Botellines 0 #1 July 28, 2004 By reading other threads i have come to realize that not even war supporters come to an agreement about why they went to war. Even Arbustito doesn´t make up his mind!!! I made this little poll to see if you conservatives, can find some common ground in this subject. While we are at this, I am very interested in seeing how the options you chose related to the next. To free Iraquies Citizens: I am sure you are aware what is going on in Sudan. Guerrillas are assaulting villages and killing many of the people who live there. One of the things they do is to rape every woman in the village (8 to 80 years old) in front of everybody. They know that after that, they will be outcast. There is many more deaths than what saddam has in his account, and the human rights are watched much, much less. http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR540762004 So i ask, why Irak and not Sudan who needs it much more? To get rid of WMD: Not only they have not been found yet (or at least not as many as we claimed there were) but also there is other countries that pose a much bigger threat than Irak. Korea Has WMD and is building more. When Korea has enough WMD, they will be able to blackmail and threat not only his neighbours but by extension all the world. Wouldn´t it has made more sense to start with Korea (just a hint, Diplomacy was not working either) To stop Terrorism: It was known from the begginig that Irak didn´t have terrorist. If we wanted to strike Terrorism, we could have gone after Pakistan (we know that have terrorists AND WMD) or the country where most of the Hijackers were Saudi Arab. so why Irak? The two left seem to me the correct ones, so i will let other people to rebate them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #3 July 28, 2004 Hey Tunaplanet, so far only Bush´s Ego got any votes. Did you also vote for that one? You are going to be kicked out of the republican files Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #4 July 28, 2004 This cookie cutter approach to foreign policy is so puerile its amazing anyone who adheres to it is literate.Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #5 July 28, 2004 QuoteThis cookie cutter approach to foreign policy is so puerile its amazing anyone who adheres to it is literate. I've not seen good evidence of Bush's illiteracy; the picture of him holding a book upside down was faked. He is certainly inarticulate. His comments on the deficit, "small and short term", suggest that he's innumerate too.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #6 July 28, 2004 QuoteThis cookie cutter approach to foreign policy is so puerile its amazing anyone who adheres to it is literate. This is a personal attack. You might want to take some time to read this post of Bill's. In relevant part: QuoteClever insults that attempt to get around the above (i.e. "I like rabbits" "anyone who likes rabbits and posts here is an idiot") will result in the same sort of bans/locks/thread deletions that a personal attack will. Take some time to consider this. In fact, take the next seven days.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #7 July 28, 2004 I think that was a bit over the top considering the original poster targeted conservitives (several of which have proclaimed them selves on this forum) and proceded to incite and insult them with terms like "WAR MONGER" Of course what do I know.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #8 July 28, 2004 Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This cookie cutter approach to foreign policy is so puerile its amazing anyone who adheres to it is literate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a personal attack. You might want to take some time to read this post of Bill's. In relevant part: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clever insults that attempt to get around the above (i.e. "I like rabbits" "anyone who likes rabbits and posts here is an idiot") will result in the same sort of bans/locks/thread deletions that a personal attack will. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take some time to consider this. In fact, take the next seven days. And calling all of us that support Bush WAR MONGERS...Thats nothing?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #9 July 28, 2004 My thoughts exactly QuoteIt is important to realize that a personal attack is any attack (slurs, insults, denigrations, implications about their mothers, etc) or threat against another poster. Any such attack is not permitted here. This is true even if you are absolutely, 100% sure that the poster is stupid, or ignorant, or childish, or an ass. It doesn't matter if you think it is true or not, or even if you can prove they are an ass. You can't post such messages here. If you feel it is important to post such things, unmoderated forums like rec.skydiving do not have any such restrictions. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #10 July 28, 2004 European pseudo-intelligensia are entertaining to listen to... Kinda like handing a philosophy book to Rain Man and asking for a summary... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #11 July 28, 2004 It's a lost cause anyways. He hates anything US. Yet likes living in here."