|
Post by strangelilboi on May 12, 2003 9:01:30 GMT -5
Youre free to express your opinions, but personal attacks are unacceptable
I do apologise for my attack on OBR but sometimes he jsut really annoys me with his blatabnt bigheadedness. I mean seriosuly, the way you answer posts is like the world revovles around America.
Its about time tha you realise and accept that the world is more than jsut America. I'm not saying in anyway that America is not important. But the world has other people in it that are justas important as any american is.
OBR, you seem to have no concern for the rest of the world.
That is exactly the kind of thinking that makes people want to terrorize the US.
She's right in that the way you post incites anger in people. I mean seriously, dont you think that some of your replies are offensive?
You won't get anywhere by crashing planes into buildings.
And I think so? I never said that, but it jsut seems like you assume that the worlds problems can be solved by brute force. Okay yes it kind of worked in Iraq. But in Afganistan... i dont think so. They arent better off just because they havent got any crazy religious people in control of their country. You think all they wanted in their life was McDonalds and MTV and not to wear their headscarves?
They wore them because they wanted to, for religious reasons, not because they were forced to. Giving them Happy Meals is not liberation.
I do think and have always thought that the Iraqis should be allowed to solve their own problems. America on their other hand pushed this war through so passionately because:
1. They brought Saddam to power 2. Strategic reasons, ie to secure the oil in the gulf.
I applaud Blair and you should too, it's not everyday you get a leader who doesn't care what others think and bow to pressure.
Erm...yeah and he said 'no' to Bush's pressure did he? Ha, rubbish! All he did was give into peer pressure!
Because it is a campaign against terrorism.
Well if so, what about the terrorism in Sri Lanka that has claimed over 100,000 lives. Why is there going to be nothing done there? Honestly, we can see through your fake 'anti-terrorism' mission as clear as crystal. The least you could do is stop lying about it!
You pro-military Americans seriously need some help with your ideas on what your position is in the world. The world is our world. It is NOT America's little . . . Been there, done that.
Exactly as I were saying! With your attitude, you are seriously looking for trouble.
|
|
|
Post by m on May 12, 2003 12:28:51 GMT -5
I do apologise for my attack on OBR but sometimes he jsut really annoys me with his blatabnt bigheadedness. I mean seriosuly, the way you answer posts is like the world revovles around America.
I haven't attacked anyone, and you even slammed somone who agreed with you which I find puzzeling. I have strong opinions as do others. As to my responses, the questions are asked, i.e. "What would happen if America . . . Why does America . . . ?" if you're going to ask something about America, expect answers concerning same.
Its about time tha you realise and accept that the world is more than jsut America.
Never thought otherwise.
OBR, you seem to have no concern for the rest of the world.
You don't know me then.
She's right in that the way you post incites anger in people. I mean seriously, dont you think that some of your replies are offensive?
I am answering her questions in a way that is respectable. I do not resort to (cough) name calling and I disagree with her views but respect them and my responses are to invite further discussion on the matter. Furthermore I do not take offense to her questions, as they stimulate and carry the discussion further. That's why we're here, right?
And I think so? I never said that, but it jsut seems like you assume that the worlds problems can be solved by brute force.
Yes, the US military reports to me.
Okay yes it kind of worked in Iraq. But in Afganistan... i dont think so. They arent better off just because they havent got any crazy religious people in control of their country. You think all they wanted in their life was McDonalds and MTV and not to wear their headscarves?
Assumptions?
They wore them because they wanted to, for religious reasons, not because they were forced to. Giving them Happy Meals is not liberation.
Sure beats beans and rice I guess.
I do think and have always thought that the Iraqis should be allowed to solve their own problems. America on their other hand pushed this war through so passionately because:
How were the Iraqi's going to solve their own problems when they lived under threat of imprisonment, torture or death?
Erm...yeah and he said 'no' to Bush's pressure did he? Ha, rubbish! All he did was give into peer pressure!
And what does he have to gain? Blair didn't agree with everything America did, and still doesn't. The British army kicks ass, and I'm glad they were with us.
