Series of Explosions in London

ShinHell9 · July 8, 2005

xechnao said:
Want something on topic?
US can bomb and kill 50 Iraqi civilians. And there's no continuing TV Coverage or special front coverage in the newspapers.
Unless people start to consider doing something about it, when realizing that it's our fault and our doing the condition of poverty of the other nations, I could just only say what I just said above about them.
Not to say that some of us consider normal that we should exploit others -for our advantage- when we can, if that gives us some profit.

In a way it's kind of like that "hate crime" Howard beach story. You know the one where a black guy went to Howard beach at 3 am to steal a car and was beaten with a bat. Why is it that if a bunch of black guys kick the shit out of a white guy in harlem it's not a "hate crime"? It's all just this perspective that most of America has on things that they're pretty stubborn about. It's only been a couple of years since segregation and such we still have a long ways to go. It's the same with whoever we war against, if we kill their civilians it's never really reported through major news venues, probably because most Americans will say "bah, they deserve it!".

xechnao · July 8, 2005

Walter said:
As I said, I believe the Iraq war offered them a chance to leapfrog themselves into Democracy. Hussein was simply an obstacle in the path to this. Using this logic, the war was necessary to properly implement such additions as "roads, schools universities..." etc. Look at North Korea. The US has been giving Kim Jong Il financial aid for years, but there's no way to determine or enforce how the aid is used. It could be, as is popularly believed here in the west, that he's simply using it to strengthen and feed his military. The same could have been said about Hussein.

Hussein was given weapons by us first place. Then we sanctioned Iraq to poverty second place. Iraq's condition is our fault.
As far as your democracy check this out:
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Margolis_Eric/2005/06/26/pf-1105205.html

Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
Putting his country into debt. Then making it even worse with his invasion of Iran.

The Iraq-Iran war was promoted by US. About Kuweit, well it was kind of a trap IMO. He asked Clinton about it, and Clinton said that he could do as he wished. Then Clinton attacked. BTW, there was some sense about Iraq's invasion in Kuweit, in means that it belonged to Iraq. And Iraq can't be put into debt by itself. They have the oil. We put it in debt by sanctions and have it pay for US first Gulf War.

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · July 8, 2005

xechnao said:
The Iraq-Iran war was promoted by US. About Kuweit, well it was kind of a trap IMO. He asked Clinton about it, and Clinton said that he could do as he wished. Then Clinton attacked. BTW, there was some sense about Iraq's invasion in Kuweit, in means that it belonged to Iraq. And Iraq can't be put into debt by itself. They have the oil. We put it in debt by sanctions and have it pay for US first Gulf War.

The only reason we sponsored Iraq was because Iran took over our embassy. "The enemy of our enemy is our friend" took into place. If Iraq had never invaded Iran we wouldn't have sent them shit. So instead of him invading another country he could have done things for his country. No Iraq invaded Kuwait because it didn't want to pay the debts it owed them, aside from that the claims Iraq made about Kuwait being part of it only worked if you think Iraq had the rights to a country it owned about a 1000 years ago. The UN put sanctions on Iraq mostly because of him ignoring the UN, because it started two wars against neighboring countries.

xechnao · July 8, 2005

Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
The only reason we sponsored Iraq was because Iran took over our embassy. "The enemy of our enemy is our friend" took into place. If Iraq had never invaded Iran we wouldn't have sent them shit. So instead of him invading another country he could have done things for his country. No Iraq invaded Kuwait because it didn't want to pay the debts it owed them, aside from that the claims Iraq made about Kuwait being part of it only worked if you think Iraq had the rights to a country it owned about a 1000 years ago. The UN put sanctions on Iraq mostly because of him ignoring the UN, because it started two wars against neighboring countries.

This is true, but it's naive to say that US didn't play it's part into having Hussein decide about starting the war with Iran.
It's the same thing as it has been with albanians in Yugoslavia, it's the same thing with financing and influencing various groups and activities. Modern rose revolutions are the same thing but with peaceful means.

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · July 8, 2005

xechnao said:
This is true, but it's naive to say that US didn't play it's part into having Hussein decide about starting the war with Iran.

Maybe, but US support for Iraq didn't start untill 1981, the Iraq Iran War started in 1980. So unless they had a magic 8 ball to tell them they were going to get support from just about every country in the world [US, Soviet Union, France, ect] I don't know how that could have effected it.

Alucard · July 8, 2005

I got one for ya, the US gave an insane leader chemical weapons. A missile is bad but that is all he needed. The US knew from Hussein's own mouth and previous actions that he had no problem using weapons on civilians. The enemy of my enemy has gotten the US in bed with a lot of Hitler wanna be dictators and CIA operations have given birth to even more. This is US actions coming back to bite it in the ass aswell as those of US allies.

