Printable View
I´m so tired of this crap....
shut up you goddamn hippies!!! because guess what, hippies? We ******' won! Yeah! We went in there and we met our stated objective to... Uh, hang on, we went in to go -- uh, liberate the... Hang on, no. Here's why we went. We went to get the, uh... to strike a thing, uh... WE ******* WON, OKAY?
the nice man playing top gun on that boat thingy said so a couple of years ago...so it must be true
Yeah,that's a nice way of camouflaging an insult.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
BTW,those reports I linked to are dated 2003 for a reason. They prove Saddam had a nuclear weapons program.
And I should ask you where you've been for the last 5 years. We captured Saddam,and I've seen his execution video on YouTube myself. Or do you need proof of that,too? I know exactly where to find it.
You have been told repeatedly that that information is outdated and has been disproved. Unless you can find a recent article that has the same information provided by a reliable source, you are not going to convince anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Also, download Adobe Reader. You will probably need it in the future, if not now.
I am more than sure he was being sarcastic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Well, the U.S. will have to attack Iraq first and secure at least most, if not all of their territory. Rumsfeld seems to think it'll be a walk-over, but I have my doubts whether the number of troops he sent will be sufficient to pull it off and pacify the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Pannonian, is there some sort of post-invasion planning being done, that you know of? :dozey:
Utter nonsense. Just because the Portable Document Format is the universally used format for documents across all platforms and throughout the world doesn't mean I should accept these newfangled technologies. I'm pretty suspicious of this terrorist-sounding Hypertext Markup Language as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
No, I'm being perfectly serious. BTW, is anyone going to contribute to the kitty for President Bush's re-election campaign next year?Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
The PDF file format has a well-known liberal bias.
Unless I have a completely wrong idea of how Norwegian politics work (I'm assuming that it's a more or less generic parliamentary democracy) you can't honestly hold that a prime minister is ever elected as such, unless his own party has the absolute majority in parliament.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Is it ?Quote:
Yeah,that's a nice way of camouflaging an insult.
I thought it was an accurate appraisal based on the content of what you have written in this topic .
Not of course that I mind what you have written , I am most glad of your contribution , it has led to some of the best piss takes I have seen so many people make in one topic in this forum .:2thumbsup:
though of course some people are being very generous and extremely patient in their replies , likeMaybe it might be a good idea to actually think .Quote:
You have been told repeatedly that that information is outdated and has been disproved.
Don't be silly Adrian invasion lite is the way to go , if we sent in more troops it would cost more money in shipping and then we would only have to pay more to bring them home again once the adulating crowds had run out of flowers to throw .Quote:
Well, the U.S. will have to attack Iraq first and secure at least most, if not all of their territory. Rumsfeld seems to think it'll be a walk-over, but I have my doubts whether the number of troops he sent will be sufficient to pull it off and pacify the country.
I hear there's a statue of Saddam somewhere in a Baghdad square. By the time Rumsfeld finds some rent-a-crowd from Saddam City to tear it down, this war will be over and U.S. troops can begin to dismantle Saddam's wmd's, secret nuclear facilities and mobile rocket launchers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
You mean Adobe? It's a 60 page report on the decision to invade Iraq and its aftermath.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Anyway. In 2003 Iraq did have WMDs, everyone knew it, just like Japan was going to attack the Philippines in December 1941.
Read the WMD commission report.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
:coffeenews:
Apparently the Republic of Morskoj knows not the difference between deciduous and coniferous.
Shmoos.
Yeah apart from them damn French who had the front to say the intelligence was bollox , oh and the Russians because they are Russian and the Chinese but thats because they are really foriegn and must have sold him loads of WMDs anyway because they are like Koreans and Pakistanis and they are all the same and interbred because they come from Asia and of course the UN ... all them horrible people at the UN laughing at poor Colin and saying his cast iron evidence was fabricated how dare they .:furious3:Quote:
Anyway. In 2003 Iraq did have WMDs, everyone knew it, just like Japan was going to attack the Philippines in December 1941.
Still once its over by Christmas and the oil is flowing cheaply , Iran will be cowering in fear as it will have two secure hostile democracies on its borders to worry about and Americas army with a widely expanded coilition will really be ready to kick some camel .:unitedstates:
As stated your information is old. Read the Duefler Report on Iraq WMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/duelfer.html
Edit: And you probably really want to read the report. While it isn't all that favorable toward the initial reason's for the invasion of Iraq, it doesn't disprove all the stated reasons for the invasion either, in fact, if I remember my own reading of it correctly - it validates at least two of the intial reason's given by Bush for the War. However for those against the war it, doesn't provide validation for the primary justification for the war used by the Bush Adminstration either.
