proud to be an American is a colonialist! HA! that statement is screaming bitterness, hatefullness, unhappiness, and above all, jealousy.
Of course I can't speak for toast but I think when he called Americans colonialists he didn't mean the "proud to eb American" part of your sentence. Everyone can be proud of her/his country, but should be critical about what his/her country does. Anything your statement about being proud of your country could be is nationalist, something I'm not implying, though!
It's only a matter of a few weeks now before the Iraqi's are throwing down their weapons and kissing their American Liberators. There will always be anti-america people like you around, and after this war is won and the world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity, you and your ilk will become a vestigal organ, a curiosity, like all these thug dictators comming to an end.
I bet it won't, but I guess only the future will prove you wrong. Let's talk about this in a year or two.
lol, right, so you're saying that anyone that says their proud to be an American is a colonialist! HA! that statement is screaming bitterness, hatefullness, unhappiness, and above all, jealousy.
Of course I can't speak for toast but I think when he called Americans colonialists he didn't mean the "proud to eb American" part of your sentence. Everyone can be proud of her/his country, but should be critical about what his/her country does. Anything your statement about being proud of your country could be is nationalist, something I'm not implying, though!
It's only a matter of a few weeks now before the Iraqi's are throwing down their weapons and kissing their American Liberators. There will always be anti-america people like you around, and after this war is won and the world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity, you and your ilk will become a vestigal organ, a curiosity, like all these thug dictators comming to an end.
I bet it won't, but I guess only the future will prove you wrong. Let's talk about this in a year or two.
Jason
Eyebrow Moderator
1) colonize... that seems to be a misintepretation by many....
we wouldnt colonize it, although we would put in a puppet government, in which case there is a huge difference...
2) Saddam as a threat.... saddam isnt much of a threat to us, he hasnt been proven to be connected to al quaeda. he is a threat to surrounding nations though, although less than previous years due to a pretty tight watch on him by the world.
3) Iraq better off.... not too sure on this one, there will be heavy civilian loss, some will appreciate being "freed" some will hold hatred for the losses of their loved ones. currently every iraqi gets fed for pretty damned cheap, which is better than what the people of north korea can say as they are mostly starving....
also i dont think anyone here has lived in a war... we as americans have never had our country touched besides 9/11 we have always been rather disconnected from wars... those people over there will have to live through the war, their food supplies will be cut/diminished for a while (although sadaam is increasing food to the citizens to prepare them a bit) their jobs will be in jeopardy, most importantly during a war, their lives will be in jeapordy, before saying "they will be better off with war" think a little bit as to what is actually like to live in a war... this is a big reason why i personally think we should try as hard as possible to avoid a war with anyone, we havent been attacked by saddaam, he hasnt threatened us (at least not until we start doing that to him), is he the nicest, cleanest man on the planet? no... but he does provide for his country, and if we take to war against them because we feel he is a threat, then we are being rather selfish, innocent lives will be lost
like someone mentioned earlier... how would you like living in an area where when you walk outside you see bombers flying over heard dropping missles on near by buildings? it wouldnt be fun....
4) the whole french debacle... this is ridiculus... the french supplied iraq with weapons in the 70's big deal... we supplied them in the 80's, also we helped give training and education to bin laden as well, if you want to go there... really bringing up past relationships that can be looked back upon and frowned upon is IMHO rather foolish... french are no less to blame for iraq's weapons as we, the soviet union or anyone else are
remember hindsight is 20/20
----
again IMHO war should be a last resort, democratic solutions should be exhausted, double exhausted and then triple exhausted, if there is no threat of violence, then why create one?
its all very sickening that this is all happening, i dearly hope it will be swift and accurate for all involved
we wouldnt colonize it, although we would put in a puppet government, in which case there is a huge difference...
2) Saddam as a threat.... saddam isnt much of a threat to us, he hasnt been proven to be connected to al quaeda. he is a threat to surrounding nations though, although less than previous years due to a pretty tight watch on him by the world.
