favorite anti-war rally Signs

[186k\sec]

"War begins with 'Dubya' "

"Pro-Life?"

"Bush to do List"
Win, (or Steal) Election - check
Reduce (or eliminate) Corporate responsibility - check
Ease or Eliminate pollution standards & treaties check
Reduce Taxes for the Rich only - check
War with Iraq
World Control
More Corporate Scandals



what were your favorites?

[Boyd Main]

There's a village in Texas that has lost its idiot.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld: Asses of Evil

[186k\sec]

pre-emptive Impeachment !

Drop Bush not bombs,

“Stop mad cowboy disease,”

“How many lives per gallon?”

“Empty war heads are in the White House.”

(I think any could be a great bumper sticker!) :)

[Carley]

Stop mad cowboy disease

^That was my *FAVORITE*!!

[the_planet]

"Why is this country run by a Bush, a Dick, and a Colin?"

(Colin = colon)

[Effendi]

Originally posted by Planet_Lush

(Colin = colon)

Thank You......:rolleyes:

[HexRei]

Originally posted by Planet_Lush
"Why is this country run by a Bush, a Dick, and a Colin?"

(Colin = colon)

OMGZ OUR COUNTRY IS RUN BY A SHRUBBERY, AN ARTICLE OF PUNCTUATION, AND A RICHARD!!!

[Boyd Main]

One great sign I saw at the Seattle Centre had a picture of Bush with his hands over his hears saying "La la la la la, I can't hear you, la la la"

[kiG]

Colin Powell to me is one of the most respectable people of our time, making ignorant comments like "Colin = colon" show you have no idea what he has done or what he is about. IF Al Gore was elected he WOULD be doing the same thing....fight a global war against terrorist groups like Al Qa'id...JUST BECUASE A TERRORIST CONTROLS A COUNTRY DOESNT GIVE HIM DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY! When Powell spoke infront of the UN everyone with half a brain or heart would understand Saddam must go. Saddam ordered the death of an entire Kurdish village consisting of about 5000 people becuase the Kurds revolted against his oppressive rule using nerve gas. You fools are like the French and Germans...NEVER there to protect other but to give heat to the ones that do, threatning to veto the war with Iraq!?!? What about what the French did in Africa???? Oil for blood?!?! ISNT THAT WHAT SADDAM IS DOING NOW?!?! WHAT DO YOU CALL ATTACKING KUWAIT???? FRIENDLY TAKE OVER???

THE UNITED STATES IS THE PROTECTOR OF THE WEAK AND SINCE NO ONE ELSE COULD IF THEY WANTED TO (except our brother the Brittish...friends to the end)

[hrryhood]

Democrats Suck...... no wait..... nevermind, that wasn't a sign

[djowns]

The only bush I trust is my own.

[Effendi]

Originally posted by kiG
JUST BECUASE A TERRORIST CONTROLS A COUNTRY DOESNT GIVE HIM DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY!

Apparently it does, one of the worst mass murderers and perpetrators of terrorist acts in recent history is the Prime minister of israel.

AND STOP YELLING NEWBIE!!

Scott!!

[Effendi]

Originally posted by kiG

THE UNITED STATES IS THE PROTECTOR OF THE WEAK AND SINCE NO ONE ELSE COULD IF THEY WANTED TO (except our brother the Brittish...friends to the end)

Well if that's the case then you take your young american ass over their and you sacrifice yourself as the "Protector of the weak"

And FYI the british are a bunch of sissy cosksuckers, I know this personally.......lol

Scott!!

[booboo69]

Originally posted by kiG
THE UNITED STATES IS THE PROTECTOR OF THE WEAK AND SINCE NO ONE ELSE COULD IF THEY WANTED TO (except our brother the Brittish...friends to the end)

Wait wait....let me pull myself up off the floor first...

Okay, first, there are other solutions to the situation, War is not the only one. Second, if the US is protector of the innocent, then why did we give Saddam the weapons to kill the people in the kurdish village in the first place? Third, if the US is protector of the innocent, why the hell don't we do anything about Tibet then? Hmm? The US (read: government) is protector of monitary interests, period. If there was nothing to profit from in the middle east, this whole situation wouldn't exist.

</tangent>

I liked the sign that had a picture of Bush on one side and Saddam on the other that said "Bush & Saddam: both unelected, both psychotic".

[186k\sec]

http://www.mccullagh.org/db7/d30-30/anti-war-protest-2.jpg

[Nukegrrrl]

PEACE: The best troop support!

[nouseforaname]

So FUCK all you anti-war people. Have a great day.

[Effendi]

.
So I hope you are Pro-War, otherwise you have a bad career choice.

But seriously, no where have you seen any of us post anything negative about our members of the military. You are us as far as I'm concerned. I am an ex-soldier myself. No one here is anti-you as far as I know, in fact I have deep respect for anyone who fights for their country.

