Valhalla Legends Archive

Quote from: Arta[vL] on June 12, 2003, 10:17 AM
War was not sanctioned and warranted. Bush failed to get UN approval. The war was illegal, and patently so.

- Pray review, United Nations Security Council's Resolution 1441 regarding the situation posed by Iraq's refusal to pro-actively disarm which was unanimously passed in 2002.

- Also, The United States does not recognize international law. As such, this attack was quite legal on their part;)

It's patently obvious to anyone with eyes and ears that there were no WMD in Iraq.

- Lol. That's just silly. It is not as if The United States suddenly "discovered" Iraq's WMD. These weapons were developed with equipment and materials -- including the anthrax and botulinum bacteria -- supplied by U.S companies under licences issued by the Reagan and Bush (First..) administrations. To deny their existense is silly (Sorry for no links to documentation, couldn't find but opinions.)

Even if there were, Iraq had absolutely no capacity to deploy them against US/UK/EU nations.

- Pray review, SS-N-1B SCUD mobile, ballistic missile system, quite capable of striking Israel (And/Or Kuwait,) a key ally of both The United States and The United Kingdom. As a legitimate member of NATO, Israel will be protected at all costs:)

It's also patently obvious that Iraq has no links with terrorists

- Pray review, the Ansar Al Islam organization openly engaged by units of the U.S' Italy-based 173Rd Airborne brigade in and around Northern Iraq.

- Hehe, you know I love you Arta, and I realize I'm not the best of all spellers, either, but are you aware of the definition of Patent?

I don't think the whole "why" questions are really all too thought-out. The simple fact of the matter is, Iraq's previous administration was an enemy of The United States and their allies -- For whatever reasons -- This, clearly, should be reason enough for Operation Iraqi Freedom, at least in my opinion.

This, is totaly ignoring the things Saddam's regime is guilty of.

These, were my unwanted 0.03 cents. Hope you enjoyed them;P

Grok: blah blah blah. You've said nothing of consequence. Of course no country 'needs' approval to go to war, that's not the point. To seek UN approval for war, which the US/UK did, and then go to war anyway after failing to get it, is a blatent middle finger to the rest of the world. Doctors from the US? Ok, perhaps. I assume you're referring to Doctors Without Borders and other similiar organisations? I'm referring to tangible aid provided by the US Government, not aid given by US citizens as members of an NGO.

As for 'getting involved' - Yeah. Consider then, why the US doesn't get involved in Tibet? Ireland? Indonesia? Zimbabwe? In fact, half the countries in Africa?

And as for the US's primary responsibility being to the citizens of the US, well, perhaps. I can see where you're coming from - but I disagree. As the world's last remaining superpower, the US has a wider responsibility to the rest of the world, one which it is spectactularly failing fulfil.

Dumb_Canadian:

Patent: adj. 2. (also ptnt) Obvious; plain. See Synonyms at apparent.

With regard to terrorism: The Kurds are (were) not controlled by  Hussien. They have been a rebel element since the beginning of his dictatorship, an element that the US has been glad to make use of in both Gulf wars.

Regarding Isreal: It is my opinion that Isreal's actions under Ariel Sharon have been almost universally reprihensible. They have bombed civilian targets, sent soldiers to civilian, palestinian-controlled areas, killed countless numbers of palestinians, civilian or otherwise, ignored previous treaties regarding the establishment of Isreali settlements, have acted with no regard for justice, reason, liberty, or in fact logic, and are totally undeservering of our protection.

Regarding WMD: Iraq's WMD were verifyably destroyed after the first Gulf war. This was documented by UNSCOM and is totally undeniable. If Iraq did manage to retain any biological/chemical weapons, they would be beyond their useful life by now and are now harmless goo. There's simply no possibility that they manufactured a nuclear weapon, leaving only the possibility that they bought one, which is highly unlikely. That's not to mention the fact that if they had any, they almost certainly would have used them in defence of an unprovoked, illegal attack on their country.