At least Dengue fever released by the CIA in Cuba on civilians hasn't come back to join in the ass biting

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · July 8, 2005

Xechano this is why no one can have a serious discussion, because there's always one ass clown that takes every single thing said and trashes out at people. From what I've learned about what the US gave Iraq, it trained Iraqi piolets, provided photos of key Iranian areas so the Iraqes knew what to attack and what not. From my under standing the Russians handed them Chemical weapons. I could be wrong though. Anyways, Xechano how's the wife and kids?

Alucard · July 8, 2005

Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
Xechano this is why no one can have a serious discussion, because there's always one ass clown that takes every single thing said and trashes out at people.

I have a right after the US used Dengue on my people.

From what I've learned about what the US gave Iraq, it trained Iraqi piolets, provided photos of key Iranian areas so the Iraqes knew what to attack and what not.

Even though Saddam had a record of attacking civilians and first thing he did after getting weapons was test them on his own people. All civilian. God bless America.

From my under standing the Russians handed them Chemical weapons.

Does that make US actions any more right?

This country has more skeletons in it's closet than a serial killer.

Begemot · July 8, 2005

Rage Incarnate said:
Does that make US actions any more right?

No, just run of the mill for a world power. Morality generally doesn't enter into it. World leaders have but one primary goal, and that's to do what is best for their own country.

Now the rub of course is figuring out what's best.

This country has more skeletons in it's closet than a serial killer.

Well, we still might have a bit of catching up with major European powers, just on the basis of them being around so much longer. But given the growth in world popilation, maybe not.

Alucard · July 8, 2005

Woland said:
No, just run of the mill for a world power. Morality generally doesn't enter into it. World leaders have but one primary goal, and that's to do what is best for their own country.

Well for a country that claims moral superiority over the world doesn't that strike you as odd?

Well, we still might have a bit of catching up with major European powers, just on the basis of them being around so much longer. But given the growth in world popilation, maybe not.

I would equate the US with Germany actually. And no, O'Reillyites, I am not taking that back.

I actually find it interesting that Britain has been attacked for years by terrorists and has had bombings yet they don't have a Patriot Act like law.

Begemot · July 8, 2005

Rage Incarnate said:
Well for a country that claims moral superiority over the world doesn't that strike you as odd?

Nope, when everyone else does dirty deeds, they claimed moral superiority as well.

I would equate the US with Germany actually. And no, O'Reillyites, I am not taking that back.

It's overstatements like these that defeat your own arguments. When was the last time the U.S. rounded up a bunch of its own citizens and sent them off to die in camps by the millions? And then invaded other nations to do the same there?

It's like the Amnesty International report that had a sentence comparing Gitmo to the Gulags, it made the report look like a farce, even though there is plenty to object to in regards to Guantonimo Bay.

I actually find it interesting that Britain has been attacked for years by terrorists and has had bombings yet they don't have a Patriot Act like law.

Probably because they have been attacked by terrorists for years, so they don't overreact.

mahlernut · July 9, 2005

Woland said:
Probably because they have been attacked by terrorists for years, so they don't overreact.

The United Kingdoms had some rather interesting "anti-terrorist" laws on the books for a couple decades, allowing them disturbingly broad powers when it came to the incarceration and interrogation of suspeted terrorists (aka anyone who happened to be Irish). Check out the Guildford Four case for one of the more public instances of abuse.

Alucard · July 9, 2005

Woland said:
Nope, when everyone else does dirty deeds, they claimed moral superiority as well.

Anyone as blatantly right now? "We are the envy of the world" Indeed.

It's overstatements like these that defeat your own arguments. When was the last time the U.S. rounded up a bunch of its own citizens and sent them off to die in camps by the millions? And then invaded other nations to do the same there?

People accused of terrorism who haven't seen their families, talked to their lawyers or had formal charges being held even today in maximum security prisons around the country count? Little box like cells where the prisoners crouch. We have invaded countries for years. Like when we blew up one of our own ship's in Havana harbour and blamed it on the Spanish then invade and set up a real "democracy" while leaving a clause in their constitution saying we could take control at any time. We have taken over two countries and put dictatorships and shipped their detainees here or into Guantanamo where in one case we strapped a guy to a chair over 24 hours no food, water or sleep due to no air conditioning so that the room was over 100 degrees. He pulled his own hair out. How many people there are guilty since little to none have faced trial?

xechnao · July 9, 2005

Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:
So unless they had a magic 8 ball to tell them they were going to get support from just about every country in the world [US, Soviet Union, France, ect] I don't know how that could have effected it.