Well if so, what about the terrorism in Sri Lanka that has claimed over 100,000 lives. Why is there going to be nothing done there?
But you said: but it jsut seems like you assume that the worlds problems can be solved by brute force
It would take military action, and no one wants that, right? It's got to be one way or the other. Maybe the people of Sri Lanka should start some campaign to the UN to get some action taken against the guerella fighters there, but understand the action taken would be an armed conflict. Now you tell me. Would you honestly want to see three huge American aircraft carriers just off your shores? My guess is the answer is no.
Exactly as I were saying! With your attitude, you are seriously looking for trouble.
Been there done that, meaning, We entered Iraq, ousted Saddam, and now are helping to rebuilding the country. The protests though heard, did not free Iraq. I have been over and over this subject with others for months. It's been discussed to death and now the war in Iraq is over. We can't go back and undo, so we must move forward. The UN failed, action had to be taken.
|
|
|
Post by strangelilboi on May 12, 2003 13:16:54 GMT -5
okay... i am now annoyed at feeling slightly humbled..
Hmm...fine sorry about the name calling. Yeah course i know the British Army kicks ass! I'm gonna be joining either the Army or the Royal Airforce soon.
Just thought I should say that. I shall reply later properly.
I still think that if u do want to go military, why not on the terrorists in Sri Lanka?
|
|
|
Post by m on May 12, 2003 14:04:16 GMT -5
As to the name calling: Just watch it. You can be civil, even if you disagree, but you don't have to let go of your passion. You know what you beleive in, so hang onto that.
Now, the question remains: Do you want the American military on your soil?
|
|
|
Post by -*- Little Miss Strawberry -*- on May 12, 2003 14:48:02 GMT -5
It's a tough one, because I do agree with strangelilboi, because I have been getting increasingly irritated with some people's comments (not referring just to OBR so don't accuse me of anything). Some have been very arrogant and unhelpful and it's just... argh, irritating.
Anyways. Discussion of that issue over.
|
|
|
Post by m on May 13, 2003 6:09:41 GMT -5
But since you brought up my name, does that mean I am arrogant because I disagree with you? And unhelpful? There are many articles and sources given to support our position.
So about this bombing in Ryadh, Saudi Arabia; ten Americans were killed in the blast. Now we did sign an agreement with the Saudis that we will leave, but as I have been saying over and over since 9-11, it doesn't matter what we do to appease terrorists, they will still want blood. Saudi Arabia can't have it both ways. They cannot have military protection just on a whim.
|
|
|
Post by strangelilboi on May 13, 2003 12:28:09 GMT -5
Hey... jsut because there was a bomb in Saudi Arabia does not mean it has anything to do with Saudi's, Arabs or Muslims!
There are plenty of people in the world that dislike the West. It could well be manic North Koreans.
Yes, it could well be al Qaeda.
Thing is I really dont like the way people label it as 'they disagree with American policies, they must have planted a bomb there!'
I'd like to point out that Bin Laden's family although wealthy and unfluential had chosed ages ago to disown him. If you dont know, he is very much the black sheep. And no real normal muslims or Arabs agree with his attitude towards the non-muslim world and America.
And honestly it seems like a lot of you belive in the 'If you arent with us, youre against us policy'.
Its sad.
|
|
|
Post by m on May 14, 2003 6:54:21 GMT -5
There is a deep seated hatred of Americans in Saudi Arabia by the general populace. It would not surprise me in the least if the Saudi Government backed this latest attack. Osama may be a black sheep, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have allies. One can always say one thing and do another.
Yes it is sad, because all the political correctness isn't going to stop it. Let's face it, the world sucks, we can only make it suck a little less.
|
|
|
Post by -*- Little Miss Strawberry -*- on May 14, 2003 9:59:51 GMT -5
Is it just me, but I thought that the Saudi Government was pro-West?
Yes it is sad, because all the political correctness isn't going to stop it. Let's face it, the world sucks, we can only make it suck a little less.
