Botellines 0 #26 July 28, 2004 Hey my friend!!!! I knew you wouldn´t let this ocasion slip without trying to take advantage and share with us your remarks. Why don´t you actually put aside our personal diferences about politics and try to answer as best as you can the questions i ask? Edited to delete what could be misunderstood as a personal attack Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyIvan 0 #27 July 28, 2004 Quoteyour president said it was a matter of WMD, when they were not found That has been OVERUSED, and in fact, no MAJOR weapons have been found yet, but think about that for a moment, we are talking about a country full of mountains and desert, and you expect AQ to stash them all in a "weather controlled self-storage" warehouse? come on!!! One analogy to that is drugs, there are places IN THE MIDDLE OF CITIES all over the world where drug dealers stash their shit and THEY ARE HARD TO FIND.__________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #28 July 28, 2004 I hope i didn´t really offend anyone with the term WARMONGER, it was not my intention. If i did, i do apologize. However i have the feeling that the term warmonger is drifting the attention away from the point of the thread. I see that many people have voted for the first 3 options, but have not answered why Irak and not other country which has a worse scenario than Irak. In particular i am waiting for Juanesky´s answer who i am sure has voted but rather that justify his ideas prefer to make unfunny jokes spanish about a guy i don´t care in the slightest. BTW Juanesky the joke about shitting in the paella of Drunkmonkey was funny as hell. Don´t continue the joke, make your own. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #29 July 28, 2004 Pues el fue el que comenzo con lo de arbustito. y no en este thread."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
Botellines 0 #30 July 28, 2004 Fair enough. I understand that, but lets suppose that we have found a decent stockpile of WMD, which we haven´t YET. My question is why go after IRAK when we THOUGHT that they had them and not after Korea that we KNOW already have them and is even more unstable than Irak. If it is a matter of order, is there any plans to invade Korea? what about Pakistan? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #31 July 28, 2004 We are at war with Korea...We are in a 30+ year cease fire. Korea has admitted to WMD's SH had them but would not show if/how he got rid of them. Korea was not under UN sanctions to not have any. Korea does not support terrorism....SH gave 25,000.00 to the families of any suicide bomber. Korea is willing to negotiate the surender of any WMD's for aid. Korea does not kill its own people for sport. Korea has never USED a WMD, much less on it's own people."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 #32 July 28, 2004 QuoteIn particular i am waiting for Juanesky´s answer who i am sure has voted but rather that justify his ideas prefer to make unfunny jokes spanish about a guy i don´t care in the slightest. BTW Juanesky the joke about shitting in the paella of Drunkmonkey was funny as hell. Don´t continue the joke, make your own.. Well, so much for contradictions aren't we? you care, and don't care, which is it? BTW shitting the paella joke was to explain you what he meant in the first post where you imply he is personally attacking you, while he is actually on your side. I did come up with my own joke, which is "el colmo de un zapatero", while you have on previous threads have already remarked bush as "arbustito". Giving you the same is not funny to you?. Too bad things appear to fly by you, Maybe it is an issue of language barrier. You can ask for help anytime."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
CrazyIvan 0 #33 July 28, 2004 QuoteFair enough. I understand that, but lets suppose that we have found a decent stockpile of WMD, which we haven´t YET. My question is why go after IRAK when we THOUGHT that they had them and not after Korea that we KNOW already have them and is even more unstable than Irak. If it is a matter of order, is there any plans to invade Korea? what about Pakistan? Exactly, WE KNOW that Korea has them and WHERE, so any sudden move to use them will trigger a USA reaction, and, it would be a "fair" fight, but NOT KNOWING where they are and having extremists accessing them is a different ball game.__________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #34 July 28, 2004 QuoteThat has been OVERUSED, and in fact, no MAJOR weapons have been found yet, but think about that for a moment, we are talking about a country full of mountains and desert, and you expect AQ to stash them all in a "weather controlled self-storage" warehouse? come on!!! wow, now Al Quada is actively hiding Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction. This story is getting better and better Are you a frequent Fox News watcher by any chance? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #35 July 28, 2004 QuoteQuoteFair enough. I understand that, but lets suppose that we have found a decent stockpile of WMD, which we haven´t YET. My question is why go after IRAK when we THOUGHT that they had them and not after Korea that we KNOW already have them and is even more unstable than Irak. If it is a matter of order, is there any plans to invade Korea? what about Pakistan? Exactly, WE KNOW that Korea has them and WHERE, so any sudden move to use them will trigger a USA reaction, and, it would be a "fair" fight, but NOT KNOWING where they are and having extremists accessing them is a different ball game. "We know where they are", Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, on ABC, referring to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.... 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
