PDA

View Full Version : Bush Jr.'s next move?



Jorden
16th February 2001, 15:17
Okay, so Bush Jr. just took over the White House, and moved his furniture in there. I can see him there saying "That coffee table should go in the corner over there, oh and by the way, when did we last bomb Iraq? Let's do that now!"

Bush Jr. wants to go on from where Bush Sr. left of, or what? Does his dad whisper in his ear what to do?

"Hi dad, yeah, I just took over the White House... but errrm, now what?"
'Bomb Baghdad, son'
"Okay, I can do that"

Silly, but who says it isn't true? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Jord.

Rags
16th February 2001, 15:22
Spoken like someone who truly has no clue. Congratulations.

Rags

Jorden
16th February 2001, 15:36
If you do have a clue, Matt, tell us.

As far as I have followed the news the past 3 weeks I was home, I've seen the new Government going for the missile-shield again (who needs that?), saying not to trust Russia - as they are selling their technology to other countries - (and then I think someone should look to himself first, but that aside)

What? They want a new Cold War?
Whereas Russia was on speaking terms with the USA in the past, they are now quiting all channels. Ofcourse, you don't care too much about that, as the US is THE WORLD these days.

If anything bad comes from all of this, please let them direct one Nucleair Missile on Oosterhout, while I am home watching yet another re-run of Star Trek: TNG. At least I won't suffer that much then http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif

Stupid Americans, as even Holly says these days.

Rags
16th February 2001, 15:50
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I've seen the new Government going for the missile-shield again (who needs that?)</font>
Retard statement number one. This has been under development since before Reagan was in office. There has been no speed up since GW has taken office. Just more publicity about it since it was a Republican publicized thing.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">saying not to trust Russia - as they are selling their technology to other countries </font>
Retard statement number 2. Show me where GW has said this. You know this is false, don't be an idiot.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and then I think someone should look to himself first, but that aside)</font>
I agree start looking.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">What? They want a new Cold War?</font>
Retard statement number 3. Back up this statement with some fact, rather than what you and holly just feel by the "seat of your pants".


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Whereas Russia was on speaking terms with the USA in the past, they are now quiting all channels. </font>
What does this have to do with the new administration?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Ofcourse, you don't care too much about that, as the US is THE WORLD these days. </font>
Sure I do. That's why I voted for someone that would have some decent foreign policy. Clinton's administration has seriously degraded some of the most important strides that were made in the last twenty years.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">If anything bad comes from all of this</font>
Did you forget to take your lithium this morning or something? If anything bad comes from all of what?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Stupid Americans, as even Holly says these days. </font>
Says more about you and Holly than about Americans.

Rags

cjolley
16th February 2001, 16:24
Members of the new Bush administration have already called the ABM treaty "ancient history".
This is not a good start.
If we feel we can abrogate trieaties any time we want, what does our word as a nation mean?
chuck

Rags
16th February 2001, 16:38
cjolley,

I have not seen that. Maybe you could post up some links, I would be interested in seeing what was said.

The only thing I have seen/heard on the ABM deal is that Bush is going to cut ADDITIONAL ABM's from America's defense, this is above and beyond what was required in the treaty, BTW.
Now if there is going to be any changes made to the treaty, the US would have to talk to the nations involved and get their approval.

Rags



[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 17 February 2001).]

Jorden
16th February 2001, 16:52
I got a couple of CNN messages:
1 (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/02/11/russia.defence/index.html)
2 (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/germany/02/12/russia.germany/index.html)
3 (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/02/13/russia.germany/index.html)
4 (http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/02/10/poweel.missile/index.html)
Russia, China and a number of European Union countries, including the UK and Germany, have all expressed reservations about the National Missile Defense (NMD) initiative.

To develop the system Washington would have to either rip up the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty -- which outlaws NMD -- or persuade Russia to accept alterations to the treaty.

Powell said: "We are going to consult with our allies to hear their concerns.

"But we are not going to be knocked off the track of moving in this direction as long as the technology points us in that direction."

In other words, as I read it: We'll hear what you have to say, but we'll go on with this no matter what you say... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif


Besides, it's National Defense... where does that leave us in Europe? To pay a lot more taxes over getting that Shield from the USA, if we want to have it for our own country. And that sucks big time.

That any country in the world has to ask his countrymen to pay up for a Defense Shield that never will be used is just bullshit. During the Cold War it could be right, but in these days, I think it's just bullshit and money used for nothing. Why can't your GW put all this money into your Health, Educational and other funds that lack money, Matt? And what about the research for something against AIDS or cancer?

It just sucks. But then again, it's the USA http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif

[This message has been edited by Jorden (edited 17 February 2001).]

Pneumatic
16th February 2001, 17:59
Everyone loves to knock America untill they need help. When there is a disaster somewhere in the world I see America spring into action immediately. Not only does the government send tons of money, man power, food, and equipment to help clean up natural disasters but the regular people get involved too. I put a $10 bill in a bucket (at a 7-11) to help out with the earthquakes in Central America just yesterday. Did I have to? No. Did I want to? Yes.

So you go ahead and say we suck or whatever you want. If I see a "NETHERLANDS RELIEF" bucket in the future I'll just walk on by.

http://www.gifs.net/animate/usflag2.gif

By the way, if you are looking to CNN for an unbiased story about our current president you are looking in the wrong place. CNN stands for:
"Clinton News Network"

[This message has been edited by Kindness! (edited 17 February 2001).]

Rags
16th February 2001, 18:04
Okay, so you are saying that with China having the Bomb, and the mideast countries having the Bomb as well, there is no need for any defense? I would say that the cold war is small in comparison. Now we have many little countries with their own ideas on what to do with the bomb with their own agenda on things to come.

As far as your comments about AIDS and cancer research suffering because of what GW is doing, well that is insane. He has not changed or lowered any funding for any of these such programs. He has not increased funding to our military as of yet, so what is your point? You have no point. You are just practicing mindless rambling that has no backup. You fail to mention what other countries have done to break the treaties that you are holding up as proof. Selective ideals? I think so.

Rags

Casey Jones
16th February 2001, 18:06
NETHERLANDS RELIEF bucket----


I thought there was an official name for my toilet.

Casey

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 18:27
Jorden, CNN is mind-controlled by the Time news people. If AOL bought Time-Warner, then why is Time-Warner's CEO now the CEO of the whole company? Because Gerald Levin wants to tell you and everyone else how to think. Looks like he's done a pretty good job. By the way, Christianity is evil. Better not disagree or the Time-Warner Zionist Big Brother Disinformation Machine will crush your puny skull under their collective thumb.

Jorden
16th February 2001, 18:40
Kindness, The Netherlands are neither in an earthquake nor in a vulcano area. The only problem we have now and then is due to flooding, which we are by now insured for, or if not, get relief for from the Dutch people themselves (wherever they are).

If an eartquake occurs, like in El Salvador, India or another country outside the rich countries, we have programs on TV and all to raise money for those people that are struck. Not for their government, but for the people. And we raise millions with just our small country, whilst our government gives extra as well.

As far as I see it, everyone who's been in this thread so far has voted for Bush, and sees nothing wrong in what he or his government does. Even if one person in his government says something, you can't blame it om GW, right?

I started this thread with the bombings on Baghdad. Why would there be bombings of Baghdad all of a sudden? Iraq has held itself to about all rules and there were no bombings in the past 2 years. So what's GW's message then? Don't **** with me?

If he really wants something done, he could tell Turkey to stop invading Iraqi territorry and stop attacking the Kurds there. If he really would want Iraq not to fly anymore, he could have shot down every aircraft he sees, no matter if it's in the Northern or Southern No-Fly-Zone. He could/should order ground troops against Iraqi troops still harassing Kurds and the people living in the South.

But ofcourse, as neither Clinton did that, and his GW's dad never went to Baghdad when he had the chance, what do we care?

Russia did 3 ICBM exercises today, one from land, one from sea and one from the air. They might've done some in the past, but then we didn't care.

Me, for one, am now worried.

Jord.

Rags
16th February 2001, 18:54
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">As far as I see it, everyone who's been in this thread so far has voted for Bush, </font>
You think I voted for Bush? What makes you think that? Because I am defending our government? You don't know who I voted for, other than it was NOT Gore (who is run by the Jesse Jackson National Mafia).


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Why would there be bombings of Baghdad all of a sudden? </font>
This is why you are clueless. It isn't all of a sudden, genius. This has been going on since IRAQ signed the agreement at the end of the gulf war. He doesn't adhere to the agreement, he gets a reaction. This happened with GB, Clinton, and now GW.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Iraq has held itself to about all rules </font>
Except they keep going into the no fly zone with their military aircraft, they continue to build chemical weapons, and they refuse to allow UN inspectors to contradict that. All of these are breaches of the rules.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and there were no bombings in the past 2 years.</font>
Wrong. Better get your facts straight.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">So what's GW's message then? Don't **** with me? </font>
I think it's more "Break the UN rules, you face UN action"



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Russia did 3 ICBM exercises today, one from land, one from sea and one from the air. </font>
Ehhmmmm...okay, I guess your point is...

Rags

Gurm
16th February 2001, 19:11
Jord,

Already told you this on ICQ, but...

Iraq has NEVER adhered to its agreement. Every single time the UN inspectors have come in to check on their weapons, Saddam says "you can check everywhere except this chemical weapons plant".

He pushes, and pushes. When he pushes hard enough, we bomb the living f**k out of him. Clinton did it, only the democrats didn't make a big deal out of it.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 19:47
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">He pushes, and pushes. When he pushes hard enough, we bomb the living f**k out of him. Clinton did it, only the democrats didn't make a big deal out of it.</font>

It was the far left that controls the media that didn't make a big deal of it. In fact, they hardly made a fuss about anything bad that Clinton did. If a Republican president had done all those things he would have been raked over the coals so much he could never have done his job.

Jorden
16th February 2001, 19:52
Rags may be right, or feel so, but the past two years the only things shot at, were AIRCRAFT, not Baghdad http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

So, why all of a sudden shoot at Baghdad, when you know beforehand that Iraq claims Western airplanes shot on civilian targets? (and they may be right... who knows?)

Why not shoot down those aircraft entering the no-fly-zone? So I don't get it, and as Matt already said, I'm no genius, so explain it to me then http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Rags
16th February 2001, 20:09
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Rags may be right, or feel so, but the past two years the only things shot at, were AIRCRAFT, not Baghdad </font>
Baghdad wasn't bombed, sir.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">So, why all of a sudden shoot at Baghdad, </font>
They didn't shoot at Baghdad, sir.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">when you know beforehand that Iraq claims Western airplanes shot on civilian targets? (and they may be right... who knows?)</font>
Iraq is going to claim anything to make the UN efforts look bad. They even went so far as to put military installations in civilian locations, and shelter civilians in military targets. Who is bad here?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Why not shoot down those aircraft entering the no-fly-zone?</font>
Part of the no fly zone is ensuring that there are no aircraft or military installations beyond a certain point. If they are launching aircraft and/or SAMs from a location, I would call doing what they did self defense. The UN has agreed that there needs to be a presence there, Saddam agreed to the presence, and when he is openly trying to shoot at the presence, there should be no surprise as to what happens to him.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">So I don't get it</font>
Nope. No doubt.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and as Matt already said, I'm no genius</font>
I just said you were clueless on this. You have just enough information to be spreading false propoganda, and have a roommate now who is feeding into your "stupid Americans" idea because someone got elected president she doesn't like. If you are going to be bashing someone, start bringing facts to the table, not heart strings.

Rags

Jorden
16th February 2001, 20:12
Oh, btw, so you know... I checked all the news sites I could find, and on all of them, GW says that this socalled Missile Shield will only be build against rogue countries, like Iran and Northern Korea. Also said in all the items is: "we will let our allies have the technology to build their own shield"...

With Russia saying they have the knowledge already to penetrate such a shield, shouldn't someone try to get a legit view on their data then?

Ah what... Never mind... I'm letting it rest here.

Rags
16th February 2001, 20:19
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Oh, btw, so you know... I checked all the news sites I could find, and on all of them, GW says that this socalled Missile Shield will only be build against rogue countries, like Iran and Northern Korea. Also said in all the items is: "we will let our allies have the technology to build their own shield"...
With Russia saying they have the knowledge already to penetrate such a shield, shouldn't someone try to get a legit view on their data then?

Ah what... Never mind... I'm letting it rest here.

</font>
Your babbling has no point. What is your point? That we are wasting our money? So what do you care? It's our money.

Rags

HollyBerri
16th February 2001, 20:41
Listen, Rags... I dunno what your issue is, but you might notice that I am not in this little discussion.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">have a roommate now who is feeding into your "stupid Americans" idea because someone got elected president she doesn't like. </font>

How simple-minded. As if I care who got elected. Do you think I sit around Holland worrying about U.S. politics (except insofar as they affect Europe)??? You must be kidding.

"America, love it or leave it", right?

Well, I left it. Gladly.

Get a clue your own self.

---------------------------
Holly

Rags
16th February 2001, 20:43
I am not the one who brought you into the discussion, Mrs. Clueless. Mr. Clueless did.

EDIT:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">How simple-minded. As if I care who got elected. Do you think I sit around Holland worrying about U.S. politics (except insofar as they affect Europe)??? You must be kidding.</font> Does "I doubt America is crying-- I'm pretty sure that Mr. Bush Jr. doesn't like me much (his dad didn't)." Ring a bell?

Rags

Stupid Americans, indeed. If only all the stupid Americans did that http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif




[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 17 February 2001).]

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:04
LOL!!!

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 21:04
(big bad Russian:)

HoHo.. I can penetrate your little shield, babushka.. with my superior big missle!!!

paulcs
16th February 2001, 21:06
I have it on good authority (my contacts in the Zionist-AOL-Time-Warner-Trilateralist-Masonic Fifth Column) that this was Dick Cheney's and Tony Blair's idea. President Bush spent the day looking for his slippers.

They also told me Queen Elizabeth is really a man.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:08
I heard that Tony Blair was a Pizza tosser, http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

I also have it on good authority that the Nat'l Security Adviser for the US hasn't been to the dentist in over two decades http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Rags

paulcs
16th February 2001, 21:17
John Ashcroft has three nipples! Justice Souter showers with his underwear on! The Blair Witch is really a good guy! (You name one thing she did in that movie that you didn't want to do.)