I for one am not a pacifist, there is definetly a time and a place for the military, and we wouldn't be respected without a strong military. I have a problem with the reasons behind some of the battles our leaders choose to fight. I'm all about self defense, I'm just concerned about the neccesitties of of attacking someone who poses no threat to us.

Maybe I take it from my own experience. Here is my thinking. My whole life I have always loved to fight. I just enjoy getting physical and handling business as necessary. In my younger days I grew up in group homes so I learned to fight well very young and since I have such a smart mouth as you can testify to, I fought ALOT. In the military I fought, I even foght four times in San Quentin, and I'm here to tell you that shit's for keeps.

But in all my fights, I never lost fights I was justified in being in, I got my ass kicked a few times when I inserted myself in someone elses business, but I never lost in a fight when I KNEW I was right, like defending a friend or defending the honor of a lady or kicking some jackass in the head that was disturbing everyone. My point is I'm very good at judging a battle and this is not one we should be involved in. It's just Not right. But I'm glad your good at the job you choose to do.

Scott!!

[nouseforaname]

I am indeed active duty... I tried writing a response back to you post a couple of times but everything i wrote wouldnt have backing to it.. No matter what i say "i dont know all the facts"... I cant say anything on things i read in the paper or see in the news.. Cause i write for a paper and i can testify that eveything that goes in a paper isnt always true and certain facts sometimes get left out.. All i know is that Bush has unlimited resources for finding out information on iraq... You on the other hand dont...I think ill let mr bush decided what is good for our country and if he wants to invade iraq ill be on plane 5 out of the 56 c-130s we have waiting for us to jump into iraq....

[the_planet]

Originally posted by HexRei


OMGZ OUR COUNTRY IS RUN BY A SHRUBBERY, AN ARTICLE OF PUNCTUATION, AND A RICHARD!!!
Bring me... A SHRUBBERY!
...
Well I thought the sign was funny. :)
ps. Here's some information about the colon if any of you are interested: http://www.colonichealth.com/

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by booboo69


Wait wait....let me pull myself up off the floor first...

Same here. <G>

Okay, first, there are other solutions to the situation, War is not the only one.

Then give us all some solutions. What most of you anti-war guys suggested in these threads so far helps Saddam. As of now it’s been the threat of war that has been the only thing causing Saddam to sweat and force him in this game he now is playing on the world. IMO he has carefully, maliciously, and successfully maneuvered well the task to deceive, advert, and hide his WMD from the world. No full compliance, no worry about that, Saddam knows the UN is lacking the backbone to disarm him, and better yet he’s knows he if plays his cards right the UN and some of the world and key western powers will appease him. So why comply? Why disarm? So far Saddam has The United Nations Security Council split, the inspectors are in the position he wants them in, we have a minority of people who are out in the streets protesting the idea of using force to disarm Saddam. You don’t think he gains comfort knowing he has people in the west that appose disarming him, that don’t mind him staying in power oppressing the Iraqi people, that don’t mind giving him the full opportunity to continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, and that don’t mind his close ties to terrorist groups? Do you think Saddam should continue his WMD programs? Or do you support disarming him? If you support disarming him, and you don’t think force should be an option, than let’s hear the alternatives? How does the world go about disarming Saddam Hussain?

Second, if the US is protector of the innocent, then why did we give Saddam the weapons to kill the people in the kurdish village in the first place?

The whole international community failed to address the situation when Saddam conducted his genocide on the Kurds, it was not the complete failure on the part of the United States. Sure blame America because the responsibility of The United Nations, key world powers, and the international community together failed to address it.

Are you suggesting that the United States gave him the weapons? I’ve must have overlooked that bit of information. I did read how some dual use items were exported to Iraq, but nothing that suggests that the US weaponized them and handed it over to Iraq. Yes, before the CWD Treaty, countries all over the world traded such items, but should that deter the world from wanting Saddam’s WMD programs stopped, completely disarmed, and prohibited to ever develop them in the future? [Scratches head] Why blame America first? Many countries provided Saddam with the means to get chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. There’s no secret here. Why blame only America? Are we being Anti-American here? I hope not, but if your not, than why not blame Germany, Russia, India, France, and a shit full of other countries? After all you if you want to lay blame somewhere, why not be completely honest here and blame everyone? Wouldn’t that be the most intellectually honest approach here? [Scratches head again] Why just blame America? Why blame anyone for that matter? What does that accomplish? Does it make you feel better to blame America? I don’t get your exterior motives, and why. But if you have some information that illustrates how the United States solely gave Saddam Hussain all of these “weapons” than share it with us all, so far if such a thing is completely true you would think Iraq’s current declaration to the UN as incomplete as it obviously is would include that link? I mean wouldn’t you think Iraq would of supplied ample documentation and information that accounts for such a link don’t you think Iraq would of supplied all of that? Shit logic tells me Iraq would love to have a “gotcha” like that. If you have that information, share it with us all. Because the only information that the world does know about Iraq’s WMD programs as of yet don’t point in that direction, in fact the Iraqis themselves and there incomplete declaration have not. So if you know something the world doesn’t than share that information with us all. And If you want to blame someone, I suggest you be intellectually honest here and blame everyone involved and if you want to levy an amount of responsibility in that blame than go ahead but I’m not digging this blame America first nonsense we hear so much from the hate America crowd. It’s stupid, false and I’m not going to be dumb and assume here that people who hate America are unaware and don’t know better. I think they do know better. I just can’t bring myself to believe that these people who hate America are that silly and ignorant on the subject. I think we all know very well what the intent of these people are. Hypocrisy never smelled so fucking sweet.