3) Iraq better off.... not too sure on this one, there will be heavy civilian loss, some will appreciate being "freed" some will hold hatred for the losses of their loved ones. currently every iraqi gets fed for pretty damned cheap, which is better than what the people of north korea can say as they are mostly starving....
also i dont think anyone here has lived in a war... we as americans have never had our country touched besides 9/11 we have always been rather disconnected from wars... those people over there will have to live through the war, their food supplies will be cut/diminished for a while (although sadaam is increasing food to the citizens to prepare them a bit) their jobs will be in jeopardy, most importantly during a war, their lives will be in jeapordy, before saying "they will be better off with war" think a little bit as to what is actually like to live in a war... this is a big reason why i personally think we should try as hard as possible to avoid a war with anyone, we havent been attacked by saddaam, he hasnt threatened us (at least not until we start doing that to him), is he the nicest, cleanest man on the planet? no... but he does provide for his country, and if we take to war against them because we feel he is a threat, then we are being rather selfish, innocent lives will be lost
like someone mentioned earlier... how would you like living in an area where when you walk outside you see bombers flying over heard dropping missles on near by buildings? it wouldnt be fun....
4) the whole french debacle... this is ridiculus... the french supplied iraq with weapons in the 70's big deal... we supplied them in the 80's, also we helped give training and education to bin laden as well, if you want to go there... really bringing up past relationships that can be looked back upon and frowned upon is IMHO rather foolish... french are no less to blame for iraq's weapons as we, the soviet union or anyone else are
remember hindsight is 20/20
----
again IMHO war should be a last resort, democratic solutions should be exhausted, double exhausted and then triple exhausted, if there is no threat of violence, then why create one?
its all very sickening that this is all happening, i dearly hope it will be swift and accurate for all involved
Cat
Registered
Colonization comes in two flavors: you go there to live there or you control the place to harvest its resources. The coloniztion Toast is talking about is rather the second type methinks. Moreover "colonialism" can be taken in metaforical sense, in that the US export and even impose their own cultural values on others. In this sense the statement "we feed, educate and clothe the world" is indeed colonialist.
I answered NO to the poll. This implies that even when there are reasons for a war or this particular war is approved by the majority of the UN security council, it still is my opnion that overall ther is no neccessary and sufficient consition to make a war just.
Justice seeks balance and equality, war domination and subdual. In seeking justice within a modern democracy a citizen defer to a higher authority to which all partecipants, criminal and victim alike, have previously agreed. In the particular case of Iraq, one country (the US) has accused another (Iraq) of breaking the rules. The "tribunal" (the UN) is investigating the matter. Justice is something that can take a long time, but the procedure by which it is carried out is what makes the outcome right. The US eveidently do not want to wait for the verdict, but have decide "to take justice into their own hands" which is also breaking the rules. Hence a war like this cannot be just. If the UN find proof that Iraq has in fact broken the rules, there are various possibilities, bobe of which imply neccesarily a war. In this case the prohibited weapons Iraq possesses will have to be destroyed and this is already being done. Iraq has already agreed to most of the terms the UN has put forward and discussion is underway on the rest. Negotiations are being amde even now about possible "material breaches". Iraq is innocent until proven guilty. If the US decide to attack on the basis of mere suspicions, again this would contradict one of the fundamental principles of justice. This however is largely metaforic, since international law differs a lot from simple national law. However, a fundamental principle of the UN states "not to attack unless attacked".
I answered NO to the poll. This implies that even when there are reasons for a war or this particular war is approved by the majority of the UN security council, it still is my opnion that overall ther is no neccessary and sufficient consition to make a war just.
Justice seeks balance and equality, war domination and subdual. In seeking justice within a modern democracy a citizen defer to a higher authority to which all partecipants, criminal and victim alike, have previously agreed. In the particular case of Iraq, one country (the US) has accused another (Iraq) of breaking the rules. The "tribunal" (the UN) is investigating the matter. Justice is something that can take a long time, but the procedure by which it is carried out is what makes the outcome right. The US eveidently do not want to wait for the verdict, but have decide "to take justice into their own hands" which is also breaking the rules. Hence a war like this cannot be just. If the UN find proof that Iraq has in fact broken the rules, there are various possibilities, bobe of which imply neccesarily a war. In this case the prohibited weapons Iraq possesses will have to be destroyed and this is already being done. Iraq has already agreed to most of the terms the UN has put forward and discussion is underway on the rest. Negotiations are being amde even now about possible "material breaches". Iraq is innocent until proven guilty. If the US decide to attack on the basis of mere suspicions, again this would contradict one of the fundamental principles of justice. This however is largely metaforic, since international law differs a lot from simple national law. However, a fundamental principle of the UN states "not to attack unless attacked".