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:21
Oh, yeah, did you know that Tommy Lee Jones is really gay?

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 21:26
Saddam is such a big man.. such a genius.. disguise day care centers as missle silos and chemical weapons dumps. Why didn't I think of that? Pure genius!!!

BTW, that moustache should be banned under treaty. It's obviously some sort of tank trap.

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:33
I heard that Martin Sheen's hidden talent is performing naked on Zebras at the local Big Top. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

paulcs
16th February 2001, 21:33
Colin Powell's favorite basketball player was Larry Byrd! (When President Bush heard this, he commented, "I didn't know Sesame Street had a basketball team.")

Janet Reno shaves her back!

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 21:35
Hmm.. I heard Alec Baldwin got all that chest hair by getting it transplanted from his buttocks! I dunno about you, but I really don't wanna see Alec's collection of buttplugs..

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:38
Did anyone find it strange that during the Gulf War, that the two people who were heading the fight were named Dick Cheney and Colon Powell? Sounds like someone is getting fuxed up the arse http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 21:44
They are keeping it very hush-hush, but the civilian on the bridge of that sub that sunk the Japanese fishing boat was Barbara Streisand.. she turned around and her nose hit the emergency surface lever!

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:47
Hehehehe, you know why Barbara Streisand likes Billy Clinton so much, right?

Rags
16th February 2001, 21:55
That's it http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/redface.gif

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 21:55
Because when they put their noses together, they have built the bridge to the 21st century?

(snicker)

KvHagedorn
16th February 2001, 22:05
I saw some of those effete Boston liberal nutless wonders on the News Hour last night. They seem to think their arguments are sufficiently made when they stick their noses in the air and say "it just IS" or "that's simply wrong"

I thought I recognized one of them, though. His head looked just like this rubberrized thingie some porno chick was masturbating with the other night at that strip club.

Rags
16th February 2001, 22:07
Sounds like Hollywood, or even Harlem now http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Chasbo
16th February 2001, 23:23
Dubya to Saddam:

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!!

(Sorry, I couldn't resist)

Topha
17th February 2001, 02:04
Im always surprised at how blind and arrogant the americans are. Why do you need that missile shield? It doesnt work anyway, its too expensive for you, and noone (asia, russia, europe) wants you to have it.
now you say: what do we care about them, we are the USA.
now we say: without asia and europe and russia you wouldnt be doing nearly as well as you are doing now. basically you americans are just the successors of all the religious fanatics the europeans wanted to get rid of a few centuries back, and all the inventions you made were just the inventions from euopean immigrants.
your school system sucks (been there for a year) and alot of you didnt even vote. what does it say about a country if almost have the population doesnt care who is president, and russia has to offer help for counting the votes. that whole election was like a joke over here in europe. now we are all a little worried that a country with your military strenght cant even elect a leader properly (gore had 200000 votes more!).
and do you really think anyone execpt for terrorists or bush is ready to use nuclear weaponst? why build NMD? why not just try to stop the selling of nukes to those terrorists? why not try to take away the reasons for the terrorists to be terrorists?
its all rather ridiculous, but since we are all involved in it it is sad and concerning as well.
but the 50 percent of the voters that voted bush wont understand that anyway, and the people who didnt vote wont understand it for the most part either, youll just start making jokes about it.

[This message has been edited by Topha (edited 17 February 2001).]

Sasq
17th February 2001, 02:11
Rags

re Baghdad wasn't bombed sir

have a look at this news clipping, admittedly it says 'areas around Baghdad' but that suggests they were pretty damn close.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/story_8745.asp

I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your complaints about Sadam though

Dan

EchoWars
17th February 2001, 02:18
Hey...at least we are THE topic of comversation http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

And the rest of you...tread lightly, we drop bombs..lol http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Topha
17th February 2001, 02:57
You are THE topic of converstaion in the US and in this thread, but here you just barley made it to the front page of the daily newspaper (not headline!).

Joel
17th February 2001, 05:17
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Im always surprised at how blind and arrogant the americans are. Why do you need that missile shield? It doesnt work anyway, its too expensive for you, and noone (asia, russia, europe) wants you to have it.
now you say: what do we care about them, we are the USA.</font>

I guess the US wouldn't feel that we needed it if the other world powers would stop selling nuclear and biological weapons to terrorist countries. The other countries don't want the US to have it because it would make us less vulnerable to attacks using these types of weapons and since these terrorist don't care who they go after that will make the European countries the next targets. And why shouldn't the US be allowed to build a defensive system? It's our money and it's not hurting anyone. It's about time that the government starts spending the money on the people who earned it in the first place instead of all this foreign welfare. It may not be the best use for that money but it is a step in the right direction.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">now we say: without asia and europe and russia you wouldnt be doing nearly as well as you are doing now.</font>

That is pure BS. If it wasn't for the US and the foriegn welfare that we send to those countries as well as Anerican troops to help portect them then they would be the ones not doing so well.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">basically you americans are just the successors of all the religious fanatics the europeans wanted to get rid of a few centuries back,</font>

Another misconstrued fact. The people who left Europe were looking for freedom from religious persecution because choose to worship their God differently than the government dictated. That is why we are so adament about the serparation of church and state.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and all the inventions you made were just the inventions from euopean immigrants.</font>

There is some truth to that. But they came to the US in the first place because they were not allowed to pursue these endeavors in their own countries, because it was not government sanctioned.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">your school system sucks</font>

At least we don't pay our teachers with bottles of vodka like Russia has done.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and alot of you didnt even vote.</font>

That is our right.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">what does it say about a country if almost have the population doesnt care who is president,</font>

Who's to say they didn't care? Maybe there were other reason as to why they did not vote none of which is the right not to.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Russia has to offer help for counting the votes.</font>

Now that is a good one. hehe.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">that whole election was like a joke over here in europe.</font>

I'm sure it was because it also got quite ridiculous over here.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">now we are all a little worried that a country with your military strenght cant even elect a leader properly (gore had 200000 votes more!).</font>

Sounds like a personal problem to me. And BTW he was elected properly based on the electoral system that we have.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and do you really think anyone execpt for terrorists or bush is ready to use nuclear weaponst?</font>

Yes, because it has even been hard to get Russia to adhere to some of the nuclear arms reductions. And they have also been one of the ones selling nuclear weapons to these terrorist.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">why build NMD?</font>

I already explianed that one.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">why not just try to stop the selling of nukes to those terrorists?</font>

We have been for years.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">why not try to take away the reasons for the terrorists to be terrorists?</font>

Terrorists are nothing but a bunch cowards and they don't have to have a reason.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">its all rather ridiculous, but since we are all involved in it it is sad and concerning as well.</font>

Don't quite understand what you are trying to state here.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">but the 50 percent of the voters that voted bush wont understand that anyway, and the people who didnt vote wont understand it for the most part either, youll just start making jokes about it.</font>

At least we have a sense humor. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Joel http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

[This message has been edited by Joel (edited 17 February 2001).]

paulcs
17th February 2001, 06:10
And we are not blind and arrogant!

We are a charming and attractive people. And we smell good too! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Pneumatic
17th February 2001, 07:30
Missle Shield is "too expensive" for US? LOL!!! We have money running out of our ears. Who are YOU to sit over there and tell America how to budget our money? Let's see, does Germany have a $2 TRILLION surplus in IT'S economy? I don't think so.

What is this about Russia having to help US count votes? Sounds like you've been a victim of some propoganda there my friend. Tell me why on earth we would need Russias help electing OUR president? I never even heard the word Russia during the recounts.

The difference in the votes for Gore and Bush equalled about .01% (not 1%, .01%) so for the first time in decades we had to use the Electoral system to decide. That's because we don't blindly follow the first jerk-off that amasses enough power to take over the Government. We actually vote. The ones that don't vote have that right And the ones that do vote actually care so we make the decision for the country. We made the right one with GWB. Anyway, who is RUSSIA to tell Americans how to elect a leader? Like you've got it down to a fine art?

No, I'll take America over any other country in the world. I've been to other countries a few times and I've yet to see anything that even comes close to America. But, I am very fascinated to see what you guys have to say about us. So I'll sit here in my 3,500 square foot house with 2 luxury cars in the garage, watching my stocks and balancing my 3 bank accounts while you tell me that the USA sucks. HAHAHAHA!!! please.

Now go take a shower.



[This message has been edited by Kindness! (edited 17 February 2001).]

Vlip
17th February 2001, 07:47
[Vlip leaning back on his chair and twisting his thumbs with an enigmatic smile]

Time will tell, time will tell...

Joel
17th February 2001, 07:49
And you know what else makes it good about living in the USA is that anyone who is willing to work hard can achieve the same. If things are so good over there why does the US see so many people coming over here from there to become US citizens. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Joel http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

impact
17th February 2001, 08:17
There is no point in this discussion. You cannot argue with people who think Bush is a good president and US covers 98% of the world. It's like trying to have an intelligent conversation with a tape recorder.

Oh and Kindness, I hope it makes you happy sitting there in your 3,500 square foot house with 2 luxury cars in the garage, watching your stocks and balancing your 3 bank accounts while the poorest americans are just going to starve because Bush does not see any point in a social security system.

Kaj
17th February 2001, 08:29
I don't know, maybe they just want to find out for themselves if the USA are a bunch of fake dreams or not. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

I don't see why the USA is so much better than the rest of the world, or worse for that matter. I enjoy living in the Netherlands because I like it here, nothing more, nothing less.
I don't see either why the USA wants to re-create something like the cold war.
Rags' saying that there was never a speedup for that stupid missile-shield, confirms my idea's of the USA as an arrogant nation, which don't give a rats ass about treaty's as long as they can do what they see fit.

WAIT; before you start your BBQ; this is my idea, from what I get off the news (no, not CNN; too USA-minded imo).
Every country/nation has its ups and downs, but why does the USA want to show their downs so blatantly?

(excuse me for bad grammar, I'm only a dumb foreigner http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/icons/icon8.gif )

KvHagedorn
17th February 2001, 08:44
Joel, nice post, but this guy wasn't worth the time.

What I find funny is how a German can call Americans arrogant. Worse than the pot calling the kettle black. As to how we vote and how we mismanage things, who did you guys vote into power in 1933? And World War I would never have started if the Kaiser had not been on vacation and could not be bothered to take care of the little problem with Austria and the Serbs. No wonder my Great Grandparents left in 1866. The Prussians were taking all the fun out of things. And are you even Germans anymore? After centuries of your ancestors spilling their blood to keep the Turks out, you invite them in to take over the country. Pathetic.

Isn't it interesting how liberals and conservatives now bash each other on an international basis?

Rags
17th February 2001, 08:52
Okay, people. I want to have some questions I have answered that were brought up by some queer thinking europeans who think that all Americans are ignorant/arrogant ****oles.

1. What is wrong with having a system that will shoot down missiles coming towards our countries.

2. What is it that terrorists hate about our country? That our citizens are actually better off, even though their citizens could be just as well off if they actually had true capitalism and it's making them look bad?

3. Where did I say I voted for GW Bush? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

4. What does it matter who I voted for, and why do you care?

5. Where are reading that Baghdad got shot at? As far as I have seen in EVERY news report, the British and US planes bombed UNPOPULATED MILITARY TARGETS OUTSIDE BAGHDAD!

6. Do you care that it was Saddam's own weapons that injured his citizens this last time as well?

7. Do you really think that Americans don't care what the outside world is doing? Because I don't believe that's the case. In our new economy, the WHOLE WORLD is dependent upon one another. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

8. When has our Government sold nuclear weapons to terrorists?

9. Do you know how critical we are of our own government?

10. Do you really think that religion has anything to do with the world anymore?

Rags



[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 17 February 2001).]

KvHagedorn
17th February 2001, 09:02
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">10. Do you really think that religion has anything to do with the world anymore?</font>

Sure it does, Matt. You just answered your own question about terrorists. Muslims hate anyone who isn't a Muslim. They want us all dead. They seem to think that our presence in Saudi Arabia soils the very f***ing ground they walk on, when we were only protecting them from being overrun by a powemad lunatic. They want us out, yet they come to European countries in droves and soil our entire culture. And then these lame European traitors bash US

Topha
17th February 2001, 09:33
"And BTW he was elected properly based on the electoral system that we have." Thats the problem: Even if you have more votes you dont necessarily get elected. as for wwII and the elections, it was more than 50 years ago, your electoin was 2000.

"And you know what else makes it good about living in the USA is that anyone who is willing to work hard can achieve the same. If things are so good over there why does the US see so many people coming over here from there to become US citizens"
yep, execpt he/she is black, asian, hispanic (exceptions confirm the rule) doesnt look good, doesnt go to church regularly and doesnt go to bed with his/her boss.
I am not saying that US sucks (not really http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif ), im just trying to say that most (not all) americans seem to forget that they are neither the richest, nor the biggest, nor the smartest, nor the only country in this world. actually i am considering to go study a year or two in the US, but a country that cant keep up the power supply in the "high tech center of the world" shouldnt act as if they are superior to everyone else.

PS: all facts I got wrong are due to misinformation, but i read it somewhere, i didnt make it up. i guess as usual the truth is somewhere in the middle. as for the economic situation: german politic and politicians suck at the moment, but considering how our country looked after wwII (which sucked too) we did some impressive work over here, also considering that we just got reunited 10 years ago. But economy is going up, with all the german cars, amd and intel manufacturing here, and some nifty little inventions german scientist are gonna come up with in the next couple of years. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/cool.gif

Pneumatic
17th February 2001, 10:16
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">...while the poorest Americans are just going to starve because Bush does not see any point in a social security system. </font>

Everyone in America has the exact same opportunity to do well. The number of people "starving"' in America is almost nonexistent. Can you say the same? The fact that I figured out a way to make money and do well for my family does not make me a bad guy. As for Bush not seeing any point to social security, if you will take a look you will most likely see that America spends as much on the "poor" as most countries produce in 10 years. I'd wager that our bottom 5% are way better off that the middle class of most other countries.

