Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » How much do you want to bet.....
|
|
| How much do you want to bet..... [message #107787] |
Fri, 13 August 2004 17:14   |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Foreigners don't hate us as much as some people would like you to believe:
For them, I present this challenge, courtesy of Rush Limbaugh:
------------------------------------
I have a message to the world, ladies and gentlemen.
Dear World,
You have been unhappy with the United States of America and you have been equally unhappy and angry with our President George W. Bush, and you say you want us to stop exporting our brand of democracy. So, in the spirit of world peace, in the spirit of international understanding, I, speaking on behalf of the United States of America, would like to offer you this gesture.
The peoples of Sudan are suffering either genocide, borderline genocide, or not far from genocide. They're being wiped out in droves. You are asking us to do something about it. You always tell us you don't like our exporting our democracy. You don't like the way we assert ourselves around the world. You don't like the way we muscle in on other people's territory. You don't like the way we have a braggadocios president. You don't like this cowboy guy who sees trouble and tries to deal with it. You don't like this.
If you don't like the way we live and if you don't like the way we do things, if you don't like the way we export our democracy, then this is your chance world. Your moment to illustrate what you are made of. The United Nations Security Council -- a-hem -- us, NATO -- (clearing throat) -- sorry, that's us, too. Long-standing allies -- that's you (Laughing) -- that hate us. What an opportunity you all have. The French and the Germans and all of these great countries around the world who are so unhappy with what we are doing, look at the opportunity you now have to show the world that you can do everything you want done but you resent us for doing it.
You want the mess in Sudan fixed, but you get mad when we do it. You call on us and you demand that we fix it, and then we do fix it, and then you hate us even more because we can. You don't like the way we export things. You don't like the way we live. You don't like the way we feed you. You don't like the way we make you well when you're sick. You don't like the way we clothe you. You don't like the way we protect you. But when there's trouble, who do you call? Yet you hate us even more after we fix the mess that you don't like.
So again, you have an opportunity here to show the world that you can do everything you want done but resent us for doing. So, rest of the world, get in there, roll up your sleeves, and do something. Get in there, save some lives, save Sudan, free Sudan, liberate Sudan. You can do it. We'll be watching.
------------------------------------
Now I know you skipped over this and didn't read it, SuperFlyingLiberal, but you really should read it anyway. You, too, Javaxcx... give us all a real retort to this, one that doesn't insult Rush Limbaugh in any way. Remember, attack the issues, not the messenger.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| How much do you want to bet..... [message #107795] |
Fri, 13 August 2004 17:52 |
 |
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Quote: |
Now I know you skipped over this and didn't read it, SuperFlyingLiberal, but you really should read it anyway. You, too, Javaxcx... give us all a real retort to this, one that doesn't insult Rush Limbaugh in any way. Remember, attack the issues, not the messenger.
|
I hope you're not insinuating that I would just assume what's in the article instead of actually reading it. You know me better than that. But, I'll see what I can do:
| Quote: |
The peoples of Sudan are suffering either genocide, borderline genocide, or not far from genocide. They're being wiped out in droves. You are asking us to do something about it. You always tell us you don't like our exporting our democracy. You don't like the way we assert ourselves around the world. You don't like the way we muscle in on other people's territory. You don't like the way we have a braggadocios president. You don't like this cowboy guy who sees trouble and tries to deal with it. You don't like this.
|
When I read this, I see Rush speaking on behalf of the world (or some of it) and their opinions of the United States. And he's exactly right. That IS how some of the world views the United States. Me, personally however, only relate to two of such issues. And only since the Iraqi war have I had any problem with the U.S. Administration: exportation of "your" democracy, and the muscling on other people's territory. I might be inclined to relate more intimately with the assertation remark in the future depending on what happens.
I can't really retort this, because Rush is pretty much on the ball here.
| Quote: |
If you don't like the way we live and if you don't like the way we do things, if you don't like the way we export our democracy, then this is your chance world. Your moment to illustrate what you are made of. The United Nations Security Council -- a-hem -- us, NATO -- (clearing throat) -- sorry, that's us, too. Long-standing allies -- that's you (Laughing) -- that hate us. What an opportunity you all have. The French and the Germans and all of these great countries around the world who are so unhappy with what we are doing, look at the opportunity you now have to show the world that you can do everything you want done but you resent us for doing it.
|
Well, last time I checked here, the United Nations Security Council had a little bit more in it than the United States exclusively. 15 different countries make up the security council. Frankly, I find it irrelevant how much of an influence the Unites States makes on that council because they only make up a single vote independantly. I'll pertain to the Charter of that international organization instead of heresay.