jimbarry 0 #36 July 28, 2004 QuoteIn 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 Only half-right, and backward. Those who make an inflamatory attack (as opposed to a supported assertion) on a group can just say it without support, and only the person or group being attacked has to respond intelligently? That's how an honest debate starts? >From Botellines: >I hope i didn´t really offend anyone with the >term WARMONGER, it was not my intention. You shouldn't backpedal like that. You meant what you meant, and you should see it through. We can take it. But then true, 'warmonger' is a term which can be easily misinterpreted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #37 July 28, 2004 QuoteOnly half-right, and backward. Those who make an inflamatory attack (as opposed to a supported assertion) on a group can just say it without support, and only the person or group being attacked has to respond intelligently? That's how an honest debate starts? >From Botellines: >I hope i didn´t really offend anyone with the >term WARMONGER, it was not my intention. You shouldn't backpedal like that. You meant what you meant, and you should see it through. We can take it. But then true, 'warmonger' is a term which can be easily misinterpreted. He is a moderator, if you don't like what he does, you are more than welcome to go and post to a different forum. yes I would feel the same if he banned me. No, I don't particularly agree with this ban, but geez, the man volunteers to try and keep all our asses in check, cut him some slack and move on...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #38 July 28, 2004 QuoteWe are at war with Korea...We are in a 30+ year cease fire. come on Ron, then all the world is at a cease fire with the rest of the world. We are at war then with the brits, the french, the US, the Romans, etc, etc. Do they know that the US is at war with them? QuoteKorea has admitted to WMD's SH had them but would not show if/how he got rid of them. And what do you think it is worse? equal to me in the worst case QuoteKorea was not under UN sanctions to not have any. Like you give a shit about the UN. I mean, if you do, shouldn´t you have waited two more months to invade Irak? QuoteKorea does not support terrorism....SH gave 25,000.00 to the families of any suicide bomber. Fair enough, what about Pakistan who has WMD, and not only help terrorists but also have terrorists in their files? QuoteKorea is willing to negotiate the surender of any WMD's for aid. Are they willing to surrender ALL of them? if you don´t believe SH why would you believe Korea´s crazy dictator QuoteKorea does not kill its own people for sport. Only for politics. Are you saying that Korea watch Human rights? QuoteKorea has never USED a WMD, much less on it's own people. Does that give you any guarantee that they will never use it? there is always a first time. Should we take away WMD from the US because they have used them before on civilians? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #39 July 28, 2004 Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We are at war with Korea...We are in a 30+ year cease fire. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- come on Ron, then all the world is at a cease fire with the rest of the world. We are at war then with the brits, the french, the US, the Romans, etc, etc. Do they know that the US is at war with them? WRONG...The Korean war was never ended....read about it before you spout off at the mouth. A war ends with a surender, truce, or an occupation. Korea is a cease fire. QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Korea has admitted to WMD's SH had them but would not show if/how he got rid of them. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And what do you think it is worse? equal to me in the worst case It hink a guy hiding them is worse...Particurly a guy that has used them and does not comply with a UN madate to show how he got rid of them. QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Korea was not under UN sanctions to not have any. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like you give a shit about the UN. I mean, if you do, shouldn´t you have waited two more months to invade Irak? Last time I checked I didn't invade Iraq...I didn't say "Go get them"...I do agree with the invasion...Hell SH had 13 YEARS to comply and didn't....What good would 2 more mths make? He had them, he ignored the UN, he played "hide the WMD's" for 13 years.... All the while while supporting terroists and killing his own people for sport. QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Korea does not support terrorism....SH gave 25,000.00 to the families of any suicide bomber. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fair enough, what about Pakistan who has WMD, and not only help terrorists but also have terrorists in their files? Pakistan is not trying to hide the fact they have WMD's. Plus Pakistan HAS NEVER USED THEM. There is a large line between having a weapon and using it.... QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Korea is willing to negotiate the surender of any WMD's for aid. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are they willing to surrender ALL of them? if you don´t believe SH why would you believe Korea´s crazy dictator Who said I would believe him? But I bet he would give us access to look for them if it was part of any deal, not play "Hide the WMD's" and not let us talk to people who would know like SH did. QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Korea does not kill its own people for sport. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Only for politics. Are you saying that Korea watch Human rights? More than killing a group of people just cause you can, and to test the weapons. QuoteIn Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Korea has never USED a WMD, much less on it's own people. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Does that give you any guarantee that they will never use it? there is always a first time. Should we take away WMD from the US because they have used them before on civilians? There is NEVER a quarantee on anything. But the fact that Korea is willing to deal, and SH was not (in fact he did everything he could to stall the process) speaks volumes of the differences of the two. As for the US and use of WMD's....Over HALF A MILLION lives were saved by the use of those two weapons. Also they were used during a WAR that was STARTED by the Japaniese. Japan's congress could not come to a surender agreement. they had to have 100% vote to surrender. The War commisioner (Whose name escapes me at the moment) would NEVER vote to surrender. It was only After the second Bomb on Nakisaki that the Emperor BEGGED the congress to surender. If he had not done that then the only other option was to invade the island of Japan with a landing force...That was going to be UGLY as shown by the landings on the other Pacific islands."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
CrazyIvan 0 #40 July 28, 2004 Quotewow, now Al Quada is actively hiding Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction. This story is getting better and better Are you a frequent Fox News watcher by any chance? Ok, I wrongly blamed AQ, the same way most of you blame Bush for everything. I should say Extremist groups or Terrorists.__________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #41 July 28, 2004 QuoteBy reading other threads i have come to realize that not even war supporters come to an agreement about why they went to war. There must only be one reason? If we're going to war, seems to me there better be a lot of good reasons. ...and there are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #42 July 28, 2004 QuoteHe is a moderator, if you don't like what he does, you are more than welcome to go and post to a different forum. Ok, so if I don't agree with a moderator, I must leave? There's no way I can discuss it with them (and the group)? I thought this was a "discussion" forum... nice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyIvan 0 #43 July 28, 2004 Quote"We know where they are", Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, on ABC, referring to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. He was 1/2 way right...he should say: "We know they are somewhere" __________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #44 July 28, 2004 did we ever actually declare war against Korea? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #45 July 28, 2004 QuoteOk, so if I don't agree with a moderator, I must leave? There's no way I can discuss it with them (and the group)? I thought this was a "discussion" forum... nice. I do believe that has been requested in the past by the owner of the website...... I guess you can take your own conclusions form there..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyIvan 0 #46 July 28, 2004 QuoteOk, so if I don't agree with a moderator, I must leave? There's no way I can discuss it with them (and the group)? I thought this was a "discussion" forum... nice. This board ain't no democracy. Deal with it. __________________________________________ Blue Skies and May the Force be with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #47 July 28, 2004 QuoteThis board ain't no democracy. Deal with it. I know the guy's got a tough (volunteer) job and we all should appreciate that. But since I need to follow the rules (and in this case, his interpretation of them) I thought I should be allowed to ask for clarification and other's input. ed: I think both sides should be respectful, intelligent, and provide support. Not just the person responding to an inflammatory unsupported attack. I believe that supports the rules of this forum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #48 July 28, 2004 Quotedid we ever actually declare war against Korea? No. It was a "police action" under UN authority. When was the last declaration of war by the USA in accordance with its Constitution?... 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
Nightingale 0 #49 July 28, 2004 World War II, after Pearl Harbor, I'm pretty sure. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zennie 0 #50 July 28, 2004 QuoteWorld War II, after Pearl Harbor, I'm pretty sure. Exactly, which is why when Bush & Co. say the Constitutional arrest, detention & trial protections don't apply because we're "at war", it's a bald faced lie. We aren't at war... war has not been declared pursuant to Constitutional requirements. Or maybe their thinking is that those requirements don't apply either because we're at war.... - Z "Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