Germany's leading role in arming Iraq
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB05Ak02.html

Eurobiz Is Caught Arming Saddam
http://www.insightmag.com/news/357431.html

Third, if the US is protector of the innocent, why the hell don't we do anything about Tibet then?

What do you suggest happen? Let us all know, spike our interests on the subject.

Hmm? The US (read: government) is protector of monitary interests, period. If there was nothing to profit from in the middle east, this whole situation wouldn't exist.

So it’s all about oil? Please fascinate me, tell me about it, I thought many of us discussed this in past threads because I could of swore we had already got into this discussion over that crazy idea, but if you missed those threads I think it’s fair to address it once more for the sake of those who maybe missed out on those past discussions. You shall proceed with your points. <G>

</tangent>

:(

I liked the sign that had a picture of Bush on one side and Saddam on the other that said "Bush & Saddam: both unelected, both psychotic".

Why? Is it funny that you and other like minded people cannot determine the difference between the two people? They are one in the same to you? Lafs

Anyways. I don’t think allot of people in the so called peace movement will ever come around. Sure.. blame America, it seems like the “cool” thing to do these days. But that’s just my opinion.

Take care,
Jason

[Mike S]

Originally posted by nouseforaname
I am indeed active duty... I tried writing a response back to you post a couple of times but everything i wrote wouldnt have backing to it.. No matter what i say "i dont know all the facts"... I cant say anything on things i read in the paper or see in the news.. Cause i write for a paper and i can testify that eveything that goes in a paper isnt always true and certain facts sometimes get left out.. All i know is that Bush has unlimited resources for finding out information on iraq... You on the other hand dont...I think ill let mr bush decided what is good for our country and if he wants to invade iraq ill be on plane 5 out of the 56 c-130s we have waiting for us to jump into iraq....

Damn bro.. That's gonna be one hell of a way for someone to earn their mustard stain.

Respect.


Our ol buddy Saddam really hasn't a damn clue as to what's (or more precisely WHO) is gonna be comin down on his ass ..If he did he would be personally leading the 600 UN weapons inspectors, their families and guests through guided tours of his weapons manufacture and storage facilities and.. he'd be hosting day trips to exotic and remote areas of Iraq that just happened to be where all the delivery systems are based.

*shakes head*



I know!!
Why don't I write Saddam a letter explaining what's up.

Hey Soddom

We've decided that the French and The Germans were really on to something last week and we're going to go 'head and bolster those weapons inspectors as well as give them a lot more time to do their job.
In fact at this very moment..We've got about 200, 000 more inspectors in route.
Oh ..and by the way... Saddam.
That sudden dimming of the suns light you're experiencing.
It isnt an eclipse.

That's the 82nd.


Peace out mother fucker.

US

[booboo69]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD
Then give us all some solutions. What most of you anti-war guys suggested in these threads so far helps Saddam. As of now it’s been the threat of war that has been the only thing causing Saddam to sweat and force him in this game he now is playing on the world. IMO he has carefully, maliciously, and successfully maneuvered well the task to deceive, advert, and hide his WMD from the world. No full compliance, no worry about that, Saddam knows the UN is lacking the backbone to disarm him, and better yet he’s knows he if plays his cards right the UN and some of the world and key western powers will appease him. So why comply? Why disarm? So far Saddam has The United Nations Security Council split, the inspectors are in the position he wants them in, we have a minority of people who are out in the streets protesting the idea of using force to disarm Saddam. You don’t think he gains comfort knowing he has people in the west that appose disarming him, that don’t mind him staying in power oppressing the Iraqi people, that don’t mind giving him the full opportunity to continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, and that don’t mind his close ties to terrorist groups? Do you think Saddam should continue his WMD programs? Or do you support disarming him? If you support disarming him, and you don’t think force should be an option, than let’s hear the alternatives? How does the world go about disarming Saddam Hussain?


Well, there is the rub. First of all, I'd like to think that nobody out there wants to see Hussein stay in power, but that war is not a good solution to the situation. As to how to disarm him, I've been pondering on and off and I can't say I've come up with a solid solution. Of course, I don't study politics and economics, so I'm not totally aware of how things work in a situation like this, but there is, I'm sure, some way either economically or politically to put just as much pressure on Hussein to disarm without having to endanger the lives of our troops and the Iraqi populous. And then if all else fails, I'd suggest sending in some sort of Rainbow Six style covert teams to track his ass down.



