Xander

Joined

• started 94 topics
• posted 2,045 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Xander

• 
  131

  France is a "Pain in the Ass"

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i changed my topic to this:.

  why does france always go against britain and us policies?

  should we still consider france as an ally?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  i think iraq is a threat to alot of countries, including the u.s.....simply because they are lead by a genocidal madman.

  Indeed, and if 'led by a genocidal madman' is a good reason to go to war with someone for being a threat, well don't you think North Korea is a BIGGER threat? Or, China? Or, hell, pretty much ALL of middle Africa? And while you're at it, Israel and the rest of the Middle East?

  if by "direct threat" you mean immediate, as in we need to take care of this by spring or else, no i dont believe that.

  Well, it's good thing you clarified this. Because it looked like you were coming off in defense of a war with Iraq that DOES look like it will be 'by spring', or, at least, this year.
• 
  64

  How Do You Feel About President Bush?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i like him, but he makes me a little nervous.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  By the way, the situation we have today was created by the previous administration.

  RE: The economy?

  Not really. The Clinton gov't certainly did nothing to temper the too-rapid growth it was going through, but it didn't CAUSE IT. It just didn't PREVENT it.

  RE: Saddam?

  Surely you jest? It was Reagan who propped up Saddam's Iraq, and funded the Afghan Mujahadeen, and Bush-1 who fought half a war, leaving in its wake a myriad of UN sanctions. All Clinton ever did was lob a few cruise missiles here and there when a distraction from domestic affairs was 'needed' - hardly the cause of this situation.

  Edited by - Xander on 24 January 2003 12:30:44
• 
  103

  France & Germany Take the Same Stance

  by MrMoe in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.cnn.com/2003/world/meast/01/22/sproject.irq.schroeder.chirac/index.html

  france, germany stand firm on iraq.

  wednesday, january 22, 2003 posted: 12:20 pm est (1720 gmt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  Quite well said Amac.

  I think we need to remind the warhawks we are debating with a few points:

  • Saddam is a bad person. Yes, we know that. Everyone knows that. That's not being debated, so every time you bring up "But look how AWFUL he is", well, we don't care. We already knew that.
  • Saddam probably has WMD. Yeah, that's kinda likely. The US sold some to him, he didn't use them all, logic dictates he still has them. Every time you post all these pics of Iraqis weapons, well, we don't care. We already knew that.
  • Saddam has violated UN resolutions. Indeed he has! No one is arguing that, either. Every time you list all the UN resolutions he has broken, well, again, we don't care. We already knew THAT, too.

  The problem is, that you all (warhawks) feel that these three facts alone are enough to justify any action the US wants to take, regardless of anything else at all, and by presenting these points OVER and OVER, you are winning an argument.

  These points are not being argued. What IS being argued is what they MEAN, and that is why I keep falling back on the context (IE., the US as a bad judge of character, etc.).

  YOU all have not provided any argument on WHY these three factors mean we MUST GO TO WAR NOW. You just present these 3 'facts' and go "Well, see, we must go to war". I look at the same thing and think "Okay....uhhh....why?"

  Edited by - Xander on 24 January 2003 12:18:3
• 
  131

  France is a "Pain in the Ass"

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i changed my topic to this:.

  why does france always go against britain and us policies?

  should we still consider france as an ally?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  youll see that i have never even implied such a thing

  I'm sorry, but you most definately do imply this:

  whether you like it or not, the u.s. will pursue terrorism everywhere.....we should just sit back and let terrorists bomb our nation?

  You used this in defense of a war on Iraq. If attacking Iraq is necessary, otherwise we will be letting 'terrorists bomb our nation', then obviously you must think Iraq plans to attack the US at some point?

  Unless by attacking Iraq, you are confident that we will terrify terrorists everywhere into not 'bombing our nation' anymore? The only other meaning that can be implied is that YOU feel Iraq is a DIRECT THREAT to the US, which it is demonstrably NOT.
• 
  131

  France is a "Pain in the Ass"

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i changed my topic to this:.

  why does france always go against britain and us policies?

  should we still consider france as an ally?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  Look, obviously you must have read my post, since you quoted it. How you then failed to comprehend it is confusing me, though.

  so, since weve been guilty of supporting terrorism in the past, we should just sit back and let terrorists bomb our nation?

  Where THE HELL do you get this idea? I never said this, I never implied this.

  YOU are assuming if we don't attack Iraq "NOW, NOW, NOW" then tomorrow he's going to be blowing up US cities. Do you understand how stupid this is? He has NEVER ATTACKED THE US. NO information spies have gotten out of Iraq EVEN IMPLIES he PLANS to at ANY POINT IN THE FUTURE.