They had. Those countries wanted to weaken Iran, which could have risen to a power controlling resources they didn't want.
Most propably they would have even reassured Hussein first place.

Woland said:
It's like the Amnesty International report that had a sentence comparing Gitmo to the Gulags, it made the report look like a farce, even though there is plenty to object to in regards to Guantonimo Bay.

When comparing something remember to take account that events are functions of other events.
#1 US wants to be the worlds first cultural influence
#2 media delivers much more
#3 we live in the global era

Gitmo is a farce. Not amnesty international report's. Gitmo itself. It is only a show trying to prove its citizens that US is in a potentially tough situation, help create more atmosphere about it.

Griffith · July 9, 2005

Oh yeah, well I know the REAL TRUTH of the World, but I'm not sharing! Ha ha ha! XD

Anyway, those Brits don't take shit as lamely as us Americans do (I mean, one of our selling points is, "If you're too big a loser to make it in your own country, come here and thrive!"), they're gonna be out to kick some ass. Stiff upper lip and all that. ;)

xechnao · July 9, 2005

"Griffith No More!" said:
Oh yeah, well I know the REAL TRUTH of the World, but I'm not sharing! Ha ha ha! XD

I sense irony. If so, are you trying to say that we can't know what really is going on and we should just trust whoever is supposed to be in charge?

Griffith · July 9, 2005

xechnao said:
I sense irony. If so, are you trying to say that we can't know what really is going on and we should just trust whoever is supposed to be in charge?

I smell ideological patronizing stupidity, and it is a stinky cologne. Are you saying you know exactly what is going on and we should only trust TERRORISTS!? I don't want to twist your words like an obtuse asshole, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!! OH MY GOD! ET TU, XECHNAO!?

Yeah, not nice is it? Thanks.

And for the record, I only trust the Internet. :-*

xechnao · July 9, 2005

"Griffith No More!" said:
I smell ideological patronizing stupidity, and it is a stinky cologne.

Yeah, that was an anti-fertilizing on your own smell. It stinks as much as yours.

"Griffith No More!" said:
Are you saying you know exactly what is going on and we should only trust TERRORISTS!? I don't want to twist your words like an obtuse asshole, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!! OH MY GOD!

Funny the way you want to use the word "terrorism". Terrorist is also the one that helps make terrorists or creates them. You call terrorist Al Qaeda. But in some cases US foreign activities are also considered terrorism.
Guess what, even germans called terrorists the ones who opposed their occupation on the countries they occupied.

I am saying that administrations have done no progress in the era of globalization, on this fact.
And if they go on like this there will always be terrorism, both sides, both parts.
Now, as I said in my first post, this might help the higher status remain higher and the rest where it is right now. If it gets worse, even more. I am asking when people are going to realize and consider certain things. When people are going to wake up.
But I believe they are waking up a bit because it seems the rope has been pulled too far.

Herald of Yama · July 9, 2005

*Sigh* OK, since Griff won't share the Big Secret, I will;

The world is going to Hell. It's been going to Hell for about the last five thousand years or so. And every single one of us is like the kid in the backseat asking "are we there yet?" And every time we do, that guy at the wheel(whatever you want to call him/her/it) steps down on the accelerator just a little bit more. To summarize:

The world is going to Hell. When will it arrive? We'll know when we get there. Now sit down, shut up, and stop punching your little brother in the arm.

xechnao · July 9, 2005

Herald of Yama said:
*Sigh* OK, since Griff won't share the Big Secret, I will;

The world is going to Hell. It's been going to Hell for about the last five thousand years or so. And every single one of us is like the kid in the backseat asking "are we there yet?" And every time we do, that guy at the wheel(whatever you want to call him/her/it) steps down on the accelerator just a little bit more. To summarize:

The world is going to Hell. When will it arrive? We'll know when we get there. Now sit down, shut up, and stop punching your little brother in the arm.

The world is going to hell when things could have been or been going better but instead they don't because of not having dealt with his somebody's doings. They call him satan. But satan can be deceiveful too and have faces more than one.

Griffith · July 9, 2005

xechnao said:
Yeah, that was an anti-fertilizing on your own smell. It stinks as much as yours.

I was was refering to you projecting obviously extreme, simple-minded ideas on people for the sake of your "1-2-3-agree-with-me" arguments. This offends me, if you didn't notice. :-*

"Are you saying you are Nazi!? That is not right; here is a link."

xechnao said:
Funny the way you want to use the word "terrorism". Terrorist is also the one that helps make terrorists or creates them. You call terrorist Al Qaeda. But in some cases US foreign activities are also considered terrorism.
Guess what, even germans called terrorists the ones who opposed their occupation on the countries they occupied.

