Target: Iran
jon@af
05-08-2003, 05:41 PM
You know, in any other case, it might surprise me that Bush is going to push for another confrontation. At the beginning of the Iraq war, I was like "Okay, the troops are there, I might as well support them until the get the job done so this Iraq stuff can end." But now that Ive heard of this problem with Iran, I am honestly questioning Bush and his ethics and strategy. I just wish that the American people could be given something to focus on other than worrying if their trigger-happy president is going to spark WWIII or not.:rolleyes: How does everyone else feel?
Prelewd
05-08-2003, 06:00 PM
I think it's like the southpark with the aliens sucking eachother's nurbs. Earth is just a big TV show for the rest of the universe, and to keep the ratings up and not get cancelled, Bush needs to start a few wars. He's just keeping everyone's best intersts in mind.
Milliardo
05-08-2003, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by Prelewd
He's just keeping everyone's best intersts in mind.
Oh yes, wars must be for everyone's best interests. I'm sure his oil magnate backers, the arms dealers, the military are happy about it. I guess most of his constituency also comprise these same people, which would then be "everyone" in this case then.
At least now one of you is beginning to doubt your President's morality, if not yet his sanity. I would hope people there would not be insane as to actually give him a second term, or else WWIII wouldn't be far off. And that's just in the international front. We have also discussed at length what might happen in the local scene.
He's just keeping everyone's best intersts in mind.
Oh yes, wars must be for everyone's best interests. I'm sure his oil magnate backers, the arms dealers, the military are happy about it. I guess most of his constituency also comprise these same people, which would then be "everyone" in this case then.
At least now one of you is beginning to doubt your President's morality, if not yet his sanity. I would hope people there would not be insane as to actually give him a second term, or else WWIII wouldn't be far off. And that's just in the international front. We have also discussed at length what might happen in the local scene.
texan
05-08-2003, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by ILike2DriveCars
You know, in any other case, it might surprise me that Bush is going to push for another confrontation. At the beginning of the Iraq war, I was like "Okay, the troops are there, I might as well support them until the get the job done so this Iraq stuff can end." But now that Ive heard of this problem with Iran, I am honestly questioning Bush and his ethics and strategy. I just wish that the American people could be given something to focus on other than worrying if their trigger-happy president is going to spark WWIII or not.:rolleyes: How does everyone else feel?
What specific problem and talk of possible war are you referring to concerning Iran?
You know, in any other case, it might surprise me that Bush is going to push for another confrontation. At the beginning of the Iraq war, I was like "Okay, the troops are there, I might as well support them until the get the job done so this Iraq stuff can end." But now that Ive heard of this problem with Iran, I am honestly questioning Bush and his ethics and strategy. I just wish that the American people could be given something to focus on other than worrying if their trigger-happy president is going to spark WWIII or not.:rolleyes: How does everyone else feel?
What specific problem and talk of possible war are you referring to concerning Iran?
jon@af
05-08-2003, 10:08 PM
Originally posted by texan
What specific problem and talk of possible war are you referring to concerning Iran?
What was the main concern of Iraq besides oil? Ill give you a hint: They havent found any yet.:rolleyes:
What specific problem and talk of possible war are you referring to concerning Iran?
What was the main concern of Iraq besides oil? Ill give you a hint: They havent found any yet.:rolleyes:
texan
05-08-2003, 11:18 PM
Errr, could you please answer my question? I thought there might be something new in the news I didn't know about, and instead I get that?
jon@af
05-08-2003, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by texan
Errr, could you please answer my question? I thought there might be something new in the news I didn't know about, and instead I get that?
I apologize. I figured with the hint I gave it would have been pretty easy. Bush is speculating that Iran has WMD and is basically pulling the same business with them as he did with Iraq.
Errr, could you please answer my question? I thought there might be something new in the news I didn't know about, and instead I get that?
I apologize. I figured with the hint I gave it would have been pretty easy. Bush is speculating that Iran has WMD and is basically pulling the same business with them as he did with Iraq.
taranaki
05-08-2003, 11:49 PM
Here's a link to a news item on the subject.
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=E09FED05-1370-477A-B7E5E2E51AA549A8
If I was an Iranian,I'd be very concerned.George Bush has already shown himself more than willing to commit troops to imagined threats.
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=E09FED05-1370-477A-B7E5E2E51AA549A8
If I was an Iranian,I'd be very concerned.George Bush has already shown himself more than willing to commit troops to imagined threats.
Prelewd
05-09-2003, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by Milliardo
Oh yes, wars must be for everyone's best interests. I'm sure his oil magnate backers, the arms dealers, the military are happy about it. I guess most of his constituency also comprise these same people, which would then be "everyone" in this case then.