Hey, if you're happy, I'm happy. The fact is that there is a flood of people coming to America from around the world. Obviously they think that there is more opportunity here than where they are coming from. In my business I deal with LOTS of first generation immigrants. You try to convince them America isn't great. Ask them if they want to go back. They will laugh.

Another thing. A lot of people have said how much the schools suck in America, in this thread. On several different occasions
(in this same thread)I see that many of you are COMING TO AMERICA TO GO TO SCHOOL! Huh? If they suck why come here to attend them?

The contradictions never end.

Rags
17th February 2001, 10:22
Just a thought on the schools sucking in America comment:

What makes you think that our schools are so much worse? I already know what you are going to say: "you score lower on the xxxxx test and the xxxxxx test on average"
Well, that is not really comparing fairly now, is it? Because in America ALL of our students take those tests. In your countries, you have only certain CLASSES taking those tests, not everyone. I am sure that if we were selective about it, we could get that average score up as well, and of course we would have the media screaming fould because of it.

Rags

Gurm
17th February 2001, 10:26
Good Lord, people.

I'm not going to start on the "our country is better than yours" routine, it gets us nowhere. However, I feel obliged to point out the following:

1. In my country, if I am smart and work hard I can be rich. Not well off, not comfortable, but RICH. Instead of worrying about my family's future, I can put enough money in trust for them to never have to worry. Perhaps this is possible in other countries, but not from what I've seen. In fact, ANYONE here can work hard and become rich. That's what's great about our system.

2. If I want a missile defense system, I can build one. If WE want a missile defense system, WE can build one. If you don't like it, please by all means feel free to shoot missiles at me. Heh.

3. How's this for an option - we in the USA will take our worthless stupid selves and stay home. Ok? Next time a fascist dictator threatens to take over all of Europe, we'll just let him. Ok? And all you damn capitulating, sideline-sitting, or just downright incompetent folk can cry all you want. You don't like us? Fine, we'll stay home. Let's see how the world would look if we had stayed home LAST TIME:

France - speaks German. Executes anyone who isn't blond haired and blue-eyed. Arc de Triumph renamed "Arc de Capitulation".

England - speaks German. Teeth are substantially better, as is cuisine, beer, and automaking.

Switzerland - speaks German. Tried to stay neutral, but Hitler won the rest of Europe and came after your gold. Oopsie!

Poland - depopulated.

Italy - speaks German. Hitler won and then turned on that fat f**k Mussolini. Trains no longer run on time.

Shall I go on? Do I think that your countries are worthless? Absolutely not. But I like mine, thank you very much. You choose to stay there, which is just fine. I choose to stay here. But don't criticise us, since our system is working substantilly better than yours.

And yeah, we have poor people. Oh well. So do you.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Rags
17th February 2001, 10:27
Sasq,

Here is the map of what was bombed:

http://members.home.net/ragsdalematt/boston/iraq_targets_map.jpg

As you can see most of the targets were some ways away from Baghdad, the closest one there was well outside of Baghdad by miles.

Rags

Pneumatic
17th February 2001, 12:13
Quote from a FoxNews story:

"There have been reports of a more active air defense. If the Iraqis were testing the new administration, they got a message that the United States was going to be vigorous in defending its aircraft and enforcing the no-fly zones," Duelfer said. "They got a good message."

Don't mess with GWB. He's not as dumb as you think. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Kaj
17th February 2001, 13:07
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">As for Bush not seeing any point to social security, if you will take a look you will most likely see that America spends as much on the "poor" as most countries produce in 10 years.</font>
Kindness-> Let's keep things in perspective here; will you? You can't compare a complete orchard with one appletree, don't you think?

Gurm has a point about WW2; I fear that we would still speak German now, if the allied forces didn't come to the rescue.
I've been looking into some historybooks: Japan decided to attack Pearl Harbor, America decided to retaliate (duh, who wouldn't), Hitler saw the opportunity to declare war against America, and all hell broke loose.
America teamed up with England which was, despite Hitlers bombs, still alive and kicking, while on the other side of Europe the Russian army -despite Stalins mistakes, made chopped liver out of the German army thanks to a little help from King Winter.
So if Japan didn't level Pearl, Hitler wouldn't have the guts to declare war and America wouldn't point a finger to Europe at that time.

But that's not the main issue here; I'd just wanted to get some facts straight.

Rags
17th February 2001, 13:42
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">But that's not the main issue here; I'd just wanted to get some facts straight.</font>
Yeah, the issue is that some clueless loon from the Netherlands seems to think that the reason Iraq got bombed on Friday was somehow related to what GW's father wants. It's quite a bit more complicated than the random thoughts of said loon http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Rags

Gurm
17th February 2001, 13:59
Rags,

Don't be TOO hard on Jorden.

You have to remember that not everyone (including some - ok MOST - Americans) gets an unbiased look at current events or history.

Many people around the world don't know that Saddam has been violating the cease-fire agreement since the day after it began.

Interesting side note: Do you all realize that Saddam erected a statue in the central square in Baghdad, to memorialize the Iraqi "victory" in the Gulf War? Now THAT's funny.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Rags
17th February 2001, 14:05
Well, come on. If he really thinks that Iraq was bombed for the reasons he stated, what else should I consider him? Pretty loony to me http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Sorry, maybe I was being a bit harsh, but I get real upset when I see people spreading misinformation. If they would just take a little time and do some research outside of what they normally watch on their own airwaves and consider several sources, they should be able to garner some clue.

I am not saying that America is perfect, because it is far from it. I am very critical of our government, as most people from Wyoming are http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif (We tend to believe that the less we hear and see of the government, the better).

Rags

Jorden
17th February 2001, 14:48
Hide in your bunkers, it's the loony again.

I did some research before I said the things, dear Matt, but you and others declared them unthinkable, as it was CNN stuff.

So, here go some of the old things I looked up in the BBC news... Bush's Clearance for Cleavage ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1096000/1096054.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point/newsid_1174000/1174646.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_1174000/1174452.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1117000/1117326.stm

And one from CNN...
http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/02/04/missile.defense/index.html
<hr>
That was before I was called a loony, and before this thread grew to beyond 60+
Do with it whatever you want.

Jord, loony of the week

Rags
17th February 2001, 15:20
Okay Jorden,

I read the first link very carefully. My summary of what it said: Iraq poses a problem for this administration. Well, gee. That's news http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/redface.gif Hasn't Iraq been a problem for many adminstrations? I think so.

The second link: I found this one rather amusing. At the top it has a pic, here look for yourself: http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1170000/images/_1174646_no_fly_tp300.jpg
hmmmm how nice. A pic of an old lady with her hands on her cheek, while there are jets bombing her. What kind of news is this? Let's get real. Baghdad wasn't bombed. That old lady was no where near the bombings. These so-called news sites need to learn something about reporting. Geez, we all know that there were military targets bombed outside Baghdad, and we know that the UK and US are getting some heat over it. Okay?


The third link: Okay, Russia is testing some weapons. The US has been following this for some time. There have been over 400 illegal weapons tests detected by US satellites since the treaty was signed. Russia has always denied the testing was taking place. So what's new here? That Russia is pissed off because we helped to bomb Yugoslavia in 1999? What's this have to do with GW bush?

The fourth link: It's an article where it describes GW's administation's idea to scale back aid given to Russia. The idea is that so long as their old nuclear stock pile is going to rogue countries and being controlled by the Russian Mafia, we keep cutting back the general aid. We won't touch the aid to keep the weapons in check. There is no immediate plan to implement this, and it's still being debated.

the cnn link: It's back to the old anti missile idea. I don't have a problem with it, but there seems to be some lines that are closely walked when implementing such a thing. Thing is they are simply DEBATING it right now, they aren't erecting it. Here's a quote from that article: '"It's not something that's going to happen tomorrow and it's not something that's going to happen without full consultation with our friends and allies," Powell said. '


Sheesh.

Rags

KvHagedorn
17th February 2001, 15:50
That old woman is probably distressed that she is about to be dragged off and stoned to death by religious zealots. They stone you to death over there for anything they can bring up an excuse for. This woman is guilty of defying Islamic law by leaving her face uncovered (she's also defying everyone's aesthetic senses.. that's a face that I agree should be covered, but I digress.. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif )

Anyhow, I find it amusing that Fascist Islamic fundamentalists who violate every freedom the left wingers propound to cherish (as long as it serves their politically expedient path to power.. oops did I say that?)are now being defended by them as oppressed because the guy calling the air strikes is now a Republican and not Slick Willie.

cjolley
17th February 2001, 16:00
This last raid on Iraq is "buisiness a usual".
Sadam tests the limits, we show him where they are.
Nothing to see here, move along.
(Though I might add that people on the right used to use this a amunition to takr a whack at Clinton, even though they agreed with him.)
As far as the ABM system goes, our main terrorest threat in this regard is a suitcase nuke. Building a "sheild" from missles will lead to a nuke race with China and, possibly, Russia again.
The reason for this is that no large competitor (to be nice) nation is going to allow us to set up a guaranteed first strike victory. We can promise all we want, they won't believe that we wouldn't use that setup and neither would you.
Even if they though we would never attack, they could not afford to take the chance.
MAD may sound screwy, but it won the cold war and kept us out of a fire storm. Several generations of planners have looked at this, it is not a new idea.
chuck

Greebe
17th February 2001, 16:26
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">basically you americans are just the successors of all the religious fanatics the europeans wanted to get rid of a few centuries back</font>REALLY??? then what the hell was WWII all about, Aye Topha?!

paulcs
17th February 2001, 16:46
I could be wrong, but I detect a pattern...

It seems to me that the English-speaking nations are quick to act when confronted with fascists. Sometimes there are political restraints that prevent us from acting (the Thugocracy of Syria), but when we can, we do (the Thugocracy of Iraq and the former thugocracy of Serbia). They just seem to piss us off more than the Communists ever did. We were willing to bring the world to the brink of annialation to prevent Communist expansion into Central and Western Europe. But we just can't seem to handle those damn fascists.

The UK hates fascists even more than we do, and Tony Blair had to be restrained when it came to Serbia. This should make sense to everyone here.

The Bath Party in Iraq and Syria has a long history with fascism. The leadership in Iraq and Syria clearly meet the fascist minimum. Again, we just can't seem to handle it. It just pisses us off.

Contrary to what you heard from Americans here, Clinton received considerable critism from the left wing of his party for his military policies in Iraq and and Serbia. Although many of these people are my friends and political compatriots, I just don't see it the same way they do.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 17 February 2001).]

Joel
17th February 2001, 17:05
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">This woman is guilty of defying Islamic law by leaving her face uncovered</font>

I may be mistaken and somebody correct me if I am, but I think it is only unmarried women who have to cover their faces.

What I find kind of sad though is that the men can wear whatever they want to but the women have to stay completely bundled up in black robes even during the heat of summer.

Joel

[This message has been edited by Joel (edited 18 February 2001).]

paulcs
17th February 2001, 17:21
Clerical fascism, which we associate with fundamentalist Islamic states, is different from fascism. It is internationalist in outlook, as opposed to ultra-nationalist. It, of course, is based in religion and clerics tend to call the shots. Iran is a clerical fascist state.

Like his kindred spirit, Musselini, Saddam is a fascist of the secular variety. He uses religion for cynical reasons: as a political tool.

The left has historically and opposed fascism in all it's flavors. That's why fascists tend to go after the left first after assuming power. The center and right tends to go into appeasement mode. "Form a coalition. Put him nominally in charge. Maybe that'll shut him up." That's how Hitler and Musselini came to power.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

DuRaNgO
17th February 2001, 17:39
The only problem I see with this most recent bombing is that Saddam is still alive :{
that is all.

Gurm
17th February 2001, 18:00
Jord,

We've been through this in chat, but...

These articles fail to mention:

1. Iraqis have been firing missiles at the planes of other nations.

2. Iraqis have been sending jets into the no-fly zones.

So we are 100% justified in bombing the living f**k out of them. I concur - the only problem here is that Saddam is still alive.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Rags
17th February 2001, 18:03
We could easily kill Saddam, you know. You know why we don't, right?

Rags

Sasq
17th February 2001, 18:46
Joel,
from memory (which is a little foggy this morning) all Islamic women are meant to cover their faces after coming of age - sorry don't know the details that well. When living in a foreign country to most women do not however it is a personal/family choice thing as far as I know.

Dan

PS Rags, I don't like CNN http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif and as I'm living in Japan atm I rely on an Australian news source for my information (I can't understand Japanese that well) so generally my news information has an Australian taint to it http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif However I retain a healthy skepticism of all news sources (being an ex-govt. employee I fully appreciate the difference between reported news and the truth) http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Pneumatic
17th February 2001, 19:55
Rags,
Isn't it because Saddam has a brother that makes him look like Mother Theresa? It seems like I heard that he is more wacked out than Saddam, and he would take over if we took Saddam out.

Rags
17th February 2001, 19:58
No, it's because it's against US law to assassinate foreign leaders. Pretty simple, eh?

Rags



[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 18 February 2001).]

EchoWars
17th February 2001, 21:34
International law, not that anyone has historically abided by it in issues that they felt strongly enough about.


Christ, wish I could spell...

[This message has been edited by EchoWars (edited 18 February 2001).]

Rags
17th February 2001, 21:43
Echo, it's not international law. It was an part of an executive order enacted by President Ford. It's OUR law http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Here's what THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo11905.htm) said :

(g) Prohibition of Assassination. No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination.

Rags




[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 18 February 2001).]

dZeus
18th February 2001, 03:23
The CIA and Fidel Castro anyone? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

impact
18th February 2001, 03:39
Well there may be exceptions sometimes...

Pace
18th February 2001, 05:18
A couple of points that I'd like to raise...

I've got a friend who has travelled the world, he spent a year in Australia and 2 months in America.

In the Oz year, he saw a total of 0 fights.

On his first night back home he saw a fight in a pub. This is kinda common.

In the US, he saw 2 stabbings.

So, although I'd always fancied working in America for a while, I'm now looking more to Oz.

Point 2 (if you want to count http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif): America will almost certainly be the only country who could close there doors from trade, and be totally self-sufficient. This is a quite incredible advantage to have over other countries in the world.

3: America certainly ain't perfect. American's who think so are wrong. You are free to think and do what you want, but please realise that small fact.

