Posts by Zep

20

To all the people who think the US only goes to war for OIL ...

by dolphman in

i won't bring up ww2 or anything like that but---.

why did we go to somalia and get shot at for distributing rice to hungy people?.

why did we go to haiti?.

Zep

dolphman

I'll bring up ww2 if you want. Everyone knows it was a good against evil thing. The nazi guys were evil. And the allies lead by the U.S of A(who saved our ass) were the good guys fighting for FREEDOM. If youse don't believe me that hitler was an evil guy, just look at what hitler did to all those Jews. Of course, everyone back in the USA was FREE, such things could never happen to a minority group. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be black for quids back in the 40's, and I certainly wouldn't want to be those 1000's of black people who in the 30's were injected with deadly diseases in the name of science by official, though very hush hush, government programs. But on the whole the U.S. was fighting for FREEDOM, not a hint of economic self interest involved, no sir.

>I'm not saying OIL didn't play an important role in why we went to Iraq. But honestly, if that's what we >were after, why didn't we just get it while we there in 1991. We had ALL the excuses in the world.

If you ask our former prime minister at the time (I'm from Australia) he'll say it was because of the UN mandate.

I think the main reason they didn't go in was the fear of what would rise up after Saddam. 60% of the population in Iraq is shite, which is the dominant Islamic sect in Iran. The U.S. was fearful of a post Saddam Iraq siding with Iran afterwards. Saddam, however bad he was, provided a check for this. The neo-conseravtives have recently reversed this thinking.

> But ridding the world of Saddam is a positive no matter how you slice it.

It depends what replaces Saddam doesn't it?

> It paves the way for what was once the Arab worlds most prosperous/secratist state to be great again, >and stable. If we can defeat the insurgents, the region will be much better off.

This is like the neo-conservative thinking. They think that by getting rid of Saddam the iraqis will unite under a glorious democracy, and that a democratized Iraq will spead democracy throughout the Arab world like a disease. I think it's a utopian fantasy myself. I think People like Pearl, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz are full of themselves. They have bought their own utopian fantasy bullshit. Iraq may end up being a little better than under Saddam, or maybe civil war will break out after the US leaves and things will get worse, who knows, I certainly don't. But, I think on the whole, as far as relations with the Arab world is concerned, it's going to be the same old same old.

9

Judge Rules Saddam Trained Hijackers

by Perry in

9/11 bombshell: judge rules saddam trained hijackers .

friday, may 9, 2003 7:22 a.m. edt.

9/11 bombshell: judge rules saddam trained hijackers.

Zep

From my memory, Powell never mentioned salman pak in his address to the UN. I wonder why? Maybe because he felt it was dodgy intelligence. I know he excluded certain other stuff from his address for that very reason.

If there really was such a link between al-qaida and saddam then why didn't we see a chemical or biological weapons attack instead of just planes flying into buildings on s11. I mean, seriously, Bush says there is a link between Saddam and Osama. Bush says that Saddam has WMD's. Bush says that Osama wants WMDs. Then why didn't we see a chemical or biological attack. I can think of only 2 answers why we didn't: either saddam had such a shitty WMD program or heb just wasn't linked to Osama.

1

Up the Republic

by ignorance is strength in

well i was surfing through this website and i thought of something... all members of the commonwealth arise and think how great a republic would be.

i mean, what do we pay our governor-generals for?

they live lavish lifestyles at the cost of the taxpayers and they do not even represent the wishes of the people since they are appointed by the prime minister (at least in canada, it varies in each commonwealth country).

Zep

I think we Australians should do the same. I'm against any form of public privilege such as recieved by the queen. And Besides it's ridiculous to have a head of state that is, in our case anyway, halfway around the world and has only been here a handful of times. A few years ago we Australians had a referendum on whether we should off the queen and become a republic or not. While a majority wanted a republic the monarchists still won. The reason why we still have the bloody queen on our 5 dollar bill is that the republicans couldn't decide on a republican model. Some wanted a popularly elected president, while others wanted the parliment to select the president. I'm with the later idea, It makes more sense and saves more more money. off the queen, good idea.

48

Why are Americans always shooting themselves?

by Zep in

.

i recently watched bowling for columbine and came away with the impression that michael moore is saying that americans are always shooting themselves because they are paranoid to the hilt.. i cant figure it out!

why are americans always going postal on themselves?

Zep

jelly,

"America does have a problem with gun violence but not for any of the reasons moore brings out."

I'm not sure what Moore is saying. He seems to meader around the topic, make a few points, and take satirical look at things, and then move on. I dont know. It is true that some of his documentary is inacurrate, but I still think some of the points he makes a pretty valid in general.

Is it really easy access to guns thats the problem, like some people say. Up and till recently down here in Australia I could get just about anything, just like America, but we still never had the amout of gun deaths per capita you guys had. Then when Martin Bryant went bonkers at Port Arthur (not too far from where I live) and killed 36 people they brought in some tougher gun laws and initiated a gun by back. That was in '96. But the hilarious thing was that they only banned rifles. I could apparently still go and get a handgun with ease, and semi automatic too. But no-one did. In fact Gun deaths went down from 96. I think people just got fed up with guns, even though they could still get them if they really wanted.