I'm going to also have to disagree with the idea here that the United Nations is implied to act alone on this issue. Of course, the United States doesn't HAVE to help with Sudan if they don't want to, but given all the hype about freedom and liberty around Iraq nowadays, I would find it suspicious if they did nothing. Not to suggest that Rush implies it, but just food for thought.
I'm not too sure if Rush refers to the actions of the Gulf War, the cold war, or whatever in this instance, so I'll use Iraq, as it's more to date and generally sparked all this 'hatred' in the first place.
If the United Nations passed a resolution saying "you may overthrow the sovereignty of Iraq nullfiying paragraph X (whatever it was) of resolution 1441", then I wouldn't be against this war in the legal arena. If the United Nations gives permission to use "all necessary force" to deal with Sudan, I'll support that fullheartedly. I think one of the key issues revolving around this 'hate' is that some of the world, myself included, feel betrayed by the United States administration (moreso in this case on the U.S. Admin. because of the initial actions taken on the matter) and their Coalition of the Willing for not respecting the resolution 1441 in the first place. You know, the whole "commitment to sovereignty" and so on. People certainly didn't like the Iraqi government for violating the United Nation resolutions, so why should they like the American administration for doing the same thing?
However, if he's refering to the actions of the Gulf war, and the actions taken under resolution 678 prior to 687, then he's absolutely right. And I would say that it's a bad call for the world to hate the nation working under authority of the United Nations.
| Quote: |
You want the mess in Sudan fixed, but you get mad when we do it. You call on us and you demand that we fix it, and then we do fix it, and then you hate us even more because we can. You don't like the way we export things. You don't like the way we live. You don't like the way we feed you. You don't like the way we make you well when you're sick. You don't like the way we clothe you. You don't like the way we protect you. But when there's trouble, who do you call? Yet you hate us even more after we fix the mess that you don't like.
|
I'm not going to speak for the world, if that's to whom he's refering. I'll speak for myself on this: I appreciate a LOT that the United States gives to the world. I appreciate the medical knowledge gained and shared, the exports-- therein including food, clothing, etc-- and I appreciate the alliance we have. However: I do not appreciate criminal activity, even in the best of intentions. I would except full legal repercussions to any act of illegality, as I would to myself if I were in a position of morality versus legality and I took the moral path.
So again, I can't refute what he said outside the generalization of the entire world. But that is beside the point. The fact of the matter is, he is pretty much right on here when it comes to a certain portion of the world. Not everyone, though. So don't forget that.
| Quote: |
So again, you have an opportunity here to show the world that you can do everything you want done but resent us for doing. So, rest of the world, get in there, roll up your sleeves, and do something. Get in there, save some lives, save Sudan, free Sudan, liberate Sudan. You can do it. We'll be watching.
|
The world can do whatever the world wants as long as it goes through the United Nations and is approved as far as I'm concerned. Of course, by "the world" I'm refering only, and ONLY to those nations who are Member States.
All in all, Rush is right for the most part. I personally don't like being generalized to the extent Rush made it out to be, but that would be attacking the person, not the issues.
So, the one million dollar statement: If it goes through the UN Security Council and recieves a resolution authorizing Member States to do what they need to do in Sudan, then I'll support it; If not, I cannot give it my concent or support unless everything pertaining to the conflict, if any, is legal.
Sniper Extraordinaire
Read the FUD Rules before you come in and make an ass of yourself.
All your base are belong to us.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
|
|
|
|
| How much do you want to bet..... [message #107805] |
Fri, 13 August 2004 19:04 |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Alright Crimson, I read those paragraphs from Limbaugh, and he's trying to make it seem like the rest of the world hates the U.S. for just attacking countries, not out of right or wrong. Invading Iraq and fixing the crisis in Sudan are NOT the same thing. From everything I've seen, it's as bright as day that we need to go in to Sudan TODAY and resolve these crimes immediately. I doubt we would have much trouble convincing the U.N. to give us full support in Sudan.
My 2 cents.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| How much do you want to bet..... [message #107982] |
Sat, 14 August 2004 17:56 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
The humanitarion crisis in Sudan is roughly about 100 times worse, and we're just hurting more people in Iraq, as we're about to invade Najaf, destroying the temple of Ali, and Muslims have a funny way of getting angry when we destroy their holy shrines...
It's not going to be pretty.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| How much do you want to bet..... [message #108063] |
Sun, 15 August 2004 00:53 |
NHJ BV
Messages: 712
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| hydra1945 |
So we shouldn't have invaded Iraq for humanitarian reasons, but we can invade Sudan for humanitarian reasons? :rolleyes:
|
| SuperflyingEngi |
The humanitarion crisis in Sudan is roughly about 100 times worse
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Jul 05 00:26:46 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00878 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