The whole international community failed to address the situation when Saddam conducted his genocide on the Kurds, it was not the complete failure on the part of the United States. Sure blame America because the responsibility of The United Nations, key world powers, and the international community together failed to address it.



Fair enough. But then the governments who overlooked the situation should at least own up to the fact that they screwed up and accept some responsibility for not acting on the situation.


Are you suggesting that the United States gave him the weapons? I’ve must have overlooked that bit of information. I did read how some dual use items were exported to Iraq, but nothing that suggests that the US weaponized them and handed it over to Iraq. Yes, before the CWD Treaty, countries all over the world traded such items, but should that deter the world from wanting Saddam’s WMD programs stopped, completely disarmed, and prohibited to ever develop them in the future? [Scratches head] Why blame America first?


I'd point my finger at America first because of the whole Iran / Iraq war back in the 70's / 80's. The US supplied a large quantity of weapond to Hussein then for use against the Iranians, and what didn't get used is presently in his arsenal. I think with stuff like dual use chemicals, there is no way to be sure that it won't be used for WMD purposes, and I'm sure now there is a lot more trepedation in selling / trading such items, but I'm also sure that when they were traded / sold, the sellers knew of the alternate possible uses of such items.


Many countries provided Saddam with the means to get chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. There’s no secret here. Why blame only America? Are we being Anti-American here?


See above. Not being Anti-American. I love America. I wouldn't live anywhere else (well, maybe Canada or New Zealand). I just dislike the government and it's policies. I'm really getting sick of people calling someone who questions the government Anti-American. Reminiscent of McCarthy tactics, imo.


I hope not, but if your not, than why not blame Germany, Russia, India, France, and a shit full of other countries? After all you if you want to lay blame somewhere, why not be completely honest here and blame everyone? Wouldn’t that be the most intellectually honest approach here?

To be fair, I never said I didn't blame the other countries, so hell yes, blame to your hearts content. Why not just say the world is a fukt up place and leave it at that.


I just can’t bring myself to believe that these people who hate America are that silly and ignorant on the subject. I think we all know very well what the intent of these people are.


And that is what? Communist takeover? Helping Saddam conquer the world? Enlighten me. The people you are portraying here as "america-haters" are just more cynical about the government and world wide politics (some much more than others). I'm sure there are some people out there that would love to take advantage of the situation for their own purposes (and I wouldn't exclude Bush from that list), but I hope it's a vast majority. I really dispise being lumped into a generic "america-hater" group with the likes of Osama yo mamma, and I'm sure the vast majority of americans protesting the war do to.



So it’s all about oil? Please fascinate me, tell me about it, I thought many of us discussed this in past threads because I could of swore we had already got into this discussion over that crazy idea, but if you missed those threads I think it’s fair to address it once more for the sake of those who maybe missed out on those past discussions. You shall proceed with your points.


Never said it was all about oil. I said it's all about profit. Yes, Oil is a part of it, but by going to war, all the defense contractors make money, energy companies make money (by selling fuel to the defense system), news organizations profit big time, etc. Look at what WW2 did to jumpstart the economy back then (though I doubt a similar effect would take place today). And then, assuming a successful outcome (not that there is ever such a think in war), there are profits to be had from the re-establishment of government in the effected regions, selling of domestic product to said regions, etc.


Why? Is it funny that you and other like minded people cannot determine the difference between the two people? They are one in the same to you? Lafs


I hope you're taking the majority of this thread with a grain of salt. I just thought that sign was clever. Sure, you can't compare the two (aside from the fact that neither were truely elected), but Bush has had his moments.

[bungle bliss]

I liked a few that I came up with:

Bush Administration = Rogue Regime

US Constitution = "Collateral Damage"

Osama bin Forgotten

And my favorite for years now- "George W Bush = Serial Killer"

[Absolut]

"Drop acid not bombs." You kinda have to see the pic...and I don't have hosting for it.
-Todd

[186k\sec]

Then give us all some solutions. i thought there were some good alternatives in this thread:
http://www.nwtekno.org/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50126
What most of you anti-war guys suggested in these threads so far helps Saddam. how?
So far Saddam has The United Nations Security Council split, the inspectors are in the position he wants them in, we have a minority of people who are out in the streets protesting the idea of using force to disarm Saddam. its not a minority, when the question of the US going in alone is posed. - "In the US the ABC News/Washington Post poll of 1001 adults found 66 per cent in favour of an attack to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Support drops to 57 per cent if the United Nations opposes an attack but other countries join the US-led effort, and falls further to 50 per cent if the United States is forced to act alone."http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5968944%255E401,00.html
ive seen numbers showing support drop to 39% if we go alone.

You don’t think he gains comfort knowing he has people in the west that appose disarming him, that don’t mind him staying in power oppressing the Iraqi people, that don’t mind giving him the full opportunity to continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, and that don’t mind his close ties to terrorist groups? nobody I saw at *any* of the protests claimed they "didnt mind" - they minded very much. Many feel that war is not yet justified at this time..... they 'wouldn't mind' if Bush would make an actual case for his plan.... They 'dont mind' exercising their rights as Americans to speak out against war.

