Aranuil wrote:Not that I really think Iraq is much of a threat...
Neither do I, and thus why I see the use of military force as being a bit overzealous.
Moderator: TheMachine

The fact is kyoukan, like it or not... the USA, "our" country for the most part of the people here, will in fact KILL as needed... thousands of innocents, IF in the end it means stopping a few of those "innocents" from later on becoming "terrorists" that would kill our own. Collateral damage if you will...kyoukan type-R wrote:And that line of unthinking is about to kill a couple hundred thousand innocent Iraqi civilians.Aranuil wrote: I'll be blunt. As long as my family/friends and the interests of my country and our allies are safe, he can do anything he damn well pleases.
But yeah, in times like this we really should be thinking about the livelihood of those Texas billionaires and massive manufacturing corporations with defense department contracts.
lollerz go usa lets roll nuke all brown people i speak for my country's foreign policyXanupox wrote:As for the rest of you, just pray the USA's foriegn policy continues to favor you and the county you reside in... or you too may face the end of her barrel, much similar to the terrorist harboring and backing nations such as Iraq. Afghanistan was just the start of things to come... I suggest all the religious to start reading "Revelations".

This pretty much sums up how god damn fucking stupid you are when it comes to other countries. I wonder if you could even find Canada on a map.Pubin wrote:natural resourse-poor country like Canada.

You could cut off those resources for about a day and then you'd get bitch-slapped hard by the US. Don't make us come up there and take care of your French problem. While you may have the resources that the United States needs, you're powerless to stop us from using them.kyoukan type-R wrote:
Natural resource poor.. Okay.. We'll talk natural resource poor after we cut off half your water supply, practially the entire western and central USA's power, most of your fish, and 75% of your softwood lumber. You people are such arrogant consumerists you don't even know where your fucking stuff comes from.

I wasn't talking to you. Shocker, huh?Winnow wrote:I didn't say we'd invade Canada. That's as foolish a notion as Canada cutting off resources to the United States. You can't do that! We love to burn up resources. Unlike you, we use more then one sheet of toilet paper to wipe our asses. It takes a lot of your trees to wipe our asses.
The rest of the world would probably sit around if you cut off our resources except maybe the middle east. They'd be laughing because they know better : )
Now quit trying to hijack this thread and get back to the costumes.

Pubin wrote:3 to 4 times as much natural resource as the U.S.? Even you must realize how incorrect that statement is. Energy? Do some research and don't pretend to be an expert about this shit.
My last job before my current one was a copy editor for the vancouver sun's business and technology section. I am an expert about this shit.
And has 10 times the population, and about fifteen times the energy consumption.The U.S. produces roughly 6 times the energy that canada does...
Well yeah of course you do just to promote trade, because the USA is so altruistic and wonderful. Well that and the rolling brownouts in California and South Oregon because Canadian hydro companies can't pump any more power into your country until PG&E (OOPS!) and Enron (UH OH!) pay their fucking bills and upgrade their power infrastructure.if we buy energy from you it's simply a function of promoting trade, not because we are going to be walking to work and reading by candle light without it.
Poor choice of words on my part. I mean bottled and consumable water. Unsurprisingly the US is #1 for wasting this product as well.Half of the water supply? I feel confident that even you are able-minded enough to read up on that and realize that you aren't even remotely close.
I don't even know what this even means in relation to a coherent argument but okay.Lumber? Ah yes. We do prefer to let you cut down your trees to enable the building of new housing etc. Lord knows Americans want their big beautiful new homes built on land with SOME existing timber. Lets not deplete our land's beautiful forests. You must realize that Americans value their spacious living and bear in mind that we are not forced to cram 91% of our population within 300 kilometers from the border.



