Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Michael Moore Has Competition.
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95296] |
Mon, 14 June 2004 15:04   |
 |
Nodbugger
Messages: 976
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Javaxcx |
To date, Iraq does not have WMD. No WMDs have been found, and no amount of whining over materials that could POTENTIALLY make one will change that.
Remember, if I had potassium and I had nitrate, that doesn't mean I'll make gunpowder. Having metal doesn't mean you're going to make bombs. If that were true, then I'll tell your country that your computer has the potential to be made into a weapon of mass destruction.
|
You just don't get it...
I am not Saddam and neither are you.
But Saddam has used them in the past, he has made them, and according to human nature he will do it again.
Just like people that do drugs. They do drugs go to jail, they get out and 3 weeks later they are back in jail for doing the same dumb shit.
Like I said in my last post. I would not trust Saddam with a butter knife.
And with you giving Saddam the benefit of the doubt.....that is one of the most stupid things in the world.
It is like trusting Michael Jackson with a group of 8 year old boys.
You are not going to get the expected results.
Saddam is not the type of person who should be allowed to run a country.
oh, and just because we have not found a cure for cancer does not mean there isn't one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95330] |
Mon, 14 June 2004 16:58 |
 |
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Sorry for the double post, but there are some issues I want you to address specifically from this.
| Nodbugger |
But Saddam has used them in the past, he has made them, and according to human nature he will do it again.
|
I'm not debating whether or not Saddam *might* try and obtain WMDs again. I'm telling you that there are no WMDs found in Iraq at this point. How does this justify the war on Iraq? Calling it a "War on Terror" doesn't justify invading a nation on shaky pretenses. Also, claiming to be "finishing" what the Gulf War started is ridiculous (not necessarily said by you, but the principle applies). I suggest you read this and find out why this is so.
| Quote: |
Just like people that do drugs. They do drugs go to jail, they get out and 3 weeks later they are back in jail for doing the same dumb shit.
|
This is utterly circumstantial and a terrible analogy.
| Quote: |
Like I said in my last post. I would not trust Saddam with a butter knife. And with you giving Saddam the benefit of the doubt.....that is one of the most stupid things in the world.
|
Don't put words in my mouth. I've said nothing of this sort, in fact, I've said the opposite. I'm questioning the justification for the United States taking it upon themselves to "liberate" Iraq, not supporting Saddam.
| Quote: |
Saddam is not the type of person who should be allowed to run a country.
|
I couldn't agree more with you. But I ask you, what gives YOU the right to go and remove his power? Your own morals? Propaganda? :rolleyes:
| Quote: |
oh, and just because we have not found a cure for cancer does not mean there isn't one.
|
I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but it doesn't mean there IS a cure, either.
I suggest you read the UN's UNMOVIC Thirteenth Quarterly Report on Iraq. Dated in 30 May, 2003.
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/S-2003-580.pdf
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95451] |
Tue, 15 June 2004 05:31 |
KIRBY098
Messages: 1546
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
If by "vague" you mean that UN monitoring equipment was found still attached to weapons that weren't supposed to have anything done with them without UN supervision.
I highly doubt that the warheads are in the scrap yard, so....
Where do you think they might be?
Deleted
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95452] |
Tue, 15 June 2004 05:35 |
KIRBY098
Messages: 1546
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Javaxcx |
as well as one third of the associated
logistics and support equipment."
|
This is the most worrisome of all the statements. Two thirds is missing. The ability to create more of this crap now moves into third world countries. Unmonitored, and under the control of morons who think killing kids is pleasing to thier God.
Deleted
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95511] |
Tue, 15 June 2004 12:33 |
|
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I understand where you're coming from, but keep in mind the date of the inspection, and the date the Shock and Awe strikes launched.
They were still (according to the UN) dismantling their caches when the bombs started flying.
Hypothetically speaking, if you were in the Iraqi government at the time, and were dismantling your munitions, would you continue to dismantle while being under seige? Supposedly, the Shock and Awe was targetted at Military sites; how do we know the sites used to dismantle the warheads and propulsion systems weren't destroyed even, only if by accident? Ultimately, how can you (not necessarily you, Kirby) conclude that Iraq was still proliferating or transferring "scrap metal" when they were consciously disarming when the bombs were flying?
Remember people (you know who you are), I'm not supporting Saddam. I'm questioning the justification for this war. The conclusions to date are bittersweet, IMO. Saddam has been captured, which in itself is a good thing. But I'm questioning whether or not the ends justify the means, and I believe they do not, and have YET to see proof that justifies this war outside the POSSIBILITY Saddam might have had weapons of mass destruction.
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.
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95539] |
Tue, 15 June 2004 14:39 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
By acting on circumstantial information, such as the components that COULD be used to make WMD's, without actually being assembled, is dangerous in a political sense. It's a large gamble for anyone to make assumptions without proof. "oh but he has the components to make the weapons", well I have components to make weapons sitting in my kitchen or garage right now. That being fertilizer and other everyday chemicals that when combined right would make a bomb. More on the legal aspect, if the US were to do something based on this circumstantial stuff and take Saddam to the World Court over this, the evidence just isn't there for something to happen. To relate it with an common local aspect, a known drug lord, despite having the means to do whatever, can not be charged with something unless it's absolutely certain that what he has, is infact illigal substances. This is why sting operations are set up, and no one acts until after the crime has been committed. This being the Criminal will 'walk', because the crime he was accused of had not occured.