4: If any country has a voting system that is clearly better than the US then please let us know, I'd love to hear it.

D'oh, time to go and I've not even finished what I'm sayi

DentyCracker
18th February 2001, 06:34
At home I don't have to worry about racism. No one looks at me strangely because I am black. I love this. I could make more money working in America. Many of my friends have migrated to America but I won't. I was supposed to go to California on training next week. It has been postponed until May (hurrah, a lot warmer then).
Most Americans that I have personally spoken to (just a hundred or so), black or white are clueless about world affairs. I think sometimes that World Geography is not a standard subject like it is out here in primary school.
I have no real beef with America except that I am black and would likely run into some problems if I were to live there.

[This message has been edited by DentyCracker (edited 18 February 2001).]

Gurm
18th February 2001, 06:43
Denty,

No you wouldn't.

That's another piece of propaganda. Unless you live in the inner city and cause trouble with the police, racial issues are few and far between here, especially in the computer industry.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Pace
18th February 2001, 07:35
btw, I was just recalling a story from a cabbie in Canada/US (can't remember which). He was standing in a supermarket queue behind an Asian couple. The checkout girl informed the lady of the amount due and received no reply. Upon speaking again she received the reply from the man: "My wife does not speak to white trash."

Although I see everyone as a man (ok, or a woman http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif), I do have fears over cases like this - in the UK (and I'd guess the US as well) it is often hard to sack people, and when other races are involved then it's much more so, for fear of any action by the (ex)employee. I obviously cannot condone racism in any form, but too often we still see evidence of distrust, uneasiness and even hatred between others, based solely on race, colour, nationality and religion.

What are these issues like in your countries? I'd obviously love to say I'm not racist, but I see in some ways that I am. What about you's? Can you honestly say that you see everyone equally, and wouldn't base any decision on the categories above? Obviously some things like language barriers are valid reasons, but what about nationality? English have a reputation of being pompous, Americans stupid, German's arrogant, Italians greasy, French ignorant, Dutch druggies http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif etc. The Internet is breaking down many barriers of course, but as long as we see each other as different in any way, I see us fighting wars over silly things.

Regards,

Paul.

Rags
18th February 2001, 07:58
Anecdotes are always fun to represent in a way you choose http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif
But once real life hits you, you realize that life isn't an anecdote http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Well there may be exceptions sometimes... </font>
Oh yeah? Show me where!

Rags

paulcs
18th February 2001, 08:08
I'm curious, Paul, about where your friend saw those two stabbings. I lived in New York City for over thirty years and never saw a single stabbing. When I was younger and crime was much worse, I found myself on the wrong side of a knife on a couple of occasions, but I never saw anyone actually get stabbed.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

DentyCracker
18th February 2001, 08:38
Remember, life is more than just home and work. There is a lot of other stuff that people do and while I've never been to the States, I encountered racism at an amusement park in Canada and did not react well to it.

DentyCracker
18th February 2001, 08:49
Oh, Pace about that Australia thing, erm one of our (W.I.) cricketers was beaten by thugs while returning from a NightClub at the end of our tour Down Under, so you might want to reconsider. Then again maybe you are safe as you are (I assume) white.

Wombat
18th February 2001, 09:01
Denty,
The country isn't nearly as Gurm wishes it would be. Part of it relates to what part of this rather large country you're in, but you can't be black in this country and always feel like you're being treated fairly.
I spent some time training high school students to be facilitators for group discussions on race/gender/age/handicap issues, and I learned more from these kids than they did from me. It's not quite like you're a 2nd class citizen or anything, but my black friends, and some of the kids I've volunteered with, can think of lots of times that they were treated unfairly because they were black.
The country isn't out to get you, but certain people will always be a thorn in your side.

Joel
18th February 2001, 10:24
Sounds like to me DentyCracker that you have a big chip on your shoulder and just because something is done to you by a white it has to be a racial thing. I can think of many times when I have also felt that I was being unfairly treated because I was white. Almost everyday I will encounter at least one black who will carry on about how whites have what they have because they are white. Not that we worked hard for what we have and have earned it. I have also had blacks tell me that because I am a white male that I am a racist and there is nothing I can do to change that. I don't think that is being too fair, do you? I have also had black cops to pull me over and then start carry on about how us rich white boys think we can get away with everything. If whites have an organization for whites then it is labeled a racist organization while blacks call their black only organizations a cultural thing. Blacks even have their own TV network, BET, which shows very few if any 'white' shows but yet the regular networks catch hell because they don't show enough 'black' shows. There is also a new FBI study that reveals that blacks are proportionally one-and-a-half times more likely to be arrested for hate crimes against whites than vice versa. I know I have not gotten a job before, not because I wasn't qualified I was and they even told me that, but because the company that interviewed me had a black ratio quota that they had to meet and they had to hire a black instead even though they were not as qualified. IMO things like affirmative action does nothing but cause resentment toward blacks. I could go on but I think you get the point, that racism is not just a white on black thing.

Joel

[This message has been edited by Joel (edited 18 February 2001).]

Pace
18th February 2001, 12:26
Paul: One was in NYC, and the other was either SF or LA (probably LA coz SF is so nice http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif). And I think I've exaggerated - he didn't actually see the blood spilled, just the police surrounding it. This could be coincidence, but I feel (personally of course!), that the US is less safe than here (although the UK is catching up fast), and that Oz seems like a very nice place http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif There have been a couple of stabbings in my town (Falkirk, with it's large surroundings has pop ~40,000) that I can recall, and one of those I pass the place a few times a week.

How do you's feel about violence in your country? The US receives major publicity because of the shootings and gun laws, but the UK is a fairly major terrorist target and has had a few large 'gun' incidents (notably the Dunblane shooting - did you's hear about that?).

Denty: You'll probably be the best judge of anti-black opinions - and you obviously feel hard done to, and are probably unsure if whites would treat you the same as others. In Scotland there are very few blacks as such, though there are large numbers of Asians/Orientals. Besides the fact I don't know whether to call them by their first name or surname (Ayoub http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif), I treat them all fairly, and as friends. I know a girl from Hong Kong from school and still speak on the train. Yet I still feel unsafest when I am walking through a largely Pakistani area in Glasgow, and a nearby park. Maybe it's because I am indeed racist, or maybe it's because I feel that they may treat me the same way as they have been treated in the past (which I suppose, is still a race-related issue).

The only time I have ever been attacked personally on an issue like this, was while on a school trip. I was at a Catholic school (the UK divides schools into 2 regions: Catholic and non-Catholic) and ventured into a Protestant area (again in Glasgow). Several males a few years older than us decided it would be fun to smack a football of the side of our bus. Now, while I knew that Rangers fans didn't like Celtic fans, at this time I couldn't understand why they would attack us on this issue solely (whether it was anti-Celtic feelings or anti-Catholic is irrelevant).

Joel: That's my point exactly! The fact that people go over the top with anti-racist policies. We've had a few large race related police cases (most recently Damilola Taylor) where a young coloured boy was killed, but there is probably more fatalities due to rival football supporters.

And finally, with the Internet breaking down so many barriers, how long do you think before we can all sit down at the table and see 6 billion fellow humans. Not coloureds and whites. Not men and women. Not gentiles and Jews etc. Why are so many kids taught to hate and kill their fellow men, well before they can read and write?

Paul.

KvHagedorn
18th February 2001, 14:06
I think Denty's right. If it makes you more comfortable, stay where you are. These problems with racism would be much less pronounced if people would just stop immigrating to countries which are foreign to them. People are naturally happier when these stupid culture clashes do not continually litter up their day until they become paranoid nutcases. I have seen too much of this in the US, particularly among blacks. The media and black organizations blow up every incident until they make almost every young black person paranoid and likely to lash out at any perceived disrespect. I very much understand this, and if I had been that cashier, thoughts of bloody murder would have rushed over me with regards to that Asian couple. I worked in a community where there were a lot of Koreans and they were the rudest people I've ever known. It's a wonder more of them aren't victims of violence. They should never have left Korea. And what the hell is a large community of Pakistanis doing in Scotland, after all? It's not their country! These people immigrate to the US and Europe because money is more important to them than their families and their culture. They don't want to give up their culture once they arrive in the other people's country though. They want to destroy the culture of their new home by insinuating their own there. This is not immigration, it is invasion.. and the brain dead, gutless, nutless wonders who allow this "immigration" are traitors every bit as much as Quisling was. End of rant. Flame away.

Pace
18th February 2001, 16:15
Oh dear - "Flame away" would appear to be the most politically correct statement http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

What I was looking towards was the total integration of society! Where we all see each other as individuals, and no grouping or categorisation...

Admittedly some races will take their customs and traditions wherever they go - but I'll always like HP Sauce, pancakes and maple syrup and a 'chipie' http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif So, should I stay in Scotland? And import some fine Canadian maple syrup? Should we stop buying foreign goods and stick to our own?

If we do that then I cannot see any hope for the human race...

Paul.

dZeus
18th February 2001, 16:17
over here they put mayonaise on chips!!!! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Liquid Snake
18th February 2001, 16:34
I usually stay out of these political threads, but it happens that my father today said the same thing as KvH. He said that if people are going to come here to America, they should try to fit in, instead of trying to force their own culture here. Else, they should not be here at all.

paulcs
18th February 2001, 16:45
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dZeus:
over here they put mayonaise on chips!!!! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif</font>


Now, that's just disgusting.

This is why multiculturalism is important. Leave white to their own devices for too long, and they start putting mayonaise on everything. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net


[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 19 February 2001).]

Wombat
18th February 2001, 18:18
Over there, dZeus calls french fries chips!

And I know a couple people from the south that mix mayo and ketchup and put it on french fries.

GinoCyber
18th February 2001, 18:39
If people would just stop bringing religion into everything, the world would be a better place. Religion is the root of all evil and will continue to be the root of all wars, racism, etc.

In fact, this whole mess will never be resolved until the middle east gets nuked as there will be allways a feel for revenge generation after generation.

Denty - I have been to Bahamas and Jamaica a few times. I can say without a doubt that there is a huge difference between the North American black people and the Islanders. The islanders are extremely friendly people and I never got my paranoia feeling whenever I went out to a club at night. When I first went to downtown Nassau at night, I was a bit scared and I was looking over my shoulder. But after talking to some of the people in the clubs thru out the night, sharing cabs with the natives, I felt at ease and got rid of my paranoia. However, I would never goto a club in a black neighbourhood anywhere in North America. Would you think there is a difference between a black born in NA and a black born on the islands with respect to their way of perceiving the world? I only ask because no matter how many times I go back there, I do not see a change in how the islanders are and the islanders who migrated to NA are exactly the same while the blacks born here are not like the islanders at all.

Ciao

Bixler
18th February 2001, 20:21
From Gino:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">However, I would never go to a club in a black neighbourhood anywhere in North America.</font>

Come on down to the Mississippi Delta, and I'll make arrangements. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif Although I do not do this on a regular basis,(I am white) it is no problem whatsoever to walk into any black blues bar or drive down any street that I wish. Don't misunderstand..this doesn't happen often...but it is no problem if you care to. As a general rule, we exist in our domains, mix where necessary without trouble, and leave each other alone to pursue our priorities.

Denty: There is one man in the U.S. who could announce himself as a presidential candidate at any time he chose and would immediately be CROWNED and placed in the White House by almost unanimous acclamation. This man is a black man of Jamaican descent. He currently serves as our Secretary of State and enjoys higher approval numbers than our sitting president.

This crap is not a racial thing...it is about values...the cultural values that one chooses to espouse. Those people (of any color or origin) who inculcate our values and give honor to our heritage and "play by the rules" will be embraced and honored.

America is the ONLY melting pot. Find any other country on the face of the earth with our ethnic diversity and tolerance, and I'll kiss your ***. It is only because we supress NO voice of dissent, (and there are many too timid to challenge the voice of agitators) that the perception exists that we are opressors of minorities.

NOT TRUE.

[This message has been edited by Bixler (edited 19 February 2001).]

GinoCyber
18th February 2001, 21:05
Hehe, maybe that came out wrong. Why do I have this feeling? Probably because of what I see in the news. I've personally never witnessed any serious crime other than a bar fight but from what I see in the news, I wouldn't want to take the chance.

Ciao

DentyCracker
18th February 2001, 21:09
The ONLY personal experience of racism that I've had occurred in July 1992 at LaRonde Amusement Park in Montreal. It consisted of a young white man calling me nigger and spitting on me. Now I never for an instant thought that such action would send me into a blinding rage but it did. I had to be restrained from going after him. I do not have a chip on my shoulder about race. I have several uncles aunts and cousins living in the US and I agree with Gino, black Americans tend to have a slightly different way of thinking than us Islanders. We were never in a system (since Independence at least) where we were the minority, and were thought of as inferior. (Admittedly this is changing in the states) Do not try to tell me the playing field is completely level though for it is not. The affirmative action thing should never had to have been thought about, if there wasn't inequality in the first place. To me it is like two wrongs trying to make right. I do believe though that there would have been many blacks who would never havwe got a fair chance without it though. I tend to agree with KV. I know I would have potential problems with life in America so I choose to not live there. If I really wanted to live in the US I would not have too many problems going there. All I would need to do is to take the USMLE exams and apply to work in a Hospital there providing my scores were good enough, which I am totally confident they would be. I hope I never have to take up that option though, because that would mean that things have got so bad out here that I would consider living somewhere where it even occasionally goes well below 20° C http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif
I hope this clears up some stuff Joel and others.
Colin Powell was strongly cautioned by his relatives in Jamaica not to run for the Presidency as they feared for his life. Yes Joel, I believe that there are black racists.
Damn what a long post. Time to go to sleep now.

ALBPM
18th February 2001, 23:16
CEASE FIRE!! and "PEACE" Everyone http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

http://home.att.net/~albpm2/murcflag.gif

It's time to rally around the old MURC Flag and count our blessings.

We can debate and argue about the few ignorant idiots that don't and never will have any understanding about the values of "Diversity".

They are everywhere in every country and thank the Gods that they are the true minority. There will always be those few that can't look past the color of a person's skin, national origin or religion. All I can do is feel pity on them because they are the real loosers in this world.

They are the ones who will not learn or try something new and different. They will never be happy or grow stronger and wiser from the new experiences and knowlege from other cultures.

