"im sorry, but i just cant agree with you that the "u.s. changed the rules"........like i said in my last post, the ENTIRE u.n. security council (including, yes, france) supported a preemptive strike against iraq....what they didnt agree on was the timing of it. if france didnt support a preemptive invasion, they wouldve voted "no" for resolution 1441........theres no getting around the fact that res.1441 called for military action if iraq did not comply. whether or not iraq complied fast enough was where all the hair splitting came into play.....half of the u.n. thought it was time, the other half did not. the half that did think it was time, acted."
"first off, i dont think youve really read my posts on the issue as a whole......if you had, youd see that i have indeed bent toward the other side on plenty of aspects of it. i agree that we need to look at both sides, and i agree that most absolutely refuse to do this. can i understand why so many fear the governmental power? absolutely....becuase i fear it as well. i fear the reprecussions of the new precedent, and i dont for one second think that everything that comes out of this is going to be flowers and rainbows. sometimes the good outways the bad.....and my hope is that this will ring true in regards to whats taken place in iraq. i think the jury is still out though, and it could very well come back to haunt the world at some point."
D. I have read your posts I promise. But I am asking you to look at it through W. Europe's eyes. From "Their" point of veiw. It's scary I know but try it. Their argument is so simple it just takes a second; Their scared. And, "the jury is still out" isn't that what has been said over and over? I agree with you. Too bad this did not end it on page one.
Jayson
JoinedPosts by Jayson
-
865
WoMD ... so where are they?
by Simon innow, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!
perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.
now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.
-
-
Jayson
-
865
WoMD ... so where are they?
by Simon innow, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!
perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.
now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.
-
-
Jayson
Dubla,
I just want the thread to end. In the start I tried to validate the other side. But I honestly think they wanted a fight. It would be nice to try to have a consensus. Someone needs to see both sides. There are more than one [side] here.
"Yesterdays" standards were "clear & present danger." That term has been around as justification for the use of force since like the 1850's. Iraq did pose a danger but was it a "clear & present one?" There is so much room for debate. It is a pandora's box. Crossing the line that the US did, that could still lead to a pandemic war. We have to remember that there are a lot of people who are really scared. And there are others who just hate Bush. Last (I speak of) are those who want to and work to understand the big picture. (They can be of either of the other 2) The US did change the rules. They did shut France out in the UN as much as the French stood in the way to protect Saddam's butt.
A lot of people think that the US are the good guys. And "They" those who oppose the US are the bad guys. I know that Saddam is the bad guy (or was) but, I also know that there are no angles here. We support the concepts of a preemptive strike & invasion. This is a big deal. There is no turning back. Saying "Well, I was wrong." That won't cut it. As where Simon's team has that luxury at any time. They can say "Well, we were mislead by the misinformation of the BBC and others."
We support a very serious change in US policy abroad and at home. We no longer stand by the principles of "Clear & Present Danger." I can understand why so many fear the saber rattling & the Governmental power. Can you?
-
865
WoMD ... so where are they?
by Simon innow, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!
perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.
now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.
-
-
Jayson
1. Rebuild containment to last long term
3. Covert operations (coup d' e'tat)
4. Create another Afghan situation by arming Kurds and Southern Shieks.
5. Full scale invasion which will remove the Iraqi regime, scour the country for WMD, and rebuild a stable, prosperous Iraq.
"The Threatening Storm." Kenneth Pollak. P.xxix-xxx
Dubla,
I posted these options earlier. (Not that anyone cared) These were the choices as people who see "doing nothing but bitch" as not an option. I'm going to give you your debate. Not because I think the war was unnessesary or wrong but because I can't believe that some people can't set aside petty ideology and look at the "big picture." Their best argument against the war lies there IMO. [in the B P]
The US made the choice of a preemptive invasion. This is a new chapter in American forigen policy. Panama and the sorts is not the same. This was a full scale military invasion into a country that we were currently hostile with but not at war with. Congress did approve it but that still does not win the debate. In no way can the concept of "clear and present danger" be met. It just can't. I understand that the problem with this concept is that it means that any country that "feels" threatened has the right to attack. Which the answer is a sound NO. 1) The US may choose to stop them. 2) Iraq is an anomaly. This was really not sold as an issue to the global public. Probably because people like you and I don't need to hear it. We understand that. And the other side like Simon's debate team have no interest in exploring the history of the region the politics involved for the last 30 year and more than the TV offers as info. Their minds are made up. (Really) It is a waste of time.
So Dubla WMD or not how do you justify a preeminate invasion by yesterdays standards? IMO you can't; we have supported writing a new chapter in American and world history. We can't take it back. Nor would I want to. -
45
If you could spend a whole day with anyone .......
by azaria indead (resurrected ) or alive who would you choose?.
mood barometer: a little melancholy, but basically .
every once in a while i think of who i would like to meet.
-
-
Jayson
myself
-
28
today i hit pay dirt with 2 jw 's
by johnny cip ini see 2 sisters today inj the fs .. so stop and start working them, they are so happy i know much about the wt.
i went into some thing about selling mag's etc.
and all of a sudden they went wild on how at the hall the co or somebody was asking for thousands of $'s for an assembly .