Regarding 1441: So far as I can see, it is the opinion of most legal authorities that this war was not sanctioned by 1441. Since I myself am not a legal authority, I cannot comment further - However, it flies in the face of logic to seek a new resolution for war when the old one would have done just as well, therefore, I conclude that the old resolution was insufficient.


I do not take this position as a result of blind anti-americanism (Grok), nor do I take it as a result of listening to others and making an uninformed decision (Dumb_Canadian). I have looked into this topic, researched the history a little, studied the Arab/Isreali confilct at High School, take an active interest in it and the Middle East in general.

Finally, I may or may not post further on this topic. I am totally secure in my position and do not feel the need to convince others that I'm right.

Quote from: Dumb_Canadian on June 12, 2003, 09:54 PM
This, is totaly ignoring the things Saddam's regime is guilty of.

What is he guilty of and how did these actions affect the US?

Quote from: Arta[vL] on June 12, 2003, 10:20 PM
Regarding WMD: Iraq's WMD were verifyably destroyed after the first Gulf war.

- Oh? And what happend to the ~3,000 tonnes of precursor chemicals, ~360 tonnes of bulk agent for chemical weapons and over 30,000 special munitions for delivery of chemical and biological agents.

Wait, wait. Granted, Saddam had 16 of the 30,000 ballistic missile systems destroyed. Certainly, that's pro-active disarmament as described in Resolution 1441:)

- On a side note of that, of the main 9 presidential palaces (Consisting of, according to my calculations, 805 buildings) 2 (259 buildings,) were checked by UNSCOM and UNMOVIC during their P.R campaigns, err, I mean inspections:)

Congratulations Arta, you're a posterchild for the liberal media's average brainwashed youth. Therefore, your completely wrong and mislead statements deserve absolutely no explanation.

Raven, everyone has a spin on events.  Granted Arta's are obviously liberally tilted -- he's a brit so it shouldn't be horribly unexpected.  But your comments reveal that you are quite conservative.  Same with Dumb_canadian.  I bet it is you two I saw on TV for weeks at those "Pro American" rallies.  Rallies which consisted of people waving flags, wearing flag TShirts, and carrying signs that read "I Support Our Troops" and the like.

That is one thing I detested during the whole event, from January - Present.  It is people like you (making a broad generalization) that claim people as being in some manner anti-American or un-American because they opposed/didn't support the war.  Fox News Channel lambasted you with the patrotism, and some of their guest speakers often boldly accused anti-war demonstrators and those opposed to the armed conflict as being un-American.  Branding someone as un-American based on the fact that they believe that human lives should not be risked to engage in an armed conflict (its not a god damned war) without clear and obvious reasons for such an engagement is ridiculous and ludicrous.  So, I beg of you to take your flag-- fly it and be proud -- but stop with the nonsense.

Anyone who has ever read the specifics of the UN Resolution in question (1441), you would know that most terms (for legal purposes) are so broad and vague as to be construed to meet anyones interpretation.  Who is to determine that the Hussein regime is "fully, and actively cooperating" and who also defines the "severe punishment".  Severe punishment could mean a plethora of things.... granted, it could be interpreted as an armed conflict, but increased sanctions, tighter restrictions, et al could also fill the bill.  This conflict with Iraq is questionable mainly because it is relying on the premise of pre-emptive assault.  Therefore there must be both a CLEAR and PRESENT danger to this country, and the amount of evidence released and the quality of that evidence are in question.  Thereby, the Bush Administration comes into question over the whole legality of the conflict, and whether it knowingly misrepresented (or encrouraged or abaded the misrepresentation of) information to Congress and the World Community.

Hrmm.

Well, indulgence, your ignorant political labels certainly has abolished any interests I had in this debate:\

Quote from: indulgence on June 13, 2003, 12:10 AM
I bet it is you two I saw on TV for weeks at those "Pro American" rallies.  Rallies which consisted of people waving flags, wearing flag TShirts, and carrying signs that read "I Support Our Troops" and the like.

My teacher has a good name for a lot of them, Sunshine Patriots.