I value the Diversity that we have at MURC and am a stronger, wiser and happier person because of it http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Paul

paulcs
19th February 2001, 02:43
Hurray! I'm with Paul. Let's all rally around that international flag and talk about something most of us can agree upon: GIRLS!

I'd like to open the discussion with Jessica Alba.

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

dZeus
19th February 2001, 02:47
Wombat and Paulcs: you should see the faces of people here when I put vinegar on chips (btw. they only have french fries in McDonnald's here, and all other chips are between belgium fries and french fries (but not hand-cut as what you get most in England). And they absolutely never have heard of fish and chips.. bummer, cause I really like it http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif

Gurm
19th February 2001, 02:58
On Maxim Magazine's list of the top ten things to be thankful for in the year 2000 (number one of course being only one Kevin Costner movie and it wasn't all that bad), numbers 2 and 7 were Jessica Alba's left breast and Jessica Alba's right breast, respectively.

It's like Campbell's Soup... mmm mmm good.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

paulcs
19th February 2001, 03:09
Vinegar is acceptable. Mayonnaise on french fries is, in my opinion, a crime against nature. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

I went to see the very first Colorado Rockies game at Shea Stadium in New York. (They're Denver's baseball franchise.) We were sitting in front of a large group of women who had traveled all the way from from Colorado to see this game.

They were great. We chatted with them for a long time, but then they began putting mayonnaise on their french fries. Hundreds of people recoiled at the sight of it. ("That's not right.")

We tried to explain that what they were doing was an abomination before the eyes of God. However, they noticed that one of our party had brought kiwi to the game, which, frankly, cause us to lose our moral authority. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

I had a friend in college who was active in Republican politics. He had dinner at the Reagan White House, and of course he was thrilled to be there. He claimed, however, that they "put mayonaise on everything! It was just disgusting."

It's a Northeastern American thing, I suspect. Mayonnaise has it's place, but one has to display some judgement as to its application. Out here in the West, anything seems to go when it comes to mayonnaise.

By the way, I have some very strict rules about pizza as well. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

paulcs
19th February 2001, 03:12
O'kay. This is important.

Was the left breast No. 2 or the right?

Oh, those lips, those eyes...

And the B-side's pretty good as well. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

dZeus
19th February 2001, 03:57
What about Elizabeth Rosa? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Pace
19th February 2001, 05:01
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by GinoCyber:
If people would just stop bringing religion into everything, the world would be a better place. Religion is the root of all evil and will continue to be the root of all wars, racism, etc.</font>
Although I think religion does have some of the blame, I believe a lot of what's blamed on it stems from people using it as an excuse to gain power and wealth - which I think is the most common root of evil.

The 2 Paul's: Yes, that is one thing I was thinking about - can we use the Internet to bridge the divide so far as to remove all divisions?

And maybe I shouldn't have mentioned sauce http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif However, I feel that HP is probably the best there is, A1 steak sauce is rather nice too, but does suit steaks better (and it's thinner too). Tomato sauce is ok in a burger, but again, the brown sauces suit meat better http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Paul.

PS: 2. Left; 7. Right http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Pace
19th February 2001, 05:02
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by GinoCyber:
If people would just stop bringing religion into everything, the world would be a better place. Religion is the root of all evil and will continue to be the root of all wars, racism, etc.</font>
Although I think religion does have some of the blame, I believe a lot of what's blamed on it stems from people using it as an excuse to gain power and wealth - which I think is the most common root of evil.

The 2 Paul's: Yes, that is one thing I was thinking about - can we use the Internet to bridge the divide so far as to remove all divisions?

And maybe I shouldn't have mentioned sauce http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif However, I feel that HP is probably the best there is, A1 steak sauce is rather nice too, but does suit steaks better (and it's thinner too). Tomato sauce is ok in a burger, but again, the brown sauces suit meat better http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Paul.

PS: 2. Left; 7. Right http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif The real question is what's so much better about the left? Or maybe it's how can you fit 4 amazing things between them? Mmm...hey, has anyone seen that official babe thread off of [H]ard|Forum, mmmm http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Joel
19th February 2001, 06:54
I feel, as well as a lot of other whites and blacks that I know, that if it wasn't for people like, lying, cheating, two-timing Jesse Jackson and his partner in crime Al Sharpton that race relationships would not be as bad as they are today. IMO all these two do is stir up trouble. Of course if there was racial harmony then these two would be out of a job. They teach blacks to reject anything that is perceived 'white' and have prompted even more division by having blacks, who have never been to Africa, to refer to themselves as African-Americans instead of just being proud that they are American and accept the opportunities that are presented to them. This was definitely not the dream that Martin Luther King had for blacks as well as all Americans. Even Martin Luther King's own family has criticized Jesse and Al for some of the things they have done.

Jesse Jackson is my name, agitation is my game.

Joel

ALBPM
19th February 2001, 07:41
Cool..... The Internet is a good tool to bridge Diversity.

Diversity should be more than just an "Idea". It should be a "Value" that we prize and make a part of our everday lives.

I'm fortunate enough to live in New Mexico where everyone tends to get along very well. We had our share of problems here, mostly in the 60's and 70's. And even though I am anglo and Native American I have also had a few encounters with Hispanics that thought I didn't belong here because I was white or did not speak spanish. I used to get angry and fight but anymore I openly express my sorrow that they feel that way. You'd be suprised at the reactions to that approch. It really catches people like that off guard. They are the unhappy ones and usually want to promote an angry response out of you by making a racial slur which results in a fight or arguement. I've actually embarrased the last few people that tried to antagonize me with racial slurs. But that hasn't happened in years.

Paul

Gurm
19th February 2001, 08:32
Uh-oh. A buzzword!

You know what I have to say about diversity?

"The longer you work her, diverse it gets."

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

DentyCracker
19th February 2001, 09:40
But for whom does it get worse that is the question http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

impact
19th February 2001, 11:50
Mayonnaise is quite okay. It's not like they make you eat it. But if you love being a picky a**e about food and telling other people what you think they should and shouldn't eat, go ahead... I just think that is none of your business.

impact
19th February 2001, 12:02
Oh and as for you Rags, I have a very important announcement:

STOP BEING IGNORANT AMERICAN! (please) Read the replies before you post. I shall remind you now of what Dzeus already told you.

The CIA and Fidel Castro anyone? (http://www.historyhouse.com/stories/castro.htm)

Rags
19th February 2001, 12:27
Hey impact,


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Oh and as for you Rags, I have a very important announcement:</font>
Oh goody! I can't wait to hear it!


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">STOP BEING IGNORANT AMERICAN! (please) Read the replies before you post. I shall remind you now of what Dzeus already told you.</font>
Reach between your legs and pull really hard. You may be able to dislodge your head from your ass if you pull hard enough. I read what Dzeus already said. The executive order came AFTER that happened. You ignorant ass.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> The CIA and Fidel Castro anyone? (http://www.historyhouse.com/stories/castro.htm) </font>
Hmmmm. Maybe if you learned how to read, and would then apply those reading skills to reading what I posted, you would note the date on those attempts against the date of the executive order, then you wouldn't be sticking your foot in your mouth.

Rags



[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 19 February 2001).]

paulcs
19th February 2001, 14:40
Although you've got to be impressed by the impassioned defense of the inalienable right to put mayonnaise on everything.

Who am I to question what people do in the privacy of their own kitchens? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Kaj
19th February 2001, 15:18
Paul-> Putting mayo on fries is a matter of taste. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif I like to put mayo (and I'm talking REAL mayonaise here; with 70% oil, not that sorry excuse for mayo herbs-crap you buy at McDonalds -yuk) on my fries. Especially with some fresh chopped onions.. Yumyum.

Funny, kinda reminds me of that one scene from Pulp Fiction. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Greebe
19th February 2001, 15:24
Hurl!

SCompRacer
19th February 2001, 17:09
Say Greebe, bring it up again and we'll all vote on it!

paulcs
19th February 2001, 21:26
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Kaj:
Paul-> Putting mayo on fries is a matter of taste. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif </font>

Rosanne Barr (or whatever the hell she's called now) has been married several times. I guess it's all a matter of taste. Still, the mere thought of marrying Rosanne guarantees I won't be eating anytime soon. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

I have other rules as well. I think you shouldn't be allowed to put anything on pizza that you would put in Jello and visa versa. NO PINEAPPLE! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Hey, have the smilies I've typing in appearing in people's browsers. I'm much more concerned about disparity in opinion about Jessica Alba's left and right breasts than people's culinary kinks. Hey! Some people eat horse. (I bet they liberally slather Mr. Ed with mayonnaise before chowing down.)

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.com

impact
19th February 2001, 23:44
Oh yeah, that's even better, they just first attempt to assasinate anyone not willing to surrender, then make a law prohibiting it, so that if anyone tries to do it to them, they can say "Hey it's against the law! We would never do that." blood driping form the still wet knives of their special forces.

That's the kind of attitude I really like about americans... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

No hard feelings Rags, you asked for the explanation, right?

And don't forget the original point of this thread.

Fact of the day: Did you know that in the US, when companies are hiring new people, they will often choose those worst suited for the job, inadequately trained/schooled, etc... just because they are not 'white' and the company has so satisfy a certain 'b-w' people quota? Amazing...

Rags
19th February 2001, 23:46
Uh, no bright guy, that executive order was made because of such situations. If you are going to go around shooting your mouth off, you would be better served by doing some research first.

Rags



[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 20 February 2001).]

impact
20th February 2001, 00:06
OK.

You said that US would never assasinate any foreign leader because it's against the law, then I just pointed out that before the that particular law was made (not very long ago, I guess), it was a regular praxis for the US' forces to assasinate any and all who stood in the way of democracy.

Maybe nowadays, they would not assasinate anyone. That's too subtle. They will just bomb the s**t out of Saddam and say (in Britney's voice): "Ooops, we did it again! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif Our super duper ballistic missiles somehow got confused by the aurora borealis or ion particles from the sun or something and aimed straigh for Baghdad residencec. Sorry about that. Won't happen again"

While at the white house, junior will be celebrating happily with the senior that they got rid of the old bugger. And preparing to start the cold war again, but this time with the missile shield at hand, no more equality, all hell will be unleashed. That's why Europeans fear Bush and his ideas. He doesn't seem to be able to foresee the consequences of his actions.

Rags
20th February 2001, 05:34
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You said that US would never assasinate any foreign leader because it's against the law, </font>
Sheesh, I know that you have a hard time grasping the English language, but come on man, go back and read what I wrote again. I did NOT say that. Get a grip.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">While at the white house, junior will be celebrating happily with the senior that they got rid of the old bugger. And preparing to start the cold war again, but this time with the missile shield at hand, no more equality, all hell will be unleashed. That's why Europeans fear Bush and his ideas. He doesn't seem to be able to foresee the consequences of his actions. </font>
Well, if all Europeans don't read as well as you do, then I can see your point of view. But, just because you think that GW is a moron, and that somehow the president acts soley on everything he does, how can I argue with someone who has no clue whatsoever on how the presidency of the US works? I know that I cannot argue with some who has no grasp on neither reality nor basic knowledge.
So I give up talking to you. I just hope that all Czechs aren't as stupid as you seem to be.

Rags

Maggi
20th February 2001, 05:44
IMHO, all comes down to one aspect that GW seem to have missed ...

he really should have informed the rest of the world beforehand and not only the UK.

I think everybody would have understood his need to defend the allied forces for letting them do their job safely (guarding the no-fly-zone) and also keep Saddam within his boundaries, if he had introduced it before.

Just my 0.02$ and I'd really wish some of the peeps in here would open up their mind and stop being ignorant.

'nuff said ... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/tongue.gif

paulcs
20th February 2001, 06:17
I don't think the CIA has been seriously accused of a covert assasination plot since Allende.

I wouldn't be surprised if the remainder of the Alliance knew more about the strikes then they're letting on.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Gurm
20th February 2001, 09:53
The rest of the UN knew exactly what was going on, but most of the world has chosen to pretend that the US is the bad guy in all of this.

Kinda like Israel and Palestine. The rest of the world has taken the position that Israel is the "bad guys", despite the fact that the Palestinians are LED by a guy who, up until a couple years ago, was one of the most wanted terrorists in the world, and who has killed more Americans than anyone except Bin Laden.

It's cognitive dissonance. You decide something must be a certain way, and can't be persuaded otherwise, despite all the facts shown to you. *shrug*

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

dZeus
20th February 2001, 09:57
in the middle-east conflict, I think both sides are equally wrong. It's the small group of extremists on both sides that mess it up for everyone else.

Maggi
20th February 2001, 10:04
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
The rest of the UN knew exactly what was going on, but most of the world has chosen to pretend that the US is the bad guy in all of this.
...
- Gurm
</font>

hmm ... how do you know ?

Gurm
20th February 2001, 12:19
Maggi,

Do you SERIOUSLY think that when the US and UK mobilize fighters from a European launch site that the rest of the UN doesn't know about it? Please.

As for the middle eastern mess, it comes down to one simple fact:

Israel won. There was a war (three of them to be exact) and Israel won. It doesn't matter who helped whom, it matters who won. And when there's a war, the winner dictates terms.

Never in the history of the world has the loser of a war been so coddled by the rest of the world, and has the winner been so vilified for not immediately surrendering all lands taken.

When the US defeated Mexico, did we "give back" New Mexico, Nevada, Texas, and California? Umm... no.

So the Palestinians can cry all they want, but it's a tremendous tribute to the good will of the ISraelis that they've "given back" ANYTHING.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

CHHAS
20th February 2001, 12:34
Do we have to get the Israel/Palestinian conflict into this? This thread is complicated enough as is http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

It's plain to see that the Israelies can do whatever they please to the Palestinians without repercussions. Talk about a country that need UN intervention.

Jorden
20th February 2001, 13:13
Okay, let me add some Persian Gulf oil to the fire. Any country in the world has a right to defend itself against the countries around, right? Any country may defend itself against air-attacks, land attacks and sea-attacks by neighboring countries. But for the countries the US deams unsafe for the democratic world, therefor those countries are not allowed to defend themselves against air-attacks, land-attacks and sea-attacks. The US says that they have to allow UN people to do their work, to get rid of weapons of mass-destruction (womd), those nations have. If I'm going wrong somewhere, please tell me.