At least now one of you is beginning to doubt your President's morality, if not yet his sanity. I would hope people there would not be insane as to actually give him a second term, or else WWIII wouldn't be far off. And that's just in the international front. We have also discussed at length what might happen in the local scene.
I shouldn't even bother.. but lighten up milliardo.. It was clearly not serious.
Oh yes, wars must be for everyone's best interests. I'm sure his oil magnate backers, the arms dealers, the military are happy about it. I guess most of his constituency also comprise these same people, which would then be "everyone" in this case then.
At least now one of you is beginning to doubt your President's morality, if not yet his sanity. I would hope people there would not be insane as to actually give him a second term, or else WWIII wouldn't be far off. And that's just in the international front. We have also discussed at length what might happen in the local scene.
I shouldn't even bother.. but lighten up milliardo.. It was clearly not serious.
ales
05-09-2003, 12:59 AM
Iran is one of the most militarised if not the most militarised country in the middle East (and not too far from the top in the World).
Iran has the biggest army in the middle East, and the most well-trained army too.
Iran has not been weakened by more than a decade of economic sanctions.
Neither has Iran has been weakened by a weapons' import embargo, or UN inspections trying to find WMD or long-range weapons. They might actually have WMD (and have every right o do so, but this is beyond the point).
What is not beyond the point, though, is that Iran is a truly Islamic country and any confrontation will be seen by the Islamic world as another crusade (heh!), and the other countries will not let it slide like they did with Iraq.
Irani (sp) army is equipped with all the latest weapons that you can think of.
Bottom line: I'd think twice, then some more, and still not go there.
Iran has the biggest army in the middle East, and the most well-trained army too.
Iran has not been weakened by more than a decade of economic sanctions.
Neither has Iran has been weakened by a weapons' import embargo, or UN inspections trying to find WMD or long-range weapons. They might actually have WMD (and have every right o do so, but this is beyond the point).
What is not beyond the point, though, is that Iran is a truly Islamic country and any confrontation will be seen by the Islamic world as another crusade (heh!), and the other countries will not let it slide like they did with Iraq.
Irani (sp) army is equipped with all the latest weapons that you can think of.
Bottom line: I'd think twice, then some more, and still not go there.
texan
05-09-2003, 01:27 AM
Ok, thanks for the link. While I certainly don't like Iranian government or the fact that they have state run terrorist organizations, I don't see any reason to go to war with them based upon anything said so far. I would be 100% against it.
TexasF355F1
05-09-2003, 12:32 PM
I really don't think that the U.S. will go into another war right now. It's not economically smart, but who knows, I'm not the government, and I don't have time to watch the news now with FINALS coming in only 3 days. TV's and whats going on in the world is the last thing on my mind right now.
YogsVR4
05-09-2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by Milliardo
I would hope people there would not be insane as to actually give him a second term, or else WWIII wouldn't be far off. And that's just in the international front. We have also discussed at length what might happen in the local scene.[/font]
Sorry, you are going to be disappointed. He will win his second term quite easily. You've demonstrated a complete lack of understanding our politics and population. Police state, WWIII :rolleyes: Whats next, that he went back in time and deflected the iceberg into the Titanic?
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
I would hope people there would not be insane as to actually give him a second term, or else WWIII wouldn't be far off. And that's just in the international front. We have also discussed at length what might happen in the local scene.[/font]
Sorry, you are going to be disappointed. He will win his second term quite easily. You've demonstrated a complete lack of understanding our politics and population. Police state, WWIII :rolleyes: Whats next, that he went back in time and deflected the iceberg into the Titanic?
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Cbass
05-10-2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by YogsVR4
Sorry, you are going to be disappointed. He will win his second term quite easily. You've demonstrated a complete lack of understanding our politics and population. Police state, WWIII :rolleyes: Whats next, that he went back in time and deflected the iceberg into the Titanic?
Why don't you explain how the US population and politics work? That 9 out 10 Americans get all their info from controlled media outlets, such as CNN, USA Today, the NY Times, etc... That these media outlets are all owned by republican oriented corporations, and say whatever the Bush administration asks of them...
Remember the rush to impeach Clinton? I do. Yet do we hear about Dubya deserting his post in time of war, to pursue a political career? No. American media outlets frantically bark about Iraq violating the Geneva Convention by showing US POWs on TV, after the US has invaded without provocation. Do we hear about how the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are being tortured by every means known, through sensory and sleep deprivation, physical torture, etc? Who are these prisoners? They are ALLEGED terrorists, the allegations forwarded by Dubya. So if he declared me a terrorist, and had the INS arrest me, he could ship me to Camp X-Ray, and do these things to me as well.