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #12 July 28, 2004 Quote Kinda like handing a philosophy book to Rain Man and asking for a summary... And then asking Rain Man to save their asses from the gambling debt"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #13 July 28, 2004 QuoteAnd calling all of us that support Bush WAR MONGERS...Thats nothing? That's a generalization. The difference is that a generalization is used to target a group (hopefully for discussion of some policy issue or other). A specific personal attack against a poster here is a personal attack. Remember, I voted for (and will vote for again) Bush, too. If I say "the sky is red" and you respond to that post with "anyone who thinks that is an idiot", that's a personal attack. If you start a thread about a cult that believes the sky is red, that's a general discussion. In the same way, calling me, personally, a war monger is a personal attack, but saying that Bush voters (such as me) are war mongers is a generalization that ought to be responded to intelligently (say, by discussing why I am not a warmonger personally, or by listing famous republicans who are obviously not warmongers, or by actual discussion of the policies of the Bush administration). There's obviously a fuzzy line here. If you find yourself firing off a one line reply that includes only allegations of illiteracy or mental deficiency, you've probably gone too far.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #14 July 28, 2004 It would seem that someone shit in Botellines' paella this morning... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #15 July 28, 2004 QuoteThat's a generalization. The difference is that a generalization is used to target a group (hopefully for discussion of some policy issue or other). A specific personal attack against a poster here is a personal attack. And saying anyone that accepts a single approach to a complicated subject is literate is wrong? You see I see that as Anvil targeting a group. QuoteThere's obviously a fuzzy line here. If you find yourself firing off a one line reply that includes only allegations of illiteracy or mental deficiency, you've probably gone too far. Or just typing out a long response on how Bush supporters are WAR MONGERS would be an insult as well. The fuzzy line you are talking about...why is it you seem to always be on the Liberal side of it?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #16 July 28, 2004 QuoteIt would seem that someone shit in Botellines' paella this morning... Anyone who would shit in another guys paella is an ass. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zennie 0 #17 July 28, 2004 QuoteRemember, I voted for (and will vote for again) Bush, too. GAAHHHHHHH!!!! QuoteThere's obviously a fuzzy line here. If you find yourself firing off a one line reply that includes only allegations of illiteracy or mental deficiency, you've probably gone too far. In any other forum I'd agree with you. SC, just by the very nature of the discussions, is going to be a little more "personal". When you're talking politics, that's sort of a given. I'm not saying it should be a free-for-all, because way too many political arguments degrade into name-calling and finger-pointing with no real substance. Just that in here the standards should probably be a little less stringent than in, say, the BASE Zone. I honestly didn't think it was all that bad compared to other stuff I've seen (and said ), and I've come to expect that sort of thing from Anvil anyway. - Z "Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #18 July 28, 2004 I would say someone took a dump in the mujer zuela, from that Zapatero."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #19 July 28, 2004 Ron, I actually agree with you. I think Anvil was targeting a group as well. There were lots of reasons for (and against) the war, and it doesn't make any kind of intelligent sense to put them into such small categories. I don't think war was the right thing to do, but I think Bush had a lot of different reasons for doing it. I don't think he just woke up one morning, scratched his head and said "gee...I think I'll blow up Iraq today to get their oil!" I guess Anvil's comment was a little ambiguous. I didn't see it as any kind of attack, but, since he didn't specify, I can kinda see how it could be read like that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyIvan 0 #20 July 28, 2004 Every time I read threads like this I say: Gosh..Bush is really popular!!!. No wonder he will be re-elected.__________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #21 July 28, 2004 Asi es. El colmo es que tienen a un zapatero como PM... y todavia tienen animos de llamar a Bush arbustito"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,452 #22 July 28, 2004 Si usted puede criticar su zapatero, porque es que el no puede criticar a nuestro arbustito? Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #23 July 28, 2004 QuoteSi usted puede criticar su zapatero, porque es que el no puede criticar a nuestro arbustito? Wendy W. "Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate.", Inscription over the entrance to Speakers' Corner.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #24 July 28, 2004 Although I agree with you that a decision as important as this that is going to affect the lives of literally thousands of people sound be put in simple terms as those in the poll, it is the only thing you have. First, your president said it was a matter of WMD, when they were not found, He said that we should free poor Irakies from Sadam rule. Irak didn´t welcome US troops with open arms, so Bush said that it was all about the war on terror. If he changes his mind again, i will create a new poll with one more option. The problem is that the idea of the war has been sold to you in those simplistic terms, so the legality and valisity of that war is so questionable. If i am wrong and Bush has given any other reason to go to war, please do tell me and i will include it right away. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #25 July 28, 2004 QuoteEuropean pseudo-intelligensia are entertaining to listen to... Kinda like handing a philosophy book to Rain Man and asking for a summary... WTF are you talking about? Is this some sort of "clever" personal attack? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