[Boyd Main]

Originally posted by 186k\sec

nobody I saw at *any* of the protests claimed they "didnt mind" - they minded very much. Many feel that war is not yet justified at this time..... they 'wouldn't mind' if Bush would make an actual case for his plan.... They 'dont mind' exercising their rights as Americans to speak out against war.
EXACTLY!!! Goddam Bush and his simple minded binary thought process. This whole "you're either with us or against us" bullshit has got too many people looking at complex situations like they're light switches. Good or Evil. Support War or Support Saddam. That kind of thinking is for simpletons like Bush. Jason, you should be ashamed of yourself.

[HexRei]

Originally posted by Boyd Main

EXACTLY!!! Goddam Bush and his simple minded binary thought process. This whole "you're either with us or against us" bullshit has got too many people looking at complex situations like they're light switches. Good or Evil. Support War or Support Saddam. That kind of thinking is for simpletons like Bush. Jason, you should be ashamed of yourself.

right, like anti-war people aren't JUST as insistent with their dichotomies. I thik Bush is a moron, but I get lumped in with Bush lovers constantly because I support removing Saddam via force.
You're either Anti-war or Anti-humanity, right?

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by booboo69


Well, there is the rub. First of all, I'd like to think that nobody out there wants to see Hussein stay in power, but that war is not a good solution to the situation. As to how to disarm him, I've been pondering on and off and I can't say I've come up with a solid solution. Of course, I don't study politics and economics, so I'm not totally aware of how things work in a situation like this, but there is, I'm sure, some way either economically or politically to put just as much pressure on Hussein to disarm without having to endanger the lives of our troops and the Iraqi populous. And then if all else fails, I'd suggest sending in some sort of Rainbow Six style covert teams to track his ass down.

All those options have already been tried and failed. Again do you know of an option that will disarm him peacefully?

Fair enough. But then the governments who overlooked the situation should at least own up to the fact that they screwed up and accept some responsibility for not acting on the situation.

And the US is doing there part now. <G>

Liberate Iraq!

I'd point my finger at America first because of the whole Iran / Iraq war back in the 70's / 80's. The US supplied a large quantity of weapond to Hussein then for use against the Iranians, and what didn't get used is presently in his arsenal. I think with stuff like dual use chemicals, there is no way to be sure that it won't be used for WMD purposes, and I'm sure now there is a lot more trepedation in selling / trading such items, but I'm also sure that when they were traded / sold, the sellers knew of the alternate possible uses of such items.

Did you just completley overlook the links I supplied? Again, America didn't give Saddam this massive arsenal you speak of or very fucking little if any. France and Germany have the lucritative contracts with Saddam's regime that have supplied the "goods". Your damn right there is more as you put it "trepedation", there was a Chemical Weapons Ban treaty the sale of these things are highly regulated by a internatinal watchdog group.

See above. Not being Anti-American. I love America. I wouldn't live anywhere else (well, maybe Canada or New Zealand). I just dislike the government and it's policies. I'm really getting sick of people calling someone who questions the government Anti-American. Reminiscent of McCarthy tactics, imo.

Honestly I wouldn't say that if the shoe didn't fit so well on your foot. <G> You see you don't have the facts right, and you are willing to blame America first ask questions later, and it's obvious you have some axe to grind with America. Ok, maybe you don't like the current president and the policies of that administration, but theres no excuse to be anti-American becuase you don't like who's in the white house.

To be fair, I never said I didn't blame the other countries, so hell yes, blame to your hearts content. Why not just say the world is a fukt up place and leave it at that.

Yes indeed. Contrar to what the peace protesters think this world is a dangerous place and I am thankfull this administration is not turning the other cheek to allow these threats to go unoticed, untouched, and ignored. But the reason I question your movtives for blaiming America first is becuase that's what people do who hate America. They just love to blaim America.

And that is what? Communist takeover? Helping Saddam conquer the world? Enlighten me. The people you are portraying here as "america-haters" are just more cynical about the government and world wide politics (some much more than others).

Your right they are fucking complete cyncial morons. Like I said it's not peace, not the concern for the iraqi people, it's fucking..

P-O-L-I-T-I-C-S

I'm sure there are some people out there that would love to take advantage of the situation for their own purposes (and I wouldn't exclude Bush from that list), but I hope it's a vast majority. I really dispise being lumped into a generic "america-hater" group with the likes of Osama yo mamma, and I'm sure the vast majority of americans protesting the war do to.

See that's what I am talking about? Do you have some information to share with us here? I mean you are saying there is people who would just love to take advantage of the situation for their own purposes most likely George W. Bush, and better yet you hope it's a vast majority who does this. Why the fuck would you have hope for such a cynical senario to be true? You hope that happens? Putting allied troops in a dangerous position over personal reasons to exploit the situation?