In short, until Iraq is found with complete missles in usable condition, not much could really happen. Complete WMD's being found that have rusted through and are unusable is not the same as usable ones though..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95642] |
Wed, 16 June 2004 07:44 |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
This guy Begs to differ.
Here is a news report about the training camp he talks about. It talks about a Boeing 707 just sitting out in the middle of nowhere. Wasn't it a pair of 707s that were hijacked and flown into the Twin Towers?
Remember Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist who cut off Nick Berg's head? He's been with al-Qaeda for a long time. He's also been sheltered by Saddam before. He even received medical treatment from him.
EDIT: Bah, changed the link to the news story instead of having the interview twice.
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
[Updated on: Wed, 16 June 2004 08:20] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95645] |
Wed, 16 June 2004 08:06 |
KIRBY098
Messages: 1546
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| hydra1945 |
This guy Begs to differ.
Here is a news report about the training camp he talks about. It may not have been the 9-11 terrorists it was training, but there sure as hell were terrorists trained there.
|
Granted. I am a veteran, and I know the reality.
I served three tours of duty in the Persian gulf shooting at Sadam's forces, but the claim that Iraq was a sponsor of multinational terrorism is unfounded. This looks like a way to hit back at the U.S. by training special forces in specwar stuff. We do the same types of training by the way.
After the first Gulf war he lost control of pretty much everything in the no-fly zones which were VERY restrictive to his genocidal policies. There was no way to hit back other than special forces, and his pathetic targeting of U.S. planes by SAM sites in the NFZ.
Deleted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95723] |
Wed, 16 June 2004 13:20 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
The entire structure of the middle east breeds and fosters terrorism. It has to be rebuilt. Everyone said Reagan couldn't topple the Soviet Union and he did... how is this any different?
And warranto, why would you listen to what the press said were the reasons? They want Bush to fail. Anything that's bad news for the US is great news for the Democrats.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95731] |
Wed, 16 June 2004 14:19 |
 |
Gizbotvas
Messages: 172
Registered: February 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Crimson |
And warranto, why would you listen to what the press said were the reasons? They want Bush to fail. Anything that's bad news for the US is great news for the Democrats.
|
Actually that's not true.
The PEW Charitable Trust Foundation released non-partisan research which stated clearly that the media "favors" Bush, with almost 75% of his network television coverage being favorable towards the administration.
The myth that the Media, comprised of the world's largest corporations, is somehow LIBERAL is sort of comical. Liberals do not control the wealth and power in this country, but will always influence it's cultural reform as that is done by the youth in this country which is almost always Liberal.
"Everyone relax...Gizbotvas is here"
Pits moderator
n00bserver moderator
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95733] |
Wed, 16 June 2004 14:24 |
|
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
The means include the United States' invasion into Iraq. The ends are Saddam's capture, and the toppling of the Iraqi government.
The United States invaded Iraq on the ASSUMPTION, and let me say again, ASSUMPTION of finding WMD, and to date, there have been none found. This means your ends are not justified.
I don't understand how comparing this to World War 2. Germany invaded all sorts of countries. Iraq has invaded none since Kuwait and the Gulf War, thereafter, UN inspectors monitored non-proliferation. I suggest you read that quarterly report I posted, instead of assuming it's drivel and ignoring it. That report disputes anything that CNN news can tell you, because it is dated a good 5 years later, and clearly shows that Iraq is non-proliferating.
I also suggest you stop blast out your rampant ad hominem. It makes you look a lot stupider than you probably are.
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.
|
|
|
|
| Michael Moore Has Competition. [message #95736] |
Wed, 16 June 2004 14:33 |
|
Nodbugger
Messages: 976
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Javaxcx |
The means include the United States' invasion into Iraq. The ends are Saddam's capture, and the toppling of the Iraqi government.
The United States invaded Iraq on the ASSUMPTION, and let me say again, ASSUMPTION of finding WMD, and to date, there have been none found. This means your ends are not justified.
I don't understand how comparing this to World War 2. Germany invaded all sorts of countries. Iraq has invaded none since Kuwait and the Gulf War, thereafter, UN inspectors monitored non-proliferation. I suggest you read that quarterly report I posted, instead of assuming it's drivel and ignoring it. That report disputes anything that CNN news can tell you, because it is dated a good 5 years later, and clearly shows that Iraq is non-proliferating.
I also suggest you stop blast out your rampant ad hominem. It makes you look a lot stupider than you probably are.
|
What are the means? How are the means worse than the ends?
Oh ya they aren't. We haven't killed millions of people. A deadly virus was not let loose on the world. There was no easier way to do this. There is nothing wrong with the way we did this.
I do not know what the fuck you are trying to spew out there. We didn't do anything wrong as far as the means go.
We did not make an assumption. We went with what every leader of the free world said. Including the UN. the UN right now is more corrupt than Enron was. They are a bunch of fucking retards now and would not listen to them worth a shit.
and yes, comparing this to world war 2 is accurate. We went to war to get rid of Hitler. We went to war to get rid of Saddam. Those are means and the ends.
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Nov 26 06:09:40 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02012 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