How about how the majority of US adults don't even vote, because regardless of who they vote for, the important issues would be resolved in teh same manner either way, in the interests of the rich.
Sorry, you are going to be disappointed. He will win his second term quite easily. You've demonstrated a complete lack of understanding our politics and population. Police state, WWIII :rolleyes: Whats next, that he went back in time and deflected the iceberg into the Titanic?
Why don't you explain how the US population and politics work? That 9 out 10 Americans get all their info from controlled media outlets, such as CNN, USA Today, the NY Times, etc... That these media outlets are all owned by republican oriented corporations, and say whatever the Bush administration asks of them...
Remember the rush to impeach Clinton? I do. Yet do we hear about Dubya deserting his post in time of war, to pursue a political career? No. American media outlets frantically bark about Iraq violating the Geneva Convention by showing US POWs on TV, after the US has invaded without provocation. Do we hear about how the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are being tortured by every means known, through sensory and sleep deprivation, physical torture, etc? Who are these prisoners? They are ALLEGED terrorists, the allegations forwarded by Dubya. So if he declared me a terrorist, and had the INS arrest me, he could ship me to Camp X-Ray, and do these things to me as well.
How about how the majority of US adults don't even vote, because regardless of who they vote for, the important issues would be resolved in teh same manner either way, in the interests of the rich.
texan
05-11-2003, 05:37 AM
Originally posted by Cbass
Why don't you explain how the US population and politics work? That 9 out 10 Americans get all their info from controlled media outlets, such as CNN, USA Today, the NY Times, etc... That these media outlets are all owned by republican oriented corporations, and say whatever the Bush administration asks of them...
Remember the rush to impeach Clinton? I do. Yet do we hear about Dubya deserting his post in time of war, to pursue a political career? No. American media outlets frantically bark about Iraq violating the Geneva Convention by showing US POWs on TV, after the US has invaded without provocation. Do we hear about how the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are being tortured by every means known, through sensory and sleep deprivation, physical torture, etc? Who are these prisoners? They are ALLEGED terrorists, the allegations forwarded by Dubya. So if he declared me a terrorist, and had the INS arrest me, he could ship me to Camp X-Ray, and do these things to me as well.
How about how the majority of US adults don't even vote, because regardless of who they vote for, the important issues would be resolved in teh same manner either way, in the interests of the rich.
Let's see, how to pick this apart.
1) Cite your sources.
Other objections will follow from that. Beyond that everything in your post is anqualified opinion. I mean really, 90% of Americans getting their news from government "controlled" outlets?
Why don't you explain how the US population and politics work? That 9 out 10 Americans get all their info from controlled media outlets, such as CNN, USA Today, the NY Times, etc... That these media outlets are all owned by republican oriented corporations, and say whatever the Bush administration asks of them...
Remember the rush to impeach Clinton? I do. Yet do we hear about Dubya deserting his post in time of war, to pursue a political career? No. American media outlets frantically bark about Iraq violating the Geneva Convention by showing US POWs on TV, after the US has invaded without provocation. Do we hear about how the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are being tortured by every means known, through sensory and sleep deprivation, physical torture, etc? Who are these prisoners? They are ALLEGED terrorists, the allegations forwarded by Dubya. So if he declared me a terrorist, and had the INS arrest me, he could ship me to Camp X-Ray, and do these things to me as well.
How about how the majority of US adults don't even vote, because regardless of who they vote for, the important issues would be resolved in teh same manner either way, in the interests of the rich.
Let's see, how to pick this apart.
1) Cite your sources.
Other objections will follow from that. Beyond that everything in your post is anqualified opinion. I mean really, 90% of Americans getting their news from government "controlled" outlets?
Prelewd
05-11-2003, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by texan
Let's see, how to pick this apart.
1) Cite your sources.
Other objections will follow from that. Beyond that everything in your post is anqualified opinion. I mean really, 90% of Americans getting their news from government "controlled" outlets?
We are in denial texan.. remember? :rolleyes:
Let's see, how to pick this apart.
1) Cite your sources.
Other objections will follow from that. Beyond that everything in your post is anqualified opinion. I mean really, 90% of Americans getting their news from government "controlled" outlets?
We are in denial texan.. remember? :rolleyes:
taranaki
05-11-2003, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by Prelewd
We are in denial texan.. remember? :rolleyes:
TSK,TSK,not true.
Half of you are in denial,
Half of you are brainwashed,
Half of you are too silly to think for yourselves,
and the other half can't add up.:p
We are in denial texan.. remember? :rolleyes:
TSK,TSK,not true.