I agree. If the US breach with the principles of the UN, action must be taken against them. We cannot have the last remaining superpower starting wars around the globe unchecked. Somekind of embargo or partial disarmament should be imposed on them by the UN. Maybe even a short period of UN government to enforce the neccessary changes, like reduction of military expenditures, control of the nuclear program, rehabilititation of international treaties, like on the International Court at the Hague, non-proliferation, Kyoto etc. I suppose the US would have to close some military bases abroad too.
moav
Hunter of Muffins
WHY THIS WAR, WHAT MOST SEEM TO BE FORGETTING *urgent*
After WWII and before 1947 Gold and the Pound where the traditional fixed currencies
1947-1971 Dollar replaced pound and linked to Gold reserve
1960s OPEC born standardized on U.S. dollar, penalties for cheating countries (U.S. not member, though large profits due to currency conversions to U.S. and asset purchase requirements by OPEC nations back to U.S.)
1971 Nixon de-linked Gold Standard
1970 OPEC becomes force in World
1972-74 Nam, OPEC embargo, oil prices increase 4 fold, high inflation, Nixon impeached, OPEC countries acquire vast amounts of U.S. dollars deposited in European Banks
1980 OPEC planning on dumping dollar, Reagan and U.S. dollar revitalized, OPEC keeps U.S. dollar
1992 Mastricht Treaty EU and Euro born
1999 Euro goes into use
2002 U.N approves Iraq motion for food-for-oil sales based on Euro not dollar, U.S. keeps quiet
WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT
2003 Iran now will switch from dollar to Euro causing panic in the states; dollar becomes devalued. NATO and EU veto war.
2004 Japan in trouble sells 10% of U.S. Treasury Securities, U.S. inflation, dollar devalues, OPEC standardizes on EURO, dollar spirals out of control, gas prices increase due to U.S. inability to subsidize gas prices at home. More countries join EU
2005 Britain joins EU, U.S. import/export reversal
SOLUTIONS
Going to war now may allow U.S. economy to hobble along for another few years but slowly America and it's economy will not be nearly as robust as last 50 years after OPEC standardizes on Euro.
U.S. must step back and realize now is the time for us to join the global economy or face dire consequences. Yes, we won't be at the top anymore but we have other resources to thrive.
After WWII and before 1947 Gold and the Pound where the traditional fixed currencies
1947-1971 Dollar replaced pound and linked to Gold reserve
1960s OPEC born standardized on U.S. dollar, penalties for cheating countries (U.S. not member, though large profits due to currency conversions to U.S. and asset purchase requirements by OPEC nations back to U.S.)
1971 Nixon de-linked Gold Standard
1970 OPEC becomes force in World
1972-74 Nam, OPEC embargo, oil prices increase 4 fold, high inflation, Nixon impeached, OPEC countries acquire vast amounts of U.S. dollars deposited in European Banks
1980 OPEC planning on dumping dollar, Reagan and U.S. dollar revitalized, OPEC keeps U.S. dollar
1992 Mastricht Treaty EU and Euro born
1999 Euro goes into use
2002 U.N approves Iraq motion for food-for-oil sales based on Euro not dollar, U.S. keeps quiet
WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT
2003 Iran now will switch from dollar to Euro causing panic in the states; dollar becomes devalued. NATO and EU veto war.
2004 Japan in trouble sells 10% of U.S. Treasury Securities, U.S. inflation, dollar devalues, OPEC standardizes on EURO, dollar spirals out of control, gas prices increase due to U.S. inability to subsidize gas prices at home. More countries join EU
2005 Britain joins EU, U.S. import/export reversal
SOLUTIONS
Going to war now may allow U.S. economy to hobble along for another few years but slowly America and it's economy will not be nearly as robust as last 50 years after OPEC standardizes on Euro.