I like people who think that anyone who's liberal or has a different point of view is 'brainwashed'. It's like they think that everything bad is the fault of people that aren't them; that people who think other things are in a club that has a secret handshake and meetings where they plot to destroy the world and currupt all things good by being nice to people instead of putting them in prison/killing them/dropping bombs on their country.

To be quite candid, I wonder how possible it is for the majority of Americans to make an informed decision on the subject. The American media is so sickeningly patriotic and introspective that it borders on isolationist propaganda... makes you wonder, really.

Aww, no fair!  You said you weren't going to post again so I also abstained.  Empty promises, like when I didn't get that football helmet for my 7th birthday  You suck.

Anyway,   It is below you to claim that other people just can't make an informed decision.  Or, is it?  In your earlier posts you stated a number of things as absolute truths, with no possibility of there being a different opinion based on other viewpoints.  You bring a really big stick to your arguments, and claim that all those opposing viewpoints only are possible for ignorant people.  Your last post even calls them brainwashed(Americans cannot be informed because of American media), while you yourself bash people who call others brainwashed.

You, above all people, are the only one capable of smelling bullshit when listening to news reports.  Americans, especially, watch and believe everything they see/hear/read, without a grain of doubt.

When you get a little older, wiser, and more experienced, you'll see that most people in the world are pretty much the same.  They largely have the same day-to-day problems and worry about the same things.  Centrally, those things close to them -- their family, their neighborhood, their town.  If they are blessed, they have the luxury of politicising and philosophising about national and even world problems.

One piece of wisdom I can give you is there are many different "right" answers for such problems.  What is right for one might be reprehensible for another.  A third and fourth persons could have equally distant opinions of what is right for the problem given their viewpoint.  None of them are wrong, except from the other direction.

I used to be like you.  I knew for a fact what was right and wrong, guided by my life's learning, and thinking, to date.  Only after I toured the world, listened to citizens of 12 foreign countries, and really paid attention to their local perspectives was I able to grow beyond my handicap of being so right.

Quote from: Dumb_Canadian on June 12, 2003, 11:14 PM
- Oh? And what happend to the ~3,000 tonnes of precursor chemicals, ~360 tonnes of bulk agent for chemical weapons and over 30,000 special munitions for delivery of chemical and biological agents.

Yes, where are they?  Obviously they aren't in Iraq because they haven't turned up!

It's actually quite simple. Anyone who doesn't have a conservative opinion is wrong. If you're British, it might be ok to be liberal, but if you're American, if you're liberal, you're wrong. And there, that's the absolute unbiased truth.

Aww, no fair!  You said you weren't going to post again so I also abstained.  Empty promises, like when I didn't get that football helmet for my 7th birthday  You suck.


lol, I said may or may not


Anyway,   It is below you to claim that other people just can't make an informed decision.  Or, is it?  In your earlier posts you stated a number of things as absolute truths, with no possibility of there being a different opinion based on other viewpoints.  You bring a really big stick to your arguments, and claim that all those opposing viewpoints only are possible for ignorant people.  Your last post even calls them brainwashed(Americans cannot be informed because of American media), while you yourself bash people who call others brainwashed.


Ok, that's fair, but misunderstood - I shall clarify. I didn't say it's impossible for americans to make informed decisions (that would be silly). The intent of my post was to point out that the nature of the American media makes it harder for Americans to do so than for people in other countries. In addition I most certainly did not at any point state that people who disagree with me only do so because they're ignorant (shame on you ). My brainwashing comment was specficially in response to Raven calling me the same; in all seriousness, none of us are *really* brainwashed. There are those, however, who tend to accept the word of those in power without question, and it tends to be conservatives, and it tends not to be liberals - I shall leave it at that.


You, above all people, are the only one capable of smelling bullshit when listening to news reports.  Americans, especially, watch and believe everything they see/hear/read, without a grain of doubt.