Never said it was all about oil. I said it's all about profit. Yes, Oil is a part of it, but by going to war, all the defense contractors make money, energy companies make money (by selling fuel to the defense system), news organizations profit big time, etc. Look at what WW2 did to jumpstart the economy back then (though I doubt a similar effect would take place today). And then, assuming a successful outcome (not that there is ever such a think in war), there are profits to be had from the re-establishment of government in the effected regions, selling of domestic product to said regions, etc.

So.. what else would you expect? If the military needs "X" and a war creates demand well logic tells me the supply of "X" is increased and whoever makes "X" might have increased profits. What? You expect them to make it for free? You mean if someone is making a profit that should deter the world from disarming Saddam Hussain? Help me out here.

I hope you're taking the majority of this thread with a grain of salt. I just thought that sign was clever. Sure, you can't compare the two (aside from the fact that neither were truely elected), but Bush has had his moments.

Well it's not clever that's the whole point. How is it clever? Don't tell me your one of these idiots who still believe in this Bush wasn't elected nonsense?

-Jason

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by 186k\sec
i thought there were some good alternatives in this thread:
http://www.nwtekno.org/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50126


Which ones?

how?

Let inspections continue for starters. Shit there was numerous ideas that do nothing but help Saddam buy time.

its not a minority, when the question of the US going in alone is posed. - "In the US the ABC News/Washington Post poll of 1001 adults found 66 per cent in favour of an attack to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Support drops to 57 per cent if the United Nations opposes an attack but other countries join the US-led effort, and falls further to 50 per cent if the United States is forced to act alone."http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5968944%255E401,00.html
ive seen numbers showing support drop to 39% if we go alone.

And.. this is supposed to mean what? Becuase shit if I was one of those polled I'd be in favor of wanting UN backing, not going in alone too.

nobody I saw at *any* of the protests claimed they "didnt mind" - they minded very much. Many feel that war is not yet justified at this time..... they 'wouldn't mind' if Bush would make an actual case for his plan.... They 'dont mind' exercising their rights as Americans to speak out against war.

The case? Not yet justified? Give peace a chance? Haha, what a fukcing joke! 12 years 17 UN resolutions, if that's not giving peace chance I don't know what is.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/030217/brookins.jpg

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Boyd Main

EXACTLY!!! Goddam Bush and his simple minded binary thought process. This whole "you're either with us or against us" bullshit has got too many people looking at complex situations like they're light switches. Good or Evil. Support War or Support Saddam. That kind of thinking is for simpletons like Bush. Jason, you should be ashamed of yourself.

What do you mean? How does one simply spell it out for those who think doing nothing makes things go away? Saddam is not evil? Ok name us all some "good" in Saddam Hussain? If you don't support disarming Saddam than you are supporting him to keep his WMD programs intact, I know it hurts you to be on the wrong side but that's where it lays. You don't directly support him but your stance is supportive of him whether you intended for that to happen or not. I think Saddam is evil, why should I be ashamed of that?

-Jason

[Boyd Main]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD

The case? Not yet justified? Give peace a chance? Haha, what a fukcing joke! 12 years 17 UN resolutions, if that's not giving peace chance I don't know what is.


12 years of what? Oh, that's right, peace.
Originally posted by ZupanGOD

What do you mean? How does one simply spell it out for those who think doing nothing makes things go away? Saddam is not evil? Ok name us all some "good" in Saddam Hussain? If you don't support disarming Saddam than you are supporting him to keep his WMD programs intact, I know it hurts you to be on the wrong side but that's where it lays. You don't directly support him but your stance is supportive of him whether you intended for that to happen or not. I think Saddam is evil, why should I be ashamed of that?


Goddammit!!! People who are protesting the war are doing JUST THAT. Protesting the war. They are not saying Saddam is not evil. They are not supporting him keeping his WMD programs. Not one sign I saw in the weekend said anything like that. Jason, I was saying you should be ashamed of yourself, not for your stance, no-one should ever be ashamed of how they feel on an issue, instead you should be ashamed of letting your thinking fall to the simpleton level of Bush or Mike S, where everyone's opinions fall into two diametrically opposing groups. That is thinking for fools.






Being against this war does not equal being pro-Saddam.

[186k\sec]

Being against this war does not equal being pro-Saddam.
nice~!
this could have been a sign in & of itself..

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Boyd Main


12 years of what? Oh, that's right, peace.

Exactly! 12 years and 17 UN resolutions and Saddam still isn't diarmed. Saddam has thumbed his nose at diplomacy, so yes the world has tried giving peace a chancem unfortunatley Saddam isn't buying it.

Goddammit!!! People who are protesting the war are doing JUST THAT. Protesting the war. They are not saying Saddam is not evil. They are not supporting him keeping his WMD programs. Not one sign I saw in the weekend said anything like that. Jason, I was saying you should be ashamed of yourself, not for your stance, no-one should ever be ashamed of how they feel on an issue, instead you should be ashamed of letting your thinking fall to the simpleton level of Bush or Mike S, where everyone's opinions fall into two diametrically opposing groups. That is thinking for fools.