Okay, so we have a couple of nations in the world that don't allow UN people in, who can only erradicate those womd's if they stay in that country for a very long time. Something like 20 years or more. All this time, the countries surrounding this one country are freely allowed, sometimes with help of the US itself, to buy & construct their own weapons. They are allowed to teach their personnel how to use those weapons, are allowed to make defences against their surrounding countries, are allowed to do a lot of things, including make a profit for themselves.

Assassination of a country's leader is not allowed anymore. I know that. This leader was a good friend of the US before (as Saddam was, for he bought a lot of American weapons directly from America during the Iran-Iraq war, and at that time no-one thought much of it... after Nixon, dear Matt), so first they tried to soothe him. When that didn't work, they tried force, by killing and capturing and after some time, letting go of a lot of Iraqi men, who only followed orders. If you don't follow orders in such a country, you will be shot. It was always that way, it'll always stay that way. The US were against having Saddam pull the strings, all of a sudden, so they rallied before the UN that it was time to get Saddam out of Kuwait, with a lot of forces from all over the world. China and Russia were against this kind of force, but who can blaim them? They have their own oilfields, which give them enough polution and oil to take almost care of their own people.

Oil? Oil again. Kuwait, Iraq, Iran and the Saudi Arabian countries sit on the biggest oilfield of this world. Maybe something sits in Russia's Eastern part, close to China, but that's not really confirmed yet. And it's out of the hands of the Americans anyway.

Kuwait, a country smaller than The Netherlands, holds a vast oil-field. It's almost nothing but oilfield underneath. And since your airplane doesn't run on water, nor does your car, nor does your diesel train, nor does you lawnmower, nor does your electricity plant (when it's not coal or nuclear), someone had to make sure that there's still oil coming through the Persian Gulf, towards your Volkswagen Rabit. If it weren't for that oilfield under Kuwait and under Saudi Arabia, there would've been no 1st Gulf war. If Kuwait would've been just a barren country, no-one would've thought of liberating it from the bad bad Iraqi's in 1990/1991.


Okay, so a lot of persons were killed, as in every war. We didn't sleep for nights, watching those bomb-runs on Iraq. Following some CNN reporters through Baghdad, as they were the only ones around and allowed to speak for themselves or the Iraqi's in the first days of the real war.

Then afterwards the whole thing with the UN dismantling Iraqi warfare machines and all whatnots, until they got kicked out and kicked out again. The Northern No Fly Zone was in effect, yet Saddam killed thousands of people there, without so much intereference of the UN airplanes (read: UK and USA). The Turks could get onto Iraqi territory to finally kill a lot of Kurds, who tried to flee to Turkey. No one said a word about that. I have never heard the Americans tell the Turks to stop killing those Kurds, not even after whole of the world saw Turkish tanks fire shells at women and children. But then again, the Americans and the English needed the Turkey air-bases to uphold the Northern No Fly Zone, as well as be able to fly possible necessary bombing runs against targets around Baghdad. So why would they say anything about the Turks killing people? Why jeopardize their airfields?

It's been 10 years since The 1st Gulf War. And in the time inbetween US and UK airplanes have upheld the no fly zones. And they were shot at from day one. And they shot down planes, sometimes even their own, from day one. But only because 'we were shot at more the past month than we were shot at during any other month, we had to let Saddam know we are still here (as if he doesn't know), and give him a message'. Send him an email, send him a postcard. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif Why not?


I've seen the reports on various news-items: That bombing run had been in the making since a couple of months. So why bring it under the name of: "We were shot at more during the past month, than any month before"? Plain and simple BS. Maybe Clinton didn't want to do it, who knows? Maybe GW did want to do it. That's why I made that first post, plus the joke. If you are an American and you can't laugh about it, too bad. Sometimes we Europeans are allowed to have some (morbid) humor as well.
<hr> The rest of this thread is something that's out of my hands. But I can react to it, I hope.<hr>
Racism I won't even burn my hands on. I live together with a black American (US) woman, and if she feels fit to handle this, I'll let her. I won't touch it, for I don't care what colour you are. You will be an equal to me, as far as I feel it.<hr>
GinoCyber: If you were to nuke the whole of the Middle East, just to get rid of all these Bible wars, then I think you ought to read up on the good book first. There's been enough wars about religion, about some religion being good, the other bad. I concur with you in one way: let the wars stop over things said in the bible, let the wars stop because we have another religion than yours. There will be enough places in the Bible saying things about quiting wars, or quarrels, just because one person doesn't believe the same as the other does. The Catholic Church has tried bannishing out the worshipping of pagan gods, by telling people to worship bits and pieces of their own priests, saints and all that. So people went from worshipping the bones of one God, to worshipping the bones of someone made Saint by the C.C.
Nuking the Middle East doesn't help. It's still the place where your ancestors came from, believing in a God. Whether that God was Mohammed or whether it was Jesus or whether it was the Christian God, that doesn't matter. Saying "nuke the place" is some thing your mother never taught you!!<hr>
Mayo or vinegar on chips or french fries. I put mayo on my friet, I put mayo on my hamburger. You got the friet from the Dutch or the Belgians, we might've all gotten the hamburger from the Romans. I also use salt on potato's and friet. Vinegar is used on things that are too dry to eat on their own, like kale. And I eat it stamped though stamped-potato's, with baked pieces of bacon (not those thin slices, but real big chunks), and the gravy from the bacon. With a pickle and some sour onions on vinegar. Does that make me a barbarian in your eyes, Paulcs?
Maybe everything is bigger in the US, but you exlpain to me why people eat vitamine pills every day, instead of real food? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif
<hr>
Last in the list: Jessica Alba: As I said to Jason already through ICQ: What breasts? There's nothing on all the pictures I saw that would be enough to hold in one hand... He couldn't even find a picture on the net showing them really good. As far as I could see she's pretty, but if you look at her breasts only, a well used ironing board has more bumps! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif<hr>

Jord, with enough fuel to burn me, right?


[This message has been edited by Jorden (edited 20 February 2001).]

Gurm
20th February 2001, 13:20
Jord, you're STILL missing a big point.

I'll say it slowly, so you can filter it all in...

THE

WINNER

SETS

THE

TERMS

Did you get that?

It's the way war works. If we win, we call the shots. If you don't like them, don't surrender.

We won, we made the rules (no more WOMD, no-fly zones, embargoes, etc.), and we can enforce them at will.

End of story.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Jorden
20th February 2001, 13:25
YOU DIDN'T WIN !!!

Did Bagdhad officially surrender? NO
Did Saddam tell you please to stop shooting? NO
Did Iraq surrender? NO

They fled out of Kuwait, they fled back into Iraq. You didn't persue them to Baghdad. So they didn't surrender, so the war is still on for them, so they have all the rights to shoot at your airplanes http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Easy huh, Jason?

If GW Sr. had told Schwarzy to not stop at Kuwaity borders, and just to take over Baghdad, who knows what we would've had now.

You did NOT get a surrender from Iraq, so you DON'T call the shots.

Even if you were calling the shots, you would have to as the UN first, "may I shoot at Baghdad", then the UN would have to say something about it. But the US didn't, not in so many words. Hell, your own Congress didn't even know about it, they were informed afterwards! How far does that go then?

Jord.

[This message has been edited by Jorden (edited 20 February 2001).]

Gurm
20th February 2001, 13:28
Ok fine. Let's run with your scenario.

We didn't win, in fact the war never ended. In that case, all rules are off. So long as we don't target civilians specifically (or whatever the Geneva conventions have to say about this) we can bomb the living f**k out of Baghdad for as long as we like.

Simple.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

CHHAS
20th February 2001, 13:34
So Gurm, what you're saying is that the US is free to dictate terms on every other country in the world due to it's military force ?

Sounds a bit like what Saddam was doing to Kuwait in my ears ...

Jorden
20th February 2001, 13:37
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">We didn't win, in fact the war never ended. In that case, all rules are off.
</font>

Ah no... the rules don't play that way, for the USA said they won the war... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

So what did the USA win then? And the game still played by the rules? Or did the rules take over the game, or did the game do so?

Gurm
20th February 2001, 13:41
Nope. You're saying that, I'm not.

Look. Country X declares war on Country Y.

They shoot at each other and bomb each other. Right?

Now, if Country X wins, and tells Country Y that its terms include everyone in Country Y agreeing not to eat pickles, and Country Y holds "let's eat pickles" day, Country X can proceed to bomb the living crap out of Country Y.

Now, if Country X "contains" Country Y, and the war never ends, then Country X can continue to bomb Country Y just because they feel like it.

Which part aren't you getting?

In this example, COuntry Y is Iraq, and Country X is NOT the USA, it's a coalition of countries, including the USA, UK, France, etc.

The fact that the US represents the bulk of the available, ready-to-use firepower in this coalition is irrelevant.

And Clinton HAS bombed Iraq. Recently. You just don't hear about it because it's not all over the news. GWB wanted it all over the news, for political reasons.

So yes, in a sense you are right. He did the same thing as Clinton, he just made a bigger noise about it.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

HollyBerri
20th February 2001, 13:46
But Gurm, doesn't your scenario basically add up to, "Country X gets to bomb Country Y practically no matter what?"

And isn't that CCHAS's question?

And is that type of thinking supposed to make friends for Country X, even among "allies"?

------------------------
Holly

dZeus
20th February 2001, 14:44
following this logic, I could make some _very_ dangerous and insulting remarks. I won't do so, but realize what it means if that logic is true...

Gurm
20th February 2001, 15:24
Yup, that's EXACTLY what I'm saying. War is icky, now isn't it?

If Country Y isn't thrilled about this, they shouldn't have started a war with Country X. I have no sympathy.

- Gurm

dZeus
20th February 2001, 15:29
sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that 'And when there's a war, the winner dictates terms' is a very dangerous logic http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Sorry for the confusion! :-)

Rags
20th February 2001, 17:09
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Any country in the world has a right to defend itself against the countries around, right? </font>
Any country can do whatever they want, but some have to pay the consequences if this breaks an agreement


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Any country may defend itself against air-attacks, land attacks and sea-attacks by neighboring countries. </font>
Isn't that the same question as above, or am I missing something?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">But for the countries the US deams unsafe for the democratic world, therefor those countries are not allowed to defend themselves against air-attacks, land-attacks and sea-attacks. </font>
This has nothing to do specifically with the US. Do you know why the Gulf War happened in the first place? It's because Iraq invaded a neighboring country and were slaughtering civilians. The UN gave Iraq a deadline to move their sorry asses out, they ignored the UN, stating they wanted a "Holy War". So we bombed the shit out them. We bombed them until Iraq signed a cease fire agreement which stipulated they get their sorry asses out of Kuwait, allow UN inspections, agree to a No Fly Zone, and would grant the UN access to their country. Well, Jorden, this gives the UK and the US every right to bomb the **** out them when they are shooting SAMs at jets enforcing the No Fly Zone. DO you get it now?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The US says that they have to allow UN people to do their work, to get rid of weapons of mass-destruction (womd), those nations have. If I'm going wrong somewhere, please tell me.</font>
You are going wrong everywhere in that statement. Do some research and report back.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Okay, so we have a couple of nations in the world that don't allow UN people in, who can only erradicate those womd's if they stay in that country for a very long time. Something like 20 years or more. All this time, the countries surrounding this one country are freely allowed, sometimes with help of the US itself, to buy & construct their own weapons. They are allowed to teach their personnel how to use those weapons, are allowed to make defences against their surrounding countries, are allowed to do a lot of things, including make a profit for themselves.</font>
No, it's very simple. They allow UN inspectors to come in voluntarily, and stop invading and killing their neighbors, and the bombing and the trade restrictions stop. Problem solved. Saddam, good boy, Saddam live long and his people prosper, but Saddam hasn't been a good boy, now we take his dinner away and bomb **** out of him. Get it?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">This leader was a good friend of the US before (as Saddam was, for he bought a lot of American weapons directly from America during the Iran-Iraq war, and at that time no-one thought much of it... after Nixon, </font>
Neither were EVER friends of the US, but we did trade with them. And yes the US does sell weapons, we are a capitalist society after all. No big stuff, though.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">dear Matt), </font>
Ummm....okay...


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">China and Russia were against this kind of force, but who can blaim them</font>
What the hell is a blaim?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">If Kuwait would've been just a barren country, no-one would've thought of liberating it from the bad bad Iraqi's in 1990/1991. </font>
Probably not. But Kuwait is the key to part of the ENTIRE world's economy, and no one was letting this go un noticed.


The rest was pretty much blah blah blah, so it doesn't get a response http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Rags

paulcs
20th February 2001, 18:24
Mayo or vinegar on chips or french fries. I put mayo on my friet, I put mayo on my hamburger. You got the friet from the Dutch or the Belgians, we might've all gotten the hamburger from the Romans. I also use salt on potato's and friet. Vinegar is used on things that are too dry to eat on their own, like kale. And I eat it stamped though stamped-potato's, with baked pieces of bacon (not those thin slices, but real big chunks), and the gravy from the bacon. With a pickle and some sour onions on vinegar. Does that make me a barbarian in your eyes, Paulcs?

No, it makes you a cracker and a pervert. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Maybe everything is bigger in the US, but you exlpain to me why people eat vitamine pills every day, instead of real food?

I'm not sure it has anything to do with size. Maybe they're eating too much bacon.

More on Ms. Alba's breasts later.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

GinoCyber
20th February 2001, 19:21
"The rest of the world has taken the position that Israel is the "bad guys", "

Well if one side has rocks and the other side has guns (that's what I see in the news), and the world saw what the Israeli soldiers did to the arab father and son in cold blood (again from the news), of course the world with think that.

And when sites like this is popping up all over the internet, the Israeli's are being looked at differently.

WARNING!!!!!!!!!!! EXTREMELY DISTURBING PICTURES.

http://lubnen.homestead.com/lubnen.html

On the other hand, the Palestinians are going by the coran and nowhere in the coran is there any mention of the piece of land they are whining about.

Ciao

KvHagedorn
20th February 2001, 19:37
Isn't kale a garnish? Like parsley?
I don't think you are supposed to eat that.. it's like a weed or something.