U.S. must step back and realize now is the time for us to join the global economy or face dire consequences. Yes, we won't be at the top anymore but we have other resources to thrive.
toast
Gone !
habilis, you laugh more than you think in your last post. And that's a shame.
lol, right, we want to colonialize a wasteland in the middle of a dessert, surrounded by 300 million proud muslims, kill off all the men and children, rape the women and create our own breed of sand loving superamerican.
- lol, you already tried that in 1991.
- lol, if those people represent so little interest to you, why is that the second US offensive on them ?
lol, right, so you're saying that anyone that says their proud to be an American is a colonialist! HA! that statement is screaming bitterness, hatefullness, unhappiness, and above all, jealousy.
Doemel just replied to this point and I agree with his post 100%. Plus, I'm not anti-American. Plus, I'm very happy from where I stand. Plus, I'm anything but jealous of the US.
It's only a matter of a few weeks now before the Iraqi's are throwing down their weapons and kissing their American Liberators.
Do you remember The Matrix movie ? Well, I think you've taken the blue pill, habilis.
What you are talking about is fiction, illusion, dream, theory. Reality is completely different.
Do I need to give you my examples again ?
- WWI was supposed to last three months.
- Vietnam, like Iraq, was supposed to be as short liberation conflict.
- Afghanistan was supposed to be an immediate response to 9/11.
But those are suppositions ! Get back on Earth, realize that even one bomb in Iraq will cause such a trauma and will trigger such a response from Iraq itself, from the Middle-East, from Europe, from the UN, that the Iraqis are very far from shouting Bush liberated them.
Don't you know the Iraqi people has been starving to death since 1991 because of your country's embargo ? Don't you know there's a statue in Bagdad which represents Saddam walking on Bush Snr.'s chopped head ?
As stated by Morpheus: "Do you think that's air you're breathing ?", I'll ask you:
Do you think that's reality you see on FOX News and hear in Bush propaganda ?
You are missing one thing: multilateral sources of information. I have no other advice to give you. In a sense, I pity your lack of clairvoyance on this topic, I assure you. And, last but not least, I'll repeat this statement is directed towards you and not against America. Don't tell me I'm anti-American again, people around here know that I'm not. I'm against war, and war is not America, neither is it Bush: those are easy amalgams, I do not believe such crap. Period.
There will always be anti-america people like you around, and after this war is won and the world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity, you and your ilk will become a vestigal organ, a curiosity, like all these thug dictators comming to an end.
Now I'm the one laughing. The world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity... You really should ask Bush for a job as speech writer, you're perfect.
I think this thread and your, hm... thoughtful, clearsighted replies to it will become a very interesting 'curiosity' in a month or two. Guess why.
You can expect to see a lot of this in the months to come: (attachment: a pro-US rally picture)
Well, you can expect to see a lot of this (Vancouver), of this (Paris), a lot of this (Germany) and also a lot of this (UK) or this (Seattle).
Maybe a good thing to do would be taking your calculator and a sheet of white paper and start counting who agrees with war against Iraq on this Earth. After you'll have written "Bush administration +50% population", "Isreali administration + 60% population", "Tony Blair" and "Jose Maria Aznar", you'll be almost done.
Note: this is caricature, nota bene.
This post applies to UTD rules (see previous posts ).
lol, right, we want to colonialize a wasteland in the middle of a dessert, surrounded by 300 million proud muslims, kill off all the men and children, rape the women and create our own breed of sand loving superamerican.
- lol, you already tried that in 1991.
- lol, if those people represent so little interest to you, why is that the second US offensive on them ?
lol, right, so you're saying that anyone that says their proud to be an American is a colonialist! HA! that statement is screaming bitterness, hatefullness, unhappiness, and above all, jealousy.
Doemel just replied to this point and I agree with his post 100%. Plus, I'm not anti-American. Plus, I'm very happy from where I stand. Plus, I'm anything but jealous of the US.
It's only a matter of a few weeks now before the Iraqi's are throwing down their weapons and kissing their American Liberators.
Do you remember The Matrix movie ? Well, I think you've taken the blue pill, habilis.
What you are talking about is fiction, illusion, dream, theory. Reality is completely different.
Do I need to give you my examples again ?