Ahh you saw signs that called for Saddam to comply to the cease fire agreement of the Gulf war, and 17 UN resolutions that followed? You saw signs that called for Saddam to stop hurting his people and starving them to prop up his regime and military? You saw signs that called on Saddam to comply fully to UN resolution 1441? I highly doubt you saw any such signs. And I think it's foolish to assume that doing nothing disarms Saddam. I normaly don't like to ever think your either in one camp or not, but unfortunatley in this situation becuase of failed diplomacy which is mostly the fault of Iraq leaves the world with two options either enforce UN resolutions by force, or do nothing instead whether it be furthering inspectors, more desperate diplomatic measures that only buy Iraq more time and more ability to play the UN like a gameboy. They only way diplomacy is going to work is if Iraq wants to engadge in it, Iraq has not, and will not do so. I'm not saying you antiwar guys support Saddam Hussain up right, what I am saying is that your approach to this matter helps Saddam Hussain and allows him to keep and develope weapons of mass destruction not end them, whether it's direct or not it's an unfortunate consequence of your position.

Being against this war does not equal being pro-Saddam.

I didn't say you were pro Saddam, I'm not saying antiwar people are pro-Saddam you'd have to be a real idiot to be pro-Saddam and pro-Peace at the very same time. But what is true is that the position that is taken by those who do not think force should be used as an option to disarm Saddam in fact are helping Saddam's cause, not purposely or directly but indirectly.

-Jason

[ZupanGOD]

http://www.brain-terminal.com/articles/video/peace-protest.html

[Boyd Main]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD


Exactly! 12 years and 17 UN resolutions and Saddam still isn't diarmed. Saddam has thumbed his nose at diplomacy, so yes the world has tried giving peace a chancem unfortunatley Saddam isn't buying it.


I'll say it again. 12 years of PEACE. Iraq hasn't invaded anyone or started any wars in 12 years. The only military action in Iraq has been the occassional dropping of bombs by the UK or US. And in that 12 year time frame the Iraqi military has become weaker, not stronger. So what's the rush, now?


Originally posted by ZupanGOD

And I think it's foolish to assume that doing nothing disarms Saddam.
And I thinks it's foolish to assume you know what other people are thinking. Who said "Do Nothing"?

I'm against this proposed war, I'm against Iraq having WMDs and I'm against doing nothing about it.

Despite the ignorance shown by most of the people interviewed in that clip you've just posted, there are more than two courses of action that can be taken (War or sit on our hands). It's just saddening that so many people, and so many powerful people, lack the imagination to see any alternatives.

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Boyd Main


I'll say it again. 12 years of PEACE. Iraq hasn't invaded anyone or started any wars in 12 years. The only military action in Iraq has been the occassional dropping of bombs by the UK or US. And in that 12 year time frame the Iraqi military has become weaker, not stronger. So what's the rush, now?


And I thinks it's foolish to assume you know what other people are thinking. Who said "Do Nothing"?

I'm against this proposed war, I'm against Iraq having WMDs and I'm against doing nothing about it.

Despite the ignorance shown by most of the people interviewed in that clip you've just posted, there are more than two courses of action that can be taken (War or sit on our hands). It's just saddening that so many people, and so many powerful people, lack the imagination to see any alternatives.

Which Alternatives are you speaking about? All I am hearing from the powerfull who oppose using force to disarm Saddam is futhuring inspections. I'm not assuming here, it's fact that those who oppose using force to disarm Saddam have suggest furthuring inspections. How is that foolish assuming? Futhruing inspections only works if Saddam "fully" coroperates with the inspections to disarm. So furhtering inspections at this point do nothing but buy time for Saddam, becuase he is not fully coroperating with them. Saddam has had 12 years and 17 resolutions giving him the chance to peacefully disarm. Your not suggesting that Saddam is fully coroperating now do you?

-Jason

[Effendi]

http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20photo%20negatives/2003%20news%20phot%20negatives/Jan%2003%20pho%20neg/301202.jpg

[Effendi]

http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20photo%20negatives/2003%20news%20phot%20negatives/Feb%2003%20pho%20neg/170203.jpg

[booboo69]

Originally posted by ZupanGOD

All those options have already been tried and failed. Again do you know of an option that will disarm him peacefully?


Not off the top of my head. However, I'm not employed by a government think tank or anything. I'm sure there is some sort of solution. If it comes down to war or not disarming him, we're already fucked.


Honestly I wouldn't say that if the shoe didn't fit so well on your foot. <G> You see you don't have the facts right, and you are willing to blame America first ask questions later, and it's obvious you have some axe to grind with America. Ok, maybe you don't like the current president and the policies of that administration, but theres no excuse to be anti-American becuase you don't like who's in the white house.