------------------
Kind Regards,

KvH

DentyCracker
20th February 2001, 19:59
Kale is a good source of Kalium

Greebe
20th February 2001, 20:02
LOL Chuck, you best not ever visit the south eastern US!

paulcs
20th February 2001, 22:14
Does kale encourage large, soft bowel movements? I find a large slab of fatty bacon smothered in mayonnaise a little binding -- albeit high in vitamins and minerals. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

CHHAS
20th February 2001, 22:26
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Do you know why the Gulf War happened in the first place? It's because Iraq invaded a neighboring country and were slaughtering civilians.</font>

You don't seriously belive that, do you ? The reason for the war was oil, pure and simple. If Kuwait hadn't been sitting on all that oil, nobody would have given a flying fvck about them.

Pardon my french.

[This message has been edited by CHHAS (edited 21 February 2001).]

paulcs
20th February 2001, 22:51
I bet mayonnaise was involved. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Greebe
20th February 2001, 23:14
Paul, Kale and bacon work very well together... like best of both worlds!

Forest green poop, high in fatty acids, mineral rich and with lots of log rolling ruffage!

and if prepared properly it's actually very good! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Greebe
20th February 2001, 23:16
Forgot one thing.... hold the Mayo!

impact
21st February 2001, 00:29
Oh definitely next time when I'm going to the US I'll be sure to speak to Mr. prez to find out whether or not is he what he seems to be. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif Gosh!

Yes I have only a faint idea on how the presidency works in the US (I only know it involves lots of bl*wj*bs, few affairs plus the occasional bombing run). My point of view is shapen mainly by what I read/see in the news. And somehow I cannot get the funky idea that Gore would be much better that Bush president out of my head (afterall, he did get more votes; but wasn't elected because of one particular 17th (maybe 18th, I know you will not resist and quote this asking for the particular year) century decision and general lack of roads and cars at those old times). Sorry for having different opinion on that matter.

Hey, there were no Clinton_or_chimp sites AFAIK. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

And US + UN winning the Kuwait war. Oh that's a good one! Almost made me laugh. They did won one battle, but 10 years later, Saddam is still alive and kickin', accepted by the neighbours (they definitely like him more than the Big Evil Country (tm)), and Iraq still building his arsenal. UN inspections a success? Heh, that's just pathetic.

SCompRacer
21st February 2001, 02:14
Sadam is alive and well cause some of his neighbors and members of the coalition didn't want him dead, just calmed down. In their culture he is still a very important man.

Your right, it is all about oil though the human element made it more dramatic and worthy. If it wasn't for the oil and the cash it generated over there, the tribes would still be sluggin' it out on their camels.

And don't forget, the US wasn't the only major power throughout history that exploited smaller countries to improve their lifestyle or worth.

Joel
21st February 2001, 02:23
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The reason for the war was oil, pure and simple. If Kuwait hadn't been sitting on all that oil, nobody would have given a flying fvck about them.</font>

That may be part of the reason, but then again if they had not had those oilfields then Iraq would not have invaded them in the first place.

Joel

[This message has been edited by Joel (edited 21 February 2001).]

CHHAS
21st February 2001, 03:27
Touché Joel http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Gurm
21st February 2001, 05:22
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">****10 reasons why itīs great to be an american*****</font>

10 Reasons why it's great to NOT be an American...


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">1. You can have a woman president without electing her </font>

You can have a presidential election, and have some guy with guns declare that he won whether anyone voted for him or not!


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">2. You can spell colour wrong and get away with it </font>

You can make forgetting to bathe a national pastime, and get away with it.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">3. You can call Budweiser beer </font>

You can call swarthy people with moustaches "women". Then you don't NEED the beer.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">4. You can be a crook and still be president </font>

You can be a pornstar and get elected to parliament.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">5. If you've got enough money you can get elected to do anything</font>

If you've got enough money you don't need to get elected. This is true the world over.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">6. If you can breathe you can get a gun </font>

You can't have a gun. You also can't protect your home with deadly force. Oopsie, your wife and daughter were just raped at gunpoint by a criminal. We're sorry.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">7. You can invent a new public holiday every year </font>

France: Enforced 35-hour work weeks. Nice.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">8. You can play golf in the most hideous clothes ever made and nobody seems to care.</font>

Cricket. 'Nuff said.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">9. You get to call everyone you've never met "buddy"</font>

You get to insult Americans and call them stupid, despite the fact that some of them are smarter than you will ever be.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">10. You can think you're the greatest nation on earth.</font>

You KNOW you're not the greatest nation on earth, and get offended when anyone else talks their homeland up.

- Gurm


------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

CHHAS
21st February 2001, 07:02
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You can have a presidential election, and have some guy with guns declare that he won whether anyone voted for him or not!
</font>

Not every country other than USA is a dictatorship you know.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You can make forgetting to bathe a national pastime, and get away with it.</font>

Racism ? Not a pretty thing.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You can call swarthy people with moustaches "women". Then you don't NEED the beer.</font>

Not even going to comment that one.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You can be a pornstar and get elected to parliament.</font>

What's wrong with that ?


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">If you've got enough money you don't need to get elected. This is true the world over.</font>

You're absolutely right about that one.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You can't have a gun. You also can't protect your home with deadly force. Oopsie, your wife and daughter were just raped at gunpoint by a criminal. We're sorry.</font>

The guncontrol issue have been dicussed to death a thousand times before, you have your opinion, I've got mine.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">France: Enforced 35-hour work weeks. Nice.</font>

Yes, isn't it ? Prevents employers from exploiting their employees.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You get to insult Americans and call them stupid, despite the fact that some of them are smarter than you will ever be.</font>

I didn't see anyone calling Americans stupid. As for the smart thing, I have a distinct feeling that it's nicely distributed the world over http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You KNOW you're not the greatest nation on earth, and get offended when anyone else talks their homeland up.</font>

If you define 'greatest nation' by military force I guess you could call the USA the greatest nation, if not ... to each his/her own opinion.

Gurm, it was a joke, lighten up ok?

Alec
21st February 2001, 07:15
OK, Gurm, you passed the test - youīre a true american: canīt really cope when your people is the subject of a joke. Iīm sorry.

Gurm
21st February 2001, 10:23
Hrm. I can't take a joke?

Look who got all offended over moustachioed women and lack of hygiene!

It just upsets me that so many people know so little about the situation and/or political system in other countries.

I know how Britain's political system works. Therefore I feel competent to comment on it. I do NOT know how Switzerland's political system works. Therefore I don't comment on it.

VERY FEW OF YOU have a clue how America's political system works. You see sensationalized headlines from the news wires and make assumptions.

Yet you all feel qualified to comment. I wonder why?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

impact
21st February 2001, 10:40
Because this is the soap box. On the Murc forum, you can't get much lower (unless The Crapper is introduced in the near future).

Alec
21st February 2001, 11:16
Thereīs stupid people all over the world, in every country, in every race. I think we can try to laugh at our defects, and you, Gurm, although I pointed out that was a humorous moment (that joke was taken from an american site) you still were affected negatively by it. You shouldnīt have a problem with it.

As an european, I disagree with lots of aspects of the american society, their foreign policies and culture. But that doesnīt mean that I donīt want to know the USA and maybe even end up living there. I canīt understand how America elected Bush. I saw him comment today that thing about the FBI guy that had been allegedly spying for the russians for years. That holier-that-thou attitude got on my nerves. He makes people believe that the Russia is the only country with spies...
Also, he talked about how he regretted that not everyone on the world shared the american values - THANK GOD THATīS TRUE!!! He should be so lucky.

Kaj
21st February 2001, 13:08
He really did say that, did he? Sheesh.. And some people in TSB wonder why some Europeans don't think highly of him.

Guru
21st February 2001, 13:15
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Alec:
He makes people believe that the Russia is the only country with spies...
</font>

One was caught in Sweden yesterday!

------------------
Join the MURC SETI team! (http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/cgi?cmd=team_join_form&id=25678) | SETI @ MURC (http://www.setiatmurc.f2s.com/)

All extremists should be taken out and shot.

Barbarella
21st February 2001, 15:03
well,

very interesting post. It seems we will have a big ideological war in the coming years between Europe / USA http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Just one more word. Usualy when American say 'Europe' they are talking about the continent. While most European (or more and more) are thinking about that :

http://www.onversity.com/image/drapeau-euro.gif

[This message has been edited by Barbarella (edited 21 February 2001).]

Gurm
21st February 2001, 15:09
You can't understand how we elected Bush? This simply illustrates your complete lack of understanding of not only the American political system but also the American mindset.

Maybe we as a country were SO sick of Bill "I want my dick sucked" Clinton that we were willing to elect ANYONE with opposing values, even if that person was perhaps not the most qualified for the job.

And maybe we WANTED someone who wasn't steeped in Washington politics and who wasn't a bleeding heart liberal. Maybe we WANTED someone with the guts to drop bombs on the bad guys, instead of trying to "talk out our differences" with a bunch of crazy extremists from the desert who have called for "death to all Americans, down to the last child".

But the point in fact is that we legally elected Bush. You obviously don't understand how, and maybe you should go read up on it.

I know this is the soap box. But all the Europeans in here get offended when we make blanket generalizations about Europe, so is it not ok for us to get offended when you make blanket generalizations about the US?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Alec
21st February 2001, 16:08
Good point, Joel.

And now, for a little bit of a humorous break (and not completely off-topic):


****10 reasons why itīs great to be an american*****

1. You can have a woman president without electing her

2. You can spell colour wrong and get away with it

3. You can call Budweiser beer

4. You can be a crook and still be president

5. If you've got enough money you can get elected to do anything

6. If you can breathe you can get a gun

7. You can invent a new public holiday every year

8. You can play golf in the most hideous clothes ever made and nobody seems to care.

9. You get to call everyone you've never met "buddy"

10. You can think you're the greatest nation on earth.

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Rags
21st February 2001, 16:54
Gurm,

You really expect these narrow-minded individuals to really see that they are being hypocrites? They tell us we are being improper by stereotyping yet they just got done doing it.

You also expect them to understand why GW Bush is president even though they don't like him? You expect them to understand that they are incorrect when they say that Al Gore got the majority of the votes in the presidential election, when this is clearly not true? Headline scholars are pretty tough cases, you know.

Rags

cjolley
21st February 2001, 18:11
As one who has lived in both Europe and the US, I would just like to say....
This is a lovers quarrel that will be forgotten in a short while when China points a gun at us and asks us both for our wallets.
chuck

paulcs
21st February 2001, 18:57
Personally, I think the waving of flags in this context is needlessly provocative and an insult to old friends and allies. Shame on you.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 22 February 2001).]

Greebe
21st February 2001, 19:12
Thank you Chuck!

impact
22nd February 2001, 01:33
Prologue:

And what exactly do you want us to do Rags? Sit here and stare at each other? If you are not enjoying this thread, there's nothing that's holding you here.

Let us poor, dumb, narrow-minded ones - who will never be able to achieve the omnicognoscant (gotta love Terry and his books http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif) demigod status of yours, not even come close to you in your greatest glory and allknowing, allhearing, allrseeing and allunderstanding status, the kind of mind that operates at 100% efficiency; you may still pay us a visit now and then if you see it fit to talk to such a lowly creature that european is and inform us of our mistakes and ignorance and show us the light, we shall follow where ever you go, praise anything that you touch and never question anything you say - just let us go on with our useless ranting.

---

China, eh? That's far away... wait when NATO expands up to the russian border, then there will be some serious trouble.

---
How to become a President of the USA, one step program:
> Work off of the anger, resentment, and hatred of Clinton and anything/everything associated to him! That easy!

You do not need ANY other qualifications.

Well,...your father being rich, connected, and a prior president SURE helps! Not to forget to mention the Christian Right. (which is NEITHER)

impact
22nd February 2001, 01:36
Cheer up people, and take it easy... this is why certain americans like Bush so much...

Republican lifestyle

-------------------------------
So, if you're a Republican, tell me - what's the Republican lifestyle really like? What is it that you people, you know, do? I mean, no offense, but I just don't get you people...
-------------------------------

Well, generally, I wake up in the morning and have breakfast, and then spend ten minutes genuflecting before my life-sized poster of Ronald Reagan. I get dressed (always in suit, tie, American Flag pin, and socks with garters, even if I'm just going to be hanging around the house) and go off to work, though usually I take a few minutes out of the morning routine to hawk a large loogie on the poor black family that lives next door.

At work, I leave Christian literature in the chairs of all of my colleagues, and conspire with my fellow white Republicans as to which minority co-workers we'll bombard with hate e-mail during the day. Thankfully, as a Republican, I've been promoted into middle management quite easily with my 'old-boy' network, and generally I spend the afternoons subtly inquiring into my subordinates' lifestyles and political views so as to decide who to fire and who to keep. Needless to say, godless Commie Democrats are the first to go. I'd say gays and pagans first, but we burned all of them at the last company picnic.

I come home from work in my '57 deSoto modified into an SUV, just to rub in it the faces of those who think that there's some sort of energy crisis or global warming crap. It's expensive, but I make more than enough money stealing food from poor families, medicine from the elderly, and candy from babies in order to afford it.

Once I get home, I start cooking dinner- although occasionally I'll take a few minutes out to go kill the black neighbor's pets or set fire to his house- and beat my wife with the crucifix we have on the wall. Luckily, usually she's barefoot and pregnant when I get home, so she's pretty submissive about the whole thing. Then I'll have a few martinis, sexually abuse the kids, and write a letter of support for Rush Limbaugh. Then it's off to bed, force a little sex on the wife, and sleep easily, dreaming of tax shelters.

impact
22nd February 2001, 01:51
and an interesting link

http://www.roevbush.com/

Alec
22nd February 2001, 03:09
Gurm,
Why do you keep underestimating what the other people in these forums know about the world? Are you the only one that knows how the american political system works? Are the other people blind by any chance? What about some real argumentation?
(Now I know why Jorden has quit talking to you in this thread)

As for you, Rags,
Be careful with who you call narrow-minded and hypocryte. This ends up showing more of what you are that the ones youīre accusing… You donīt have a f*cking clue about who I am, what I do and what I could end up doing to you if I met you.