Doesn't concern you, if only a little bit, that a lot of the world seems to hate you? The problem is, America's plan of, as you say, "making it suck a little less" often provokes more anger that it creates goodness.
|
|
|
Post by m on May 14, 2003 11:09:20 GMT -5
The Saudi Gov't has never been pro-west. It is a sticky alliance. They were slow to react to this latest attack after we told them it was going to happen. We signed an agreement that we would be pulling our military out of there by the end of this summer. We were still attacked to what's the diff?
Doesn't concern you, if only a little bit, that a lot of the world seems to hate you?
It does concern me. As to the example above, even when we work with those who have a problem with us, it doesn't matter, they'll find something else to complain about.
|
|
|
Post by strangelilboi on May 14, 2003 13:34:45 GMT -5
Well if the US stopped meddling in Middle East affairs where they are not wanted, maybe then they would become more popular? Dont you think mate?
In reality the US has no business in the Middle East save for Israel, but I'm sure they can handle their own affairs. Either way its not like the US makes the Israeli situation fairer.
About Iraq maybe your o-so-clever government shouldnt have given Saddam damn weapons in the first place!
I dont see how governments can change the opinion of the public. Oh i suppose there's so such things as free speech in America.. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on May 14, 2003 16:20:47 GMT -5
<<Well if the US stopped meddling in Middle East affairs where they are not wanted, maybe then they would become more popular?>>
Our goal is not to be popular, it is to maintain stability in a very hostile region. It is in our national interest to have a stable Middle East, and due in large part to the massive dependence on Middle Eastern oil.
What other nation has the influence and resources to ensure a stable ME?
<<About Iraq maybe your o-so-clever government shouldnt have given Saddam damn weapons in the first place!>>
Maybe the entire Western world shouldnt have supported Sadaam during the Iran-Iraq War? Nearly all Western countries supported Iraq through many means, and then he stabbed us in back. Heck, Sadaam and Chirac are college buddies.
<<I dont see how governments can change the opinion of the public. Oh i suppose there's so such things as free speech in America.. Oh well.>>
Im not really sure what you mean, most people supported the war in Iraq because it was the right thing to do. Everyone has free speech, but no one has to listen to them.
|
|
|
Post by strangelilboi on May 14, 2003 17:01:46 GMT -5
most people supported the war in Iraq because it was the right thing to do.
No, you personally believe it was the right thing to do. Most people disagreed with the war. Our forces went to war against a truckload of opposition.
Dont speak for the world please. It is a very patronising habit.
What other nation has the influence and resources to ensure a stable ME?
Either way, its none of your business. The oil you pay for...you shouldnt really be telling them how to run their lives should you? First clear your own troubles up.
Millions of your own countrymen live in poverty. Heck we casestudy parts of Los Angeles for geography all the time. It is one of the most deprived parts of the world. Oh wow, you got the technology and the resources.
First fix your own problems; then preach to others. I dont see Iraqi kids gunning down their teachers. I dont see that happening anywhere else in the world. Do you?
Everyone has free speech, but no one has to listen to them
Yes, but OBR seems to think that Saudi civilians dont have a right to voice their opinions jsut because they disagree with American policies.
Heck we disagree. You lot best deal with it. The US cant take criticism... And you try to run the world ha!
|
|
|
Post by paradoxPanda on May 14, 2003 18:05:26 GMT -5
I dont see Iraqi kids gunning down their teachers. I dont see that happening anywhere else in the world.
Not to sound pro-war, but a lot of that is that in other countries education is much stricter and punishments are harsher, whereas in the US children have a great deal of educational freedom.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on May 14, 2003 23:16:50 GMT -5
<<No, you personally believe it was the right thing to do. Most people disagreed with the war. Our forces went to war against a truckload of opposition.
Dont speak for the world please. It is a very patronising habit.>>
I was speaking about America, where the people overwhelmingly supported the President in his decision to go to war.
<<Either way, its none of your business.>>
You criticize, and yet you do not present a solution. America gives more foreign aid that any other country in the world, maybe thats none of our bussiness as well? Was Hitler really any of our business? We tried isolationism, and it failed horribly. Yes, we have problems at home as well, but as the lone superpower of the world, we have many international obligations, that no one else is willing, or is capable handling.
|
|