In my defense, I don't pay as much attention to politics as you do (I'm still going off some of the half truths I've been taught in HS), and yeah, I didn't was too lazy to read the links you provided. Part of my willingness to blame america comes from the lack of being taught that other countries had some stake in the situation too. HOWEVER, the US being the strongarming superpower it is, there is quite a bit of history to look back on which poses questions as to why some of these things happened. And part of it is I was raised by a hardcore cynic. :p


I mean you are saying there is people who would just love to take advantage of the situation for their own purposes most likely George W. Bush, and better yet you hope it's a vast majority who does this. Why the fuck would you have hope for such a cynical senario to be true?


Actually, that was a brain fart on my part. I meant to say I hope the vast majority of people are the ones that aren't going to be looking to capitalize on the situation.


So.. what else would you expect? If the military needs "X" and a war creates demand well logic tells me the supply of "X" is increased and whoever makes "X" might have increased profits. What? You expect them to make it for free? You mean if someone is making a profit that should deter the world from disarming Saddam Hussain? Help me out here.


No, I'm saying that just because someone WANTS to make a profit is no reason to start a war. I'm sure that profit isn't entirely the motive, but even you have to admit that it's a factor.

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by booboo69


Not off the top of my head. However, I'm not employed by a government think tank or anything. I'm sure there is some sort of solution. If it comes down to war or not disarming him, we're already fucked.

Well I'm no government think tank but such a think tank should start comming up with a better alternative and quick becuase so far it's looking grim and using force to disarm Saddam looks enevitable. Hey I'm in the belief that war is an option and usually is always the last, but if someone has a "real" alternative that will disarm him than I hope such a plan is revield.

In my defense, I don't pay as much attention to politics as you do (I'm still going off some of the half truths I've been taught in HS), and yeah, I didn't was too lazy to read the links you provided. Part of my willingness to blame america comes from the lack of being taught that other countries had some stake in the situation too. HOWEVER, the US being the strongarming superpower it is, there is quite a bit of history to look back on which poses questions as to why some of these things happened. And part of it is I was raised by a hardcore cynic. :p

Fair enough, if it's just informational negligence on your part or apathy all together I guess I can't falt you for that. I still don't understand the need to be cynical about the subject though. But it's the people who know better and yet still hug false information to support their warped world view which are usually based on these false pretences that I really have a problem with. I knew deep down inside you couldn't really have such a cynical view of America. I thought you had that exterior motive, that you disliked America to the point that you would be willing to blaim America first. And I stand corrected.

I don't think America acts as an angel never making wrongs, I just know America does have it's wrongs and it does a great deal to re-write those wrongs and correct it's flaws in the process.

Actually, that was a brain fart on my part. I meant to say I hope the vast majority of people are the ones that aren't going to be looking to capitalize on the situation.

Same here.

No, I'm saying that just because someone WANTS to make a profit is no reason to start a war. I'm sure that profit isn't entirely the motive, but even you have to admit that it's a factor.

I agree maybe not a motive but perhaps a factor in it all, war does cost money.

Take care,
-Jason

[kiG]

"Okay, first, there are other solutions to the situation, War is not the only one. Second, if the US is protector of the innocent, then why did we give Saddam the weapons to kill the people in the kurdish village in the first place? Third, if the US is protector of the innocent, why the hell don't we do anything about Tibet then? Hmm? The US (read: government) is protector of monitary interests, period. If there was nothing to profit from in the middle east, this whole situation wouldn't exist."

#1. War is the only solution...wipe away the problem.
#2. We gave Saddam weapons ( not to kill the kurds) but during the Iraq Iran war...Iran hand the major upper hand and the US wanted to make a stalemate to stop the fighting.
#3. The reason we did nothing about Tibet is becuase China is a super big exporter to the US and China has NUKES...der.
#4. NOTHING IS FOR FREE

Just becuase you live in a peaceful land...doesnt mean the world is!

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by kiG
#2. We gave Saddam weapons ( not to kill the kurds) but during the Iraq Iran war...Iran hand the major upper hand and the US wanted to make a stalemate to stop the fighting.

Your right the US feared Iran and it's radical islamic regime from taking over the middle east, and this was around the hostage situation but one thing though, it wasn't exactly weapons that the US supplied but supplied Iraq where Irans troop deployments where a couple times. The result of the war is exactly what the US wanted to see happen, a stale mate.

-Jason

[MO]

"Attack Iraq ? Are you on crack ?" heh

[Effendi]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shave.jpg

[hrryhood]

HAHAHAHA

Did I mention that Democrats Suck.....
I just hope that dubya decides what he is going to do soon so the economy turns around.

[Effendi]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/Image230.gif

[186k\sec]

I just hope that dubya decides what he is going to do soon so the economy turns around.
the economy isnt going to 'turn around' until the threat of war turns around... bush's indecision is just a symptom of a much bigger problem - that the numbers of anti-war protesters was & is significantly higer than was originally estimated..

http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen01182003.html