easy to blame it on one party.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: Second, the markets have taken further hits from businesses that were operating illegally under the Clinton administration and have now been caught red handed for Bush to deal with.
my understanding is that Al Queda is not a big fan of the secular government in Iraq. While i think that Iraq certainly has ties to some major terrorist organizations, i don't think Bin Laden's is one of them. Don't confuse the crazy dictator that is Saddam with some sort of widespread Jihad. His motives have little to do with religion, beyond the limited amount of use he gets out of it for political purposes.Third, Saddam and his buddies in Iraq HAVE had a direct impact on terrorism. They have funded, hosted, trained, and supplied terrorists in the Al Queida organization.
no it doesnt.Sixth, the Israel/Palestine fighting reks of Revelations. It is just a matter of time before all hell breaks loose.
True it was in a very mild repression, that was showing only signs of growing worse.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:First of all, the US economy was in a very mild repression up until the point that some religious nuts decided to destroy a major WORLD trade center.
Don't assume that they were acting illegaly because Clinton was in office. Association-Causation is just as wrong as being flat out wrong. You can bet your ass businesses were operating illegally prior to any of us even thinking about the possibility.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Second, the markets have taken further hits from businesses that were operating illegally under the Clinton administration and have now been caught red handed for Bush to deal with.
That really isn't the point. Just because I could (hypothetically) kick Voronwe's ass doesn't mean it's right to do so. In fact, your example, if taken to an individual level, is known as assaulted robbery, which is illegal.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Fourth, if the US was ever cornered and had its back against the wall and was about to die off because of the lack of resources, I would be VERY afraid if I was a country rich in resources. I don't care how badly we are down, when you put the people of this country into a spot where they have to fight to survive, then you had better be prepared to get your ass kicked.
I can't tell you the vast number of people who tell me on a weekly basis how much situation x parallels the prophecies of Revelations. And everytime situation x is something different. If you try hard enough, you can believe anything, even when you know it's not true. Be careful.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: Sixth, the Israel/Palestine fighting reks of Revelations. It is just a matter of time before all hell breaks loose.

I don't know that that's the plan, and I also don't know that the ultimate goal is to have Sadaam step down. I believe that having Sadaam comply with the UN declarations is the plan. That includes allowing weapons inspectors to do their job, and prevention of Iraq creating/acquiring weapons of mass destruction. I don't have a problem with this.Bombing Iraq (Bush's proposed plan) will not cause Saddam to step down...
Like you said, only speculation. I think he'd trade the excuse for not being able to go after Sadaam any day of the week.And, this is only speculation, but i'd wager pretty heavily that Bush wanted to play toy soldiers with Saddam a year and fourteen days ago, but now he has an excuse.



Hmmm, doesn't say didly about supporting a political parties agenda there, does it. Some of you need to go back and read what Ben Franklin and company had in mind when they created our nation.to the republic, for which it stands





Only because the pile of goat shit that is Saddam will continue to hide in the center of the largest city he can find, shielding himself with as many of the 'innocent people of Iraq' as he can throw in front of the advancing tank line.And that line of unthinking is about to kill a couple hundred thousand innocent Iraqi civilians.
Uhh, the only thing around Baghdad is 100s of miles of desert. Fleeing it in a rush is just a slower death sentence. Use your brain.Xanupox wrote:The threats of high civilian losses and the like are all overdone. The Iraqi civilians will flee the cities and there will be only shells left remaining for the battles to be fought under...
You didn't stop at Baghdad. You shelled the fucking christ out of it with artillery and bombed a good portion of it's infrastructure. Don't you remember Peter Arnette and Wolf Blitzer hiding under a bed on CNN blubbering for their mommies?This man is an oppressor not only to the world, but to his own people. There was a mistake made 10 years ago when we stopped short of Bagdhad, this time we will not make that mistake again.
Actually, the last i heard about this was that congress had a bill for $40 million (this was two months ago) that if passed, would go to the Kurds. Or as they put it the "Northern Iraq Alliance". But I haven't heard anything more on it. Even so, they are our allies if needed.kyoukan type-R wrote:The kurds have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this conflict. Maybe if they had oil teh US would give a shit about their future, but they don't, so they are fucked.