Half of you are in denial,
Half of you are brainwashed,
Half of you are too silly to think for yourselves,
and the other half can't add up.:p
TexasF355F1
05-11-2003, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by taranaki
TSK,TSK,not true.
Half of you are in denial,
Half of you are brainwashed,
Half of you are too silly to think for yourselves,
and the other half can't add up.:p
Very funny 'Naki:rolleyes: :silly2:
TSK,TSK,not true.
Half of you are in denial,
Half of you are brainwashed,
Half of you are too silly to think for yourselves,
and the other half can't add up.:p
Very funny 'Naki:rolleyes: :silly2:
Cbass
05-13-2003, 12:52 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A37943-2002Dec25¬Found=true
I love this little snippet
"If you don't violate someone's human rights some of the time, you probably aren't doing your job," said one official who has supervised the capture and transfer of accused terrorists. "I don't think we want to be promoting a view of zero tolerance on this. That was the whole problem for a long time with the CIA."
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20021110162533397
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0126-07.htm
Of course, you won't find anything about this in any of the major US media outlets, or the BBC for that matter :rolleyes: wonder why...
I love this little snippet
"If you don't violate someone's human rights some of the time, you probably aren't doing your job," said one official who has supervised the capture and transfer of accused terrorists. "I don't think we want to be promoting a view of zero tolerance on this. That was the whole problem for a long time with the CIA."
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20021110162533397
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0126-07.htm
Of course, you won't find anything about this in any of the major US media outlets, or the BBC for that matter :rolleyes: wonder why...
texan
05-13-2003, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by Cbass
Of course, you won't find anything about this in any of the major US media outlets, or the BBC for that matter :rolleyes: wonder why...
So the Washington Post isn't a major media outlet? Or the LA Times, the NY Times, CNN, ABC and others I could easily find news stories on the detainee issue?
BBC search results (http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?q=detainee&uri=%2Fhome%2Ftoday%2Findex.live.shtml)
CNN search results (ttp://search.cnn.com/europe/search?sites=cnneurope&qp=&key=&source=cnn&invocationType=side%2Ftop&query=detainee&qt=detainee)
Now how about you explain how 90% of Americans are only recieving controlled media, or how the free press in America isn't really free.
Of course, you won't find anything about this in any of the major US media outlets, or the BBC for that matter :rolleyes: wonder why...
So the Washington Post isn't a major media outlet? Or the LA Times, the NY Times, CNN, ABC and others I could easily find news stories on the detainee issue?
BBC search results (http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?q=detainee&uri=%2Fhome%2Ftoday%2Findex.live.shtml)
CNN search results (ttp://search.cnn.com/europe/search?sites=cnneurope&qp=&key=&source=cnn&invocationType=side%2Ftop&query=detainee&qt=detainee)
Now how about you explain how 90% of Americans are only recieving controlled media, or how the free press in America isn't really free.
Cbass
05-15-2003, 10:13 PM
I mean specifically relating to how they torture those prisoners, or "detainees" as they love to call them. They apparently tortured at least one to death.
No, the US press is far from free, there are many reports of journalists being threatened with losing their jobs by their bosses, on account of stories they have picked relating to these issues.
No, the US press is far from free, there are many reports of journalists being threatened with losing their jobs by their bosses, on account of stories they have picked relating to these issues.
Milliardo
05-16-2003, 12:39 AM
Government control of media is nothing new, really. It's just the perception that you are receiving "unflitered" news that's why you think news in the U.S. isn't filtered. But then, especially now, news is regulated and monitored by the government. Damaging news reports such as torturing "detainees" (I love these euphemisms for "political prisoners") and even common criminals are downplayed, for instance. These are done by government to portray an image of it doing nothing wrong, as well as bolster morale on the home front. If news is really unfiltered, I doubt the support for the war, as an example, in the U.S. would be big.
BigJustinZ28
05-18-2003, 12:38 PM
I think Iran should rename itself "Happy Fun Land" so that if the president declares war on them too I can at least get a chuckle (more than usual) out of the news. Noone wants to see someone bombing happy funland !!!
YogsVR4
05-18-2003, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by Cbass
No, the US press is far from free, there are many reports of journalists being threatened with losing their jobs by their bosses, on account of stories they have picked relating to these issues.
And how does that relate to not being free press? Someone doesnt do what the boss wants and thats indicative of censorship? Thats screwed up logic there.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
No, the US press is far from free, there are many reports of journalists being threatened with losing their jobs by their bosses, on account of stories they have picked relating to these issues.
And how does that relate to not being free press? Someone doesnt do what the boss wants and thats indicative of censorship? Thats screwed up logic there.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025