I am saying that administrations have done no progress in the era of globalization, on this fact.
And if they go on like this there will always be terrorism, both sides, both parts.
Now, as I said in my first post, this might help the higher status remain higher and the rest where it is right now. If it gets worse, even more. I am asking when people are going to realize and consider certain things. When people are going to wake up.
But I believe they are waking up a bit because it seems the rope has been pulled too far.

Funny, I never mentioned any of that, at all, yet you project ready-made bullshit opinions on me as if they are my own, using those blatant setups as a soapbox to spout off on your own agenda like a windbag. Makes sense; it's hard to lose a debate when you're arguing for both sides, huh? "Are you saying you are wrong. Here is the right answer!"

No offense, Xech old chap, but I don't think you're acting much different from these administrations. ;)

Herald of Yama · July 9, 2005

So Xech, you will agree with me when I say

"If people understood the true nature of evil they would refrain from it, not out of any inherent goodness so much as from a sense of revulsion at something so ugly, pointless, and stupid."

If you do not agree, I will make you an official Turd Minion

xechnao · July 9, 2005

"Griffith No More!" said:
I was was refering to you projecting obviously extreme, simple-minded ideas on people for the sake of your "1-2-3-agree-with-me" arguments. This offends me, if you didn't notice. :-*

"Are you saying you are Nazi!? That is not right; here is a link."

If you are offended, then you have issues with what we are talking about going above common logic. You know an argumentation is made up of a chain of arguments, linking together and refernces if there can be any.

"Griffith No More!" said:
Funny, I never mentioned any of that, at all, yet you project ready-made bullshit opinions on me as if they are my own, using those blatant setups as a soapbox to spout off on your own agenda like a windbag. Makes sense; it's hard to lose a debate when you're arguing for both sides, huh? "Are you saying you are wrong. Here is the right answer!"

No offense, Xech old chap, but I don't think you're acting much different from these administrations. ;)

No, you did. That was a defense on my part trying to explain what YOU intended as I' ve said as your ready made BS opinion on me:

quote:" Are you saying you know exactly what is going on and we should only trust TERRORISTS!? I don't want to twist your words like an obtuse asshole, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!! OH MY GOD! "

So, because of that, the following quote made by you right here:

"Griffith No More!" said:
No offense, Xech old chap, but I don't think you're acting much different from these administrations.

Lacks credibility.

PS: This thread shouldn't end up as one of our flames again.
If the irony I sensed first place was wrong or true you should have just said so.

Herald of Yama said:
So Xech, you will agree with me when I say

"If people understood the true nature of evil they would refrain from it, not out of any inherent goodness so much as from a sense of revulsion at something so ugly, pointless, and stupid."

If you do not agree, I will make you an official Turd Minion

I agree. But it is not because of inherent lack of comprehension possibility. It's because of twisted information Satan can give them because of the power he has grasped.

Griffith · July 9, 2005

xechnao said:
If you are offended, then you have issues with what we are talking about going above common logic. You know an argumentation is made up of a chain of arguments, linking together and refernces if there can be any.

No, you did. That was a defense on my part trying to explain what YOU intended as I' ve said as your ready made BS opinion on me:

quote:" Are you saying you know exactly what is going on and we should only trust TERRORISTS!? I don't want to twist your words like an obtuse asshole, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!! OH MY GOD! "

So, because of that, the following quote made by you right here:
Lacks credibility.

PS: This thread shouldn't end up as one of our flames again.
If the irony I sensed first place was wrong or true you should have just said so.

It can't be helped if you're going to continue on in this fashion.

xechnao said:
The world is going to hell when things could have been or been going better but instead they don't because of not having dealt with his somebody's doings. They call him satan. But satan can be deceiveful too and have faces more than one.

xechnao said:
I agree. But it is not because of inherent lack of comprehension possibility. It's because of twisted information Satan can give them because of the power he has grasped.

Okay, nevermind. I'm outta here!

xechnao · July 9, 2005

"Griffith No More!" said:
It can't be helped if you're going to continue on in this fashion.

Or yourself.
You are not supposed to be my patron you know.

Series of Explosions in London

ShinHell9

I started on here when I was like 14...

xechnao

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great

xechnao

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great

Alucard

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great

Alucard

Begemot

STOP UNDRESSING ME WITH YOUR EYES!

Alucard

Begemot

STOP UNDRESSING ME WITH YOUR EYES!

mahlernut

I call the big one Bitey!

Alucard

xechnao

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

xechnao

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

xechnao

Herald of Yama

"It is pure Potential"

xechnao

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

Herald of Yama

"It is pure Potential"

xechnao

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

xechnao