What a couple of nice people, Gurm and Rags.
I think Iīll stop here to prevent a intercontinental war. Hope you stop as well. Thread closed for me.

Rags
22nd February 2001, 05:30
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">If you are not enjoying this thread, there's nothing that's holding you here.
</font>
I am enjoying this thread fine, I was talking to Gurm about some of you people's hypocrisy and having a snicker at your expense. Just like you do to us.

I don't think the US is the be-all end-all. I just don't like people lying about us, that's all. And I have been seeing flat out lies. If you want to have a serious discussion, then fine. Leave out the hip shots and let's have a discussion. You don't see me degrading your country of origin, do you? It's not because I don't have ammo, either.

But that's fine. Just keep on stating lies as matter of fact statements, it just makes you look even more silly http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif .

Rags

Rags
22nd February 2001, 05:35
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You donīt have a f*cking clue about who I am, what I do and what I could end up doing to you if I met you.</font>
Oooooo! Hey there tough guy, calm down. I never mentioned you. But now that you put yourself on the stage; you seem to think violence is A-OK, yet you kind of seemed to be harping on the US for their attitude on these things. I guess this is hypocrisy after all http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif Calm down there, hero.

Rags

HedsSpaz
22nd February 2001, 06:49
Heretofore I had managed to refrain from entering this thread (gee, I wonder why?). However, for some strange reason I feel inclined to do so now. I geuss I'm just feeling irritable this morning (and I haven't had my second cup of coffee yet).

So, as I see it, this is coming down to idealogical differences in opinion on the way a nation should be run. Citizens of nations all around the world have frequently accused Americans of being clueless when it comes to concerns of foreign policy, foreign forms of government, etc.

Gurm and Rags have turned the tables and tried (in vain apparently), to show that most other countries in the world can't seem to understand America either.

So, for those of you who are not American, who ridicule our system of government, yet purport to have an understanding of it... lets here you explain your understanding. Thats right, tell me how, as you understand it, the US gov't works.

After you are done doing that, us USian's will correct you (and rest assured, you will get something wrong).

A side note to Jorden and anyone else who might not be aware of this.

The "Gulf War" (Operation Desert Storm) was not a war. At least not by the definition that the US uses. In order for the US to declare war on a nation it requires a 2/3 majority vote in favor by congress. No vote ever even took place. However, the President of the US is also the Commander in Chief of the US military. He can issue an executive order to send troops to fight in a conflict without actually issuing a declaration of war. Incidentaly, this is one of the reasons that Vietnam was so vehemently opposed by so many USians, we never actually declared war on Vietnam, it was an executive order. The last time the US actually declared war on a nation was the Korean war.

So, moving right along, Mayonaisse belongs on sandwich's (of the cold cuts and cheese variety). One of my best friends used to make fry sauce for his fries (Mayo and Ketchup). We ridiculed him endlessly for that. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Impact, I must say, that little rant of your's was highly amusing. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and then spend ten minutes genuflecting before my life-sized poster of Ronald Reagan.
</font>
LMAO!! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif
I just about died when I read that! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

And one last swing in subject, this is a side note for all of you out there (and this includes Americans) that believe that the USA is a Democracy. You are sadly mistaken. Democracy is a myth. It's a nice ideal in the same way that Communism (Marxism) is a nice ideal. But neither will ever exist in large form on this planet.

Ian

Maggi
22nd February 2001, 07:16
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
Maggi,

Do you SERIOUSLY think that when the US and UK mobilize fighters from a European launch site that the rest of the UN doesn't know about it? Please.
</font>

Now what's this about ?

If the rest of the UN/NATO/World knew of that strike, how come that nobody admits ?

I personally believe that GW is under too much pressure, just because of the fact that he will always be compared to his dad.
Thus he will make wrong decisions every now and then and I count this íncident to that.

If he'd really informed the UN, there would have been at least a discussion about it, if not a debate with a majority conclusion/decision.

I have the strange feeling that GW was well aware that not many nations would support his 'executive order' and therefore he decided (I hope the UK was really involved in that decision and not only informed) to do the fast way, rather than having to argue with other nation's representatives about pros and cons about that strike.

Regards,
Maggi

PS: Do you really think that I'm lacking a minimum of education and knowledge ??? Please .... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Gurm
22nd February 2001, 08:20
Ok, let's get a few things straight.

1. Do I have an oversized ego in regards to my intellect? Yup. You betcha. That's what happens when you have this kind of IQ. I'm working on keeping it in check. Sometimes, when people piss me off, it can't be controlled. Sorry.

2. Do I think you are all stupid? NO. I do, however, think that SOME of you are critically misinformed. It's a function of where you are. It's a function of your news sources. It's a function of your upbringing. We in America are raised cynical.

3. You just don't understand us. At all. You don't get the American system. You don't get American politics. And you don't get our mindset.

4. I'd be happy to actually have some real argumentation. However, you must agree to leave your preconceived notions at the door. You must agree that when you make a misstatement and we correct you, you won't cling to that misstatement. If I stated that all people in France wear berets, because that's what I've seen on TV, and someone from France tells me they don't, and I CONTINUE TO INSIST that they do, I look like an idiot. And THAT is what you people have been doing.

So, grow up a little. You want intelligent discourse? Let's have some. But first you have to check your ignorance at the door.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

Maggi
22nd February 2001, 08:59
hmmm ... sorry Gurm, but your post somewhat confuses me ... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
Ok, let's get a few things straight.

1. Do I have an oversized ego in regards to my intellect? Yup. You betcha. That's what happens when you have this kind of IQ. I'm working on keeping it in check. Sometimes, when people piss me off, it can't be controlled. Sorry.</font>

ok, fair enuough ... thanx for explanation.



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
2. Do I think you are all stupid? NO. I do, however, think that SOME of you are critically misinformed.</font>

so far, so good ...



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">It's a function of where you are. It's a function of your news sources. It's a function of your upbringing. We in America are raised cynical.</font>

now here is where my confusion starts ...

What is the function of Germany ?
What is the function of German news sources ?
Why are all in America raised cynical and
what has that to do with this discussion ?



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
3. You just don't understand us. At all. You don't get the American system. You don't get American politics. And you don't get our mindset.</font>

How can you be so sure ?
For me this statement is a clear sign of arrogance (maybe even ignorance).

Honestly, what do you know of Germany, Germans, our political system and our mindsets ???



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
4. I'd be happy to actually have some real argumentation. However, you must agree to leave your preconceived notions at the door. You must agree that when you make a misstatement and we correct you, you won't cling to that misstatement. If I stated that all people in France wear berets, because that's what I've seen on TV, and someone from France tells me they don't, and I CONTINUE TO INSIST that they do, I look like an idiot. And THAT is what you people have been doing.</font>

hmmm ... how should I take this one ?

You start off really well (I'd be happy to actually have some real argumentation), but right after that, you tell us (who are "we" btw ?) rules how to argue ???

I mean isn't argueing the act of discussing pros and cons for finding a common solution (consense) ???

What if you were wrong at the beginning and GW really didn't inform the UN/NATO whoever and just claims he did ???

You didn't even reply to my post, did you ?



<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gurm:
So, grow up a little. You want intelligent discourse? Let's have some. But first you have to check your ignorance at the door.

- Gurm
</font>

oh well ... how low can you go ?

Or was your post not even a reply to mine, but more like a general statement ?

Regards,
Maggi

Wombat
22nd February 2001, 09:00
I guess there must be a difference between intelligence and wisdom. Wisdom brings humility, and, well......

Maggi
22nd February 2001, 09:01
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Wombat:
I guess there must be a difference between intelligence and wisdom. Wisdom brings humility, and, well......</font>

Good point !

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Alec
22nd February 2001, 10:19
OK, one more reply...

Rags, Iīm not a hero, and you shouldnīt mistake national-scale wars with a punch in the face via internet (which Iīm not totally against, since you offended me personally without even knowing me). I donīt think violence is OK, as I never in my life used it beyond the Kung-Fu gym. Besides, you were the first one to throw rocks through words.

Gurm, you know something? You are seriously confused, as you fight ghosts all the time. I started here with a innocent (american-made) joke to lighten up the thread and you took it seriously. That is not a sign of intelligence nor of wisdom. Then you start talking about leaving preconceptions at the door. Preconceptions is thinking that the whole world is against you.

And you know where you can shove up your IQ. (Sorry, MURC, I love you, but I had to do this american-style au-revoir)

[This message has been edited by Alec (edited 22 February 2001).]

Nuno
22nd February 2001, 10:33
This is the saddest thread I ever saw on MURC forum.

Enough said.

impact
22nd February 2001, 11:51
The thread is turning the wrong way. We need an american who sees what Bush jr. really is and is willing to share his opinions with us eventho there is the risk of being attacked by certain zealots. (Notice that I din't mention any names, did I? So it's not about you, do you see your name anywhere, zealot? I don't think so. Bugger off then... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif)

Jorden
22nd February 2001, 12:14
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Joel said earlier: That may be part of the reason, but then again if they had not had those oilfields then Iraq would not have invaded them in the first place.</font>

True Joel, as to the PART of the reason. Iraq (read Saddam) has oil enough, and might want more, yet he attacked and overran Kuwait because it earlier was a part of Iraq, and he just wanted to get it back. He just doesn't like democracies or Kings, who take care of their people, instead of massing all their money on a bank-account for their own. Or something like that, for who knows how Saddam's brain works.

But you might want to see it like: Texas says it's an independed country within the USA. All it's oil is for the people of Texas only. How fast do you think the US will send in the National Guard or the army, to bring order to that state?<hr>
Matt, I meant blame instead of blaim. And you know it, but are too narrow-minded to read it.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Matt said further: You really expect these narrow-minded individuals to really see that they are being hypocrites? They tell us we are being improper by stereotyping yet they just got done doing it.</font>

That from someone who doesn't look beyond the street he lives in. Did you ever set foot outside your own state, or for that matter the USA, Matt? Did you ever try to soak up the life outside the USA? Did you ever try to go on a holiday to, for example, Greece, France, or any of the 'old countries', photograph the places where democracy started, read upon how democracy started, or maybe even watch Discovery Channel/National Geographic and watch what those documentaries say about "the old world"?

When I first read your commentary about narrow minded individuals, I thought you might've talked about the Arabs, the Muslims. But apparently upon further reading you talked about me, and about any general European who was in this thread.

I, for one, am open for a lot of things, Matt. A lot of things you might not even think about. That you might not even dream about. Yet, you can say from over there that I am a narrow-minded individual, just because of the couple of things I said in this thread. And maybe elsewhere.


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Also by Matt: You also expect them to understand why GW Bush is president even though they don't like him?</font>

Errrm, as far as I read in this thread, you didn't vote for him. So a question to you then: Do you like GW? Easy question from a narrow-minded to a god-oh-so-lucky-person-he-can-use-his-brain... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif<hr>

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">By Jason: But all the Europeans in here get offended when we make blanket generalizations about Europe, so is it not ok for us to get offended when you make blanket generalizations about the US?</font>

Maybe that's because Europe consists of a lot of countries, Jason. As an Italian, he might be an Italian, talked to as if he were an Italian, in his home language. Go to France as an English speaking person, and you'll hit a blank wall wherever you go, until you learn to speak French (stupid French, as they even expect me to speak it in The Netherlands! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif)

I am Dutch. It says so in my passport. It says somewhere in my passport that I am part of the European Union. In very small lettering. It doesn't say anywhere that I am European.
Is that narrow-minded then?

Neither you nor Matt know how we vote for our Government. I bet on that.

Besides, your point 3 (3. You just don't understand us. At all. You don't get the American system. You don't get American politics. And you don't get our mindset.)... Which American out there vows to be willing to understand how the general man outside of the USA thinks? How our countries work, how our politics work etc.?

I gotta say, Maggi: HUG !! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif
<hr>
Alec, I didn't quit speaking to Gurm or anyone in here. I just am not on the forums every day or on the internet for that matter. With no flatfee, cable, adsl or mxstream around I pay for every minute I am lingering here http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif
And Jason knows that http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Jord.


[This message has been edited by Jorden (edited 22 February 2001).]

paulcs
22nd February 2001, 12:26
Actually, I think I was the first to suggest that the US's Nato partners might have known of the attack ahead of time. I assume the Egyption, Saudi, and Israeli governments were informed as well.

I think Americans believe this sort of thing is done all the time. Allies are informed of "unilateral" military actions "through channels" to avoid misinterpretations and provide political cover.

It should be noted that many journalists here believe that this particular action was rooted in the Clinton administration. I personally do not like the current administration, but I doubt the president woke up one morning inspired, called Tony Blair on the phone, and a couple of days later the bombs began to drop. US foreign policy has been fairly consistant over the last three administrations, and pointing the finger at George Bush might be a little unfair in this particular case.

Personally, I don't think this thread was ever a debate about the action itself. Gratuitous potshots were taken which I (and others, I'm sure) found insulting.

I've noticed that people have avoided this type of thread since the American election. The fact that this degenerated into a nasty flame war was predictable, and I think it was poor judgement to start it.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Ant
22nd February 2001, 12:40
I have a simple philospophy, countries suck, religion sucks, the two things that get human beings fighting, well apart from beer, oh and football, and err women. Anyway things are getting a little too serious and Jorden asked me to close this thread so there it goes http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Jorden
22nd February 2001, 12:40
I started it with a joke, that fell wrong, Paul.

I wonder what this thread would've done, if it was started by someone from the USA though.

And about you thinking "I assume the Egyption, Saudi, and Israeli governments were informed as well." you can shut the assumation down. Saudi Arabia has called the bombing a dumb thing, if everyone in the Middle East wants to go back to their living their own life again.

China sold ground-to-air missiles to Iraq. The USA is mad about that. Iraq has fibre-optics attached to computers, running between their radar-sites. They took over "something the Serbs did", whereas one radar illuminates the plane, then before a radar lock is made, it shuts down, and the next radar installation takes over, firing at the airplanes.

I'm sorry to say that not the Serbs developped this attitude. As far as I know it were both the Americans and the Russians. I've read about those tactics in books by Clive Cussler and Tom Clancy before a journalist made the assumption that the Serbs thought it up.

Reading books helps, I assume http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Jord.