  If you want to retaliate against terrorists who attack the US - FINE, that's OKAY, they started it, WE CAN FINISH IT.

  Iraq has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH THAT GROUP AT ALL.

  SAUDI ARABIA DOES.

  Why is this so hard for you to get through your head?
• 
  1

  Amazing photochopped posters...

  by Xander in

  1. social
  2. humour

  .

  even if you don't agree with the content (they are all political), surely you must acknowledge the quality chops done.

  these are wartime propoganda posters used in the us at various times in its past, re-chopped to, errr, fit the 'modern' situation..... click on any of them to start the slideshow - it's worth the time..

  1. 
• 

  Xander

  Even if you don't agree with the content (they are all political), surely you must acknowledge the quality chops done. These are wartime propoganda posters used in the US at various times in its past, re-chopped to, errr, fit the 'modern' situation....

  Click on any of them to start the slideshow - it's worth the time.
• 
  103

  France & Germany Take the Same Stance

  by MrMoe in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.cnn.com/2003/world/meast/01/22/sproject.irq.schroeder.chirac/index.html

  france, germany stand firm on iraq.

  wednesday, january 22, 2003 posted: 12:20 pm est (1720 gmt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  BTW, since you have a habit of misunderstanding me, let me clarify:

  That the 'West' is no better DOES NOT MEAN I CONDONE HIS ACTIONS.

  I am merely stating that the US can be no judge of them, as this nation has done far worse in its history.
• 
  103

  France & Germany Take the Same Stance

  by MrMoe in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.cnn.com/2003/world/meast/01/22/sproject.irq.schroeder.chirac/index.html

  france, germany stand firm on iraq.

  wednesday, january 22, 2003 posted: 12:20 pm est (1720 gmt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  after the over throw of the Taliban, the warlords took over and some of them are as bad as the Taliban

  Ding! Exactly what I'm talking about.

  his former mistress came on TV and said so

  You remember how Arabs treat women, right? I'm sure a "former mistress" of any Arab man would have some quite flattering things to say about him, especially if being prodded by the western press. (IOW, I don't believe her, she has several motives to lie, and that she just happens to tell the world at large exactly what they want to hear, but could never prove, well I'm sure that's just seredipity at work).

  Saddam is evil incarnate

  If he is, the 'West' is no better.

  You have yet to come up with ANY crime he has committed, that has never been done by the US or any US ally.
• 
  103

  France & Germany Take the Same Stance

  by MrMoe in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.cnn.com/2003/world/meast/01/22/sproject.irq.schroeder.chirac/index.html

  france, germany stand firm on iraq.

  wednesday, january 22, 2003 posted: 12:20 pm est (1720 gmt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  Greedy Republicans maybe, but when was the last time the Bush family bombed one of thier own citys or killed people with chemical weapons?

  Is it fair to compare the US of today to the Iraq of today? Iraq is only 70 yrs old as a country. What was the US doing at 70 yrs old?

  You can't MAKE a nation grow up faster, or impose your will on them. Their people, while you think they SHOULD appreciate it, won't. They'll just see one government topple in favor of another (if our experience with Iran is any indicator...and another, and another, and....) without them having any control over it. Just throwing out a dictator, telling everyone 'okay, you can vote now', trying to explain what voting MEANS and how it is a POWER for them, etc. just doesn't work.

  They have to seize control over their own country themselves to improve their situation.

  Hence, my argument that there is no justifiable reason to attack Iraq.

  • We can't help the people without them helping themselves
  • He is not a threat to the US
  • He had nothing to do with the terrorist attack that we can legimately retaliate for
• 
  103

  France & Germany Take the Same Stance

  by MrMoe in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.cnn.com/2003/world/meast/01/22/sproject.irq.schroeder.chirac/index.html

  france, germany stand firm on iraq.

  wednesday, january 22, 2003 posted: 12:20 pm est (1720 gmt).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Xander

  To protect Iraqi Kurds and Shi'a Muslims from Saddam's chemical attacks, executions and forced relocations

  Yes, because gods forbid we would EVER fight against natives of OUR country, or attack them with biological warfare, or force them relocate to reservations or anything.

  And we would certainly, never EVER use WMD in warfare, no sir. In fact, we are so peaceful, we've already disarmed ourselves just like Saddam should!

  Or, wait, I forgot, we're members of the "US and Friends" club, we operate by a different set of rules. We're allowed to have NBC weapons. We're allowed to use them when we want to. We're allowed to, even when not using them, intimidate other countries with our military power. 'Cause we're just better than everyone else in the world.

  Everybody else is wrong, we're right.

  Edited by - Xander on 23 January 2003 18:0:50