In America it seems to be a God given right to own a gun, a necessity almost, enshrined in the constitution to protect Americans from a Government that might go bad. We just dont have that culture. We just dont seem to like them as much, or feel like we need them as much to protect life and property. We aint as PARANOID???

Seriously, I dont fully know. I think its a culture thingy at the moment.

48

Why are Americans always shooting themselves?

by Zep in

.

i recently watched bowling for columbine and came away with the impression that michael moore is saying that americans are always shooting themselves because they are paranoid to the hilt.. i cant figure it out!

why are americans always going postal on themselves?

Zep

Well.....stinky dude..... I just found one point MM made to be rather interesting. He made the point that the US has heaps of guns, but then so does Canada. Yet then Canada doesn't have near the amount of gun deaths as the US. So, can it be the media and all those hollywood movies that is causing Americans to go shoot up the joint? But Canadians watch them too. So what gives? I get the impression that Americans are just way too stressed out and not too happy?

48

Why are Americans always shooting themselves?

by Zep in

.

i recently watched bowling for columbine and came away with the impression that michael moore is saying that americans are always shooting themselves because they are paranoid to the hilt.. i cant figure it out!

why are americans always going postal on themselves?

Zep

I recently watched Bowling for Columbine and came away with the impression that Michael Moore is saying that Americans are always shooting themselves because they are PARANOID to the hilt.

I cant figure it out! Why are Americans always going Postal on themselves?

12

did anyone here understand THE MATRIX RELOADED

by Zep in

i got the first one, and thought it was pretty good.

hell, i even understood mulholand drive.

but the matrix sequel is just bullcrap.

Zep

yeah, well, maybe "UNDERSTAND" is the wrong word. I think i should have said that I "GOT" it instead.

I dont understand why, in the matrix, the machines use humans as batteries. Why dont they just wipe out all the troublesome humans and use chimpanzees or pigs or cows or some other lower lifeform as batteries instead. Sheep would be the best choice because they are so dumb. The matrix for them would consist only of a field of grass...easy to program???? For a Pig it would just be a bunch of mud and for a chimpanzee it would just be a bunch of bananas??????

12

did anyone here understand THE MATRIX RELOADED

by Zep in

i got the first one, and thought it was pretty good.

hell, i even understood mulholand drive.

but the matrix sequel is just bullcrap.

Zep

drwtsn

yeah, I'm with you on a few of you points. But ultimately more questions are raised than are answered. I got the script of the key scenes in the movie last night, thinking that if i read them I'd understand, but nope. Your stuff about the matrix being too perfect and having to be redesigned with wars etc. makes sense to me.

I read one guy on the net who thinks that neo is actually a program, and BAD, and agent smith is actually the anomally and is GOOD. Then there is some stuff about a matrix with a matrix.

My take on mullholand drive: it was excellent.I wish i had seen it on the big screen. It was all a dream from the start to the blue box bit...duh! I caught onto that when some nutty lady started talking about "someone is in trouble", so the film made sense to me when everything changed. Once you realise its a dream, you just pass everything off as a mish mosh of the girls fantasies and experiences put into a very symbolic form that should be interpreted in light of the girls real life that is shown at the end of the movie. The stuff in the dream that doesn't really fit you just pass off as just the dream --you can over analyse some of mullholand drives symbolic elements. I think some of the stuff isn't meant to be understood, its just there for effect, thats how david lynch works. But the core of the movie makes sense to me....more than the matrix anyhow!

12

did anyone here understand THE MATRIX RELOADED

by Zep in

i got the first one, and thought it was pretty good.

hell, i even understood mulholand drive.

but the matrix sequel is just bullcrap.

Zep

seriously???

I got the first one, and thought it was pretty good. Hell, I even understood Mulholand drive. But the matrix sequel is just bullcrap. Theres a whole lot of shit blowing up and lots of dumb car chases...and then when twist FINALLY comes I'm just left with my head spinning.

Can any one please what the hell the architect was talking about at the end of the movie. He talked too fast for me to take it all in! No-one i know understood what the hell he was talking about!!!

6

Time for the US military to do more liberating

by Zep in

with the recent united states military success in iraq, which has set the ball rolling for the liberation of the iraqi people, it is not time to relax and sit on our asses.

there are more people to liberate.. the world faces many threats.

wmd could, if they fall into the wrong hands, kill millions.

Zep

G'day Waiting. Hows things.

enjoy your coffee! Full of heaps of antioxidants to help fight the ageing process, I hear. I cant stand the stuff myself, but i think i might have to start drinking some since i just hit the big 3 0

Jayson

I just checked out a book review of "world on fire". Judging from the review, I doubt i'd disagree with much of it at all. But i'd have to read it of course.

http://www.spiritualityhealth.com/newsh/items/bookreview/item_5635.html