Some do, some don't. The point is that *smelling* the bullshit isn't enough. You need to say so, and a few of the people who say so need to go do something about it. This seems not to happen so much in the US as in other countries because of so-called 'sunshine patriotism'. I'm not one of those people who goes around saying americans are all stupid and soforth - I think that's silly. I don't think the percentile of ignorant americans is very much different from the percentile of ignorant brits, australians, iraqis (haha), or anyone else for that matter. However, I do think that American culture doesn't lend itsself to speaking out. Few people protest. Many that did immediately stopped after the conflict started. Many don't say anything in fear of being branded unpatriotic and/or unamerican. That's very *very* different from other places in the world - the UK being a good example - where no one considers it unpatriotic to call tony blair a slimy, conspiring little fuck.


When you get a little older, wiser, and more experienced, you'll see that most people in the world are pretty much the same.  They largely have the same day-to-day problems and worry about the same things.  Centrally, those things close to them -- their family, their neighborhood, their town.  If they are blessed, they have the luxury of politicising and philosophising about national and even world problems.


I don't need to be older and wiser to know that


One piece of wisdom I can give you is there are many different "right" answers for such problems.  What is right for one might be reprehensible for another.  A third and fourth persons could have equally distant opinions of what is right for the problem given their viewpoint.  None of them are wrong, except from the other direction.


Very much so. That said, it is possible to set your own viewpoint aside, and examine an argument logically - to break it down. To debate it's merits. It's fun too


I used to be like you.  I knew for a fact what was right and wrong, guided by my life's learning, and thinking, to date.  Only after I toured the world, listened to citizens of 12 foreign countries, and really paid attention to their local perspectives was I able to grow beyond my handicap of being so right.


I don't think I am like that. I have opinions, certainly, I value them, and I'll debate them with great enthusiasm - but i'm not closed to the possibility that I'm wrong, nor am I closed to new ideas or philosophies. I love new ideas and new points of view. Other points of vew are great. The only way to define one's own point of view is by assimiliating those of others and comparing the 2 (or hopefully 3,4, 5, 6...n). I also have travelled - visiting America was a revelation in some respects - and meeting others and hearing their views was very valuable to me.

My point is, don't mistake my enthusiasm for closed mindedness.

Since we have come to terms on everything else, I address this morsel:

Quote from: Arta[vL] on June 13, 2003, 10:52 AMSome do, some don't. The point is that *smelling* the bullshit isn't enough. You need to say so, and a few of the people who say so need to go do something about it. This seems not to happen so much in the US as in other countries because of so-called 'sunshine patriotism'. I'm not one of those people who goes around saying americans are all stupid and soforth - I think that's silly. I don't think the percentile of ignorant americans is very much different from the percentile of ignorant brits, australians, iraqis (haha), or anyone else for that matter. However, I do think that American culture doesn't lend itsself to speaking out. Few people protest. Many that did immediately stopped after the conflict started. Many don't say anything in fear of being branded unpatriotic and/or unamerican. That's very *very* different from other places in the world - the UK being a good example - where no one considers it unpatriotic to call tony blair a slimy, conspiring little fuck.

I'm interested in how you have adopted this opinion about Americans being afraid to speak their minds out of fear of being branded unpatriotic or un-American?  Seriously, we have no shortage of people who speak their mind.  There are plenty of people who disagree as well.  All sides call the other sides various names (such as you have no problem calling Blair names).  But you'll find an almost universal agreement that the right to speak one's mind and opinion is almost an American responsibility as a citizen.

I'm thinking you might be believing too much anti-American spin TV over there.  You pretty much think Americans aren't capable of critical thought, like the rest of the world.  Where DID you get this idea?

See South Park 705: I'm a little bit country.


The magic of the united states (as said by our founding fathers) is that they can attack another country (ordered by the president) while making it look like they don't want to go to war (because of people protesting).  It's the country's ability to say one thing and do another that gives it great power, because nobody wants to fuckwith them (or they'll get their asses kicked) but the only person they hate is the government (because the protesters make it look like they don't want the war).

I know I butchered the idea, but they say it a lot better on south park.