-
-
Jayson
SHHHHHh!!!
Be vedy vedy quite. JohnnyC is hunting dubitts
-
7
LET"S START OVER,,,
by kls ini know there are bad feelings running here but it has to stop now.this forum and all on it are hurt in some way.i come here for information and a smile when things get bad.if it was not for this place i would not know all the lies of the wt or what they are pulling next.i finally feel i am not alone in dealing with a loved one in this cult and emotionly i am getting stronger thanks to you all.everyone here is needed, you all provide information ,either emotionily or about the org.
that may help someone.we are not the org.we are of group of healing and we need each other to stick together .i can see the trolls just loving this and instead of helping them get out of the org.
this will show them we are no better.please make this the loving place all want to join.we are all some of us have.today is a new day,let's start over.please!
-
-
Jayson
It's just a fire guys. It will burn itself out eventually. Better to get it out now and not have flair ups forever. You can bet that trolls with love it. So what? (they suck) It is not always going to be lovey dovey, there are some hawks here. God bless em both. A while ago I suggested people go fishing. I leave tomorrow.
-
21
My opinion about everything.
by notperfectyet inthere has been alot of hurt on this board for a while.
http://members.tripod.com/lheanna/sociopat.htm.
mr. moe gets hurt and abrasive and hostile over certain personality types she doesn't want to deal with any more.. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/15/52211/1.ashx.
-
-
Jayson
Stinkypantz that is my point exactly. And Simon is right it is not the end of the world. Not even close. But it is a matter of respect and fairness. (Even if it is just the perception of it.)
-
12
My minimus like question of the day
by pr_capone inwhy is it that every time there is an argument on this forum, there are at least 5 to 7 threads that pop up talking about how we need to make up, how we should get over it, and how we need to start over/ .
none of them point directly or quote directly from the original flame thread but all beat around the bush though we all know what they are talking about.. do those threads really do anything to help the situation or do they continue to pour salt on an open wound?.
kansas district overbeer
-
-
Jayson
I always hear about how it was the "kindness" of someone that brought one out of the wt. All the crap that others were put through the attitude is "oh well" it's not my fault. All the kindness that I have ever shown was returned with a knife in my back.
It seems to me that the problem is more like an addict. They have to hit rock bottom for themselves to get out. Then we can help them.
Sometimes being kind and avoiding confrontation is the worst thing you can do. Weakness and kindness will get you a knife in the back. That's my experience.
Tuff love does work.
-
21
My opinion about everything.
by notperfectyet inthere has been alot of hurt on this board for a while.
http://members.tripod.com/lheanna/sociopat.htm.
mr. moe gets hurt and abrasive and hostile over certain personality types she doesn't want to deal with any more.. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/15/52211/1.ashx.
-
-
Jayson
OK for starters Minimus is not a troll. Is that wrong to say? He baits people yes but so maybe he trolls but many here do if they express an opinion ask a question or even respond. My personal take is he is in "elder mode." And I don't trust him. The problem with "feelings" is that the moderators are being babies. They want to call for an open forum but they are emotionally invested in their topics. Simon gets mad at the TV so he starts a thread to take out his frustration on us. He should have went to a politcal forum to vent first. Thats my opinion since he did also say to stay away from those kinds of threads and then starts one which he appologized for [starting]. All of this should be able to be hooked on this. And at some point let go of. I don't have a grudge and am sure as hell not bitter over. I accept that there are very different political views here. I have also read where he says that the JW sites are the worst of the worst and the new lable of children to those who are rebelling against the attitude here oh ya thats mature. Well as the saying goes people grow up. This will continue and you can deal with it. Lock threads and delete people but it is not going away. Nor are we. Maybe this it the end of JWD. I'm not worried though. Even if it is a new on will be born. I'll see many of you again.
-
41
In Your Opinion, What Is The Purpose Of This Board?
by minimus inmy understanding is that this board can serve as a place to come so that jw's and ex-jw's can get together to discuss mostly, jw issues as well as matters such as our likes and dislikes of a non-religious nature.
since there are so many posters here, could you please express what you think this place is for?
-
-
Jayson
It's getting a bit of a joke talking about deleting people off the forum because of their opinions.
Do you mean dis-fellowship them?
I thought this forum was for people to express their OPINIONS and for others to respond.
The rules are there to stop people attacking others, not to stop people expressing there opinion or thoughts on a matter.
Who decides? If someone has a view that you totally object too, would you call for them to be deleted?
I've posted some threads recently on topics such as the war etc and have enjoyed ALL the posts for and against, but would I be expelled off the forum if someone complained to Simon because my views differed from someone else.
We ALL disagree with the watchtowers control over peoples thoughts, the last thing we want is for JWD to become a place were we are scared to air our thought's in case we are dis-fellowshipped from the site.
If we want to post controversial threads then they should be in the Adult and Heated debate room. Thats what it is there for.
If you don't agree with someone then tell them. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion, surely.
I agree with you 100% Mark FYI. I think Min is thinking "old school" and totally disagree with him. But it seems that those with power and control here are starting to think like him. (just making that point with the post) Old traits are resurging it seems. Rather shallow again Mini IMO.