- WWI was supposed to last three months.
- Vietnam, like Iraq, was supposed to be as short liberation conflict.
- Afghanistan was supposed to be an immediate response to 9/11.
But those are suppositions ! Get back on Earth, realize that even one bomb in Iraq will cause such a trauma and will trigger such a response from Iraq itself, from the Middle-East, from Europe, from the UN, that the Iraqis are very far from shouting Bush liberated them.
Don't you know the Iraqi people has been starving to death since 1991 because of your country's embargo ? Don't you know there's a statue in Bagdad which represents Saddam walking on Bush Snr.'s chopped head ?
As stated by Morpheus: "Do you think that's air you're breathing ?", I'll ask you:
Do you think that's reality you see on FOX News and hear in Bush propaganda ?
You are missing one thing: multilateral sources of information. I have no other advice to give you. In a sense, I pity your lack of clairvoyance on this topic, I assure you. And, last but not least, I'll repeat this statement is directed towards you and not against America. Don't tell me I'm anti-American again, people around here know that I'm not. I'm against war, and war is not America, neither is it Bush: those are easy amalgams, I do not believe such crap. Period.
There will always be anti-america people like you around, and after this war is won and the world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity, you and your ilk will become a vestigal organ, a curiosity, like all these thug dictators comming to an end.
Now I'm the one laughing. The world returns to stability and happiness and prosperity... You really should ask Bush for a job as speech writer, you're perfect.
I think this thread and your, hm... thoughtful, clearsighted replies to it will become a very interesting 'curiosity' in a month or two. Guess why
.You can expect to see a lot of this in the months to come: (attachment: a pro-US rally picture)
Well, you can expect to see a lot of this (Vancouver), of this (Paris), a lot of this (Germany) and also a lot of this (UK) or this (Seattle).
Maybe a good thing to do would be taking your calculator and a sheet of white paper and start counting who agrees with war against Iraq on this Earth. After you'll have written "Bush administration +50% population", "Isreali administration + 60% population", "Tony Blair" and "Jose Maria Aznar", you'll be almost done.
Note: this is caricature, nota bene.
This post applies to UTD rules (see previous posts
).
toast
Gone !
moav: SOLUTIONS
Going to war now may allow U.S. economy to hobble along for another few years but slowly America and it's economy will not be nearly as robust as last 50 years after OPEC standardizes on Euro.
There's much truth in this statement. Even Alan Greenspan, who did support Bush's reform plan in first place, is now telling journalists he has very very strong doubts about it.
A declaration signed by 400 economists and 10 Nobel Prizes (incl. Joseph Stiglitz, former World Bank director and Clinton lead economist) also states the economic situation of the US will become very preoccupying if Bush persists in his war plans.
The dollar has already dramatically dropped this week; Nasdaq has reached its lowest level for last 5 years, CAC40 has reached its lower level for last 20 years, USD has dropped far beyond Euro value ('far' being, in economic terms, a variation of .1 point yesterday, of 0.06 this morning, etc.). USD has even fell down to 0.90Euro a few days ago.
Going to war now may allow U.S. economy to hobble along for another few years but slowly America and it's economy will not be nearly as robust as last 50 years after OPEC standardizes on Euro.
There's much truth in this statement. Even Alan Greenspan, who did support Bush's reform plan in first place, is now telling journalists he has very very strong doubts about it.
A declaration signed by 400 economists and 10 Nobel Prizes (incl. Joseph Stiglitz, former World Bank director and Clinton lead economist) also states the economic situation of the US will become very preoccupying if Bush persists in his war plans.
The dollar has already dramatically dropped this week; Nasdaq has reached its lowest level for last 5 years, CAC40 has reached its lower level for last 20 years, USD has dropped far beyond Euro value ('far' being, in economic terms, a variation of .1 point yesterday, of 0.06 this morning, etc.). USD has even fell down to 0.90Euro a few days ago.
toast
Gone !
... And puppet governments (ie. satellite governments in Cold War terms) are part of what Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel Richer, as well as Noam Chomsky (but I know many US people think he's a complete dummy) call neocolonialism in their various studies.
But this debate is worth another thread.
But this debate is worth another thread.