There's no better tree for firewood than the good old birch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beirut
When I click on these, it tells me I have to download some program to view it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Then download the program for a safe source --- :yes: :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Nah, I'm pretty sure this Adobe thing has a liberal bias, and I'm downloading no damn liberal hippy program onto my computer. Hell, I don't trust those damn browser thingies either. Sure, it takes me longer to write a post by feeding in punchcards, but I know my 320x240 monitor and my trusty 8 baud modem will never fail me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
:inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
I thunk you need to starts a farewood thread in the Frontroom so we can learns ya proper like.
I've always used it - the bark works as kindling, the wood catches easily...Quote:
Originally Posted by Beirut
I'll always throw on a big log of some other kind of wood for a good, long burn though.
The bark is good for burning, but I'll take you up on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beirut
Naw we can just derail this thread farther.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beirut
I like pine 2x4 made into kinliding (SP) and used to start a small fire of split pine. After the fire is going good - place a Mesquite log on the fire - burns nice and hot for a long time. Works good in the old house without central heat.
Now if pine isn't available - cottonwood makes an adequate substitute
Do you support an immediate US invasion of Yugoslavia, North Korea, Indonesia, Algeria, Libya, Columbia, Egypt, Israel, China, and Iran? How about Turkey, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, South Korea, or India? If not, what makes the Iraqi people so special to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Ajax
Oh boy now we are really getting full of hyperbole.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Now lets answer.
Yugoslavia has been broken up into several nations - so which new republic should we invade. That is besides the ones that alreadly have some sort of NATO or UN presence?
North Korea - since a state of war alreadly exists between North Korea and South Korea, with the North Korean government counting the US as still part of that conflict, I think your point is rather mute here.
Indonesia - Hmm tough question on that one, do they have nuclear or chemical weapons? Or are we to invade the largest Islamic nation just because of their religion?
Algeria - that seems to alreadly be settled by themselves - or are they deciding that its all France's fault again?
Libya - alreadly bombed in the 1980's, and he learned his lesson.
Columbia - At last I heard the United States alreadly as at least a law enforcement agency in country.
Egypt - the United States used to send a rotation to Egypt to monitor the cease fire between Egypt and Israel. Last I heard Egypt is not attempting to invade its neighbors, nor is it developing nuclear or chemical weapons. Or are you just picking on them because of their religion.
Israel - an ally of the United States. However they have sent spies into the US to steal secerts once again. Would make all the Islamic fundmentalist happy though - a good possiblity to conduct such an operation to bring about world peace. :sweatdrop: :laugh4:
China - we would lose all thosejobscheap consumer goods. Good capitialists dont destroy their cheap labor source.
Iran - Hillary alreadly took care of that requirement.......
Turkey - I see your picking on Muslim nations again.....
Mexico - population assimlation soon to be accomplished. No need for an invasion by the United States, since an invasion is alreadly happening......:oops:
Saudia Arabia - naw its just a big desert, beside been there not a pretty country at all. Or is it the Islam thing again for you....
Pakistan - seems someone is picking on Muslim countries as targets for invasion. Now they do have weapons of mass destruction all aimed at India....
South Korea - see answer for North Korea. Then again we also invaded both North and South Korea at least once alreadly. Inchon ring a bell.....
India - can't invade India we would loseall those jobsall that cheap labor....
Sorry to get you riled up, Redleg. Just grabbed a bunch of names from an online list of nations with high per capita records of human rights violations. I've got nothing personal against them, I just find it interesting that Spartan at one point used caring about the Iraqi people as his justification for the war. It seems strange to have so much care for the people of Iraq (does he know any personally?), without having a similar concern for oppressed people the world over.
Ajax
no big deal - I just wanted to point out the weakness of hyperbole exambles and try out a different type of arguement then I have in the past. Most of it I will probably delete unless some fish actually takes a bit out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Who's Hillary?
Uhm, yes he is. A few of our ministers aren't elected though(Støre is the only one I can think of atm). But ministers aren't elected in any country as far as I know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenring
Why do you think he isn't, btw?
Whilst this has been the funniest and most informative (if one is interested in the properties of firewood) threads for some time, I would ask that the snide insults directed at some members cease forthwith.
Thank you kindly.
:bow:
He climed Everest a couple of years ago .Quote:
Who's Hillary?
Oh sorry wrong Hillary, I must be in a time warp .
Its this one .
She has recently been elected in New York for her first term , she says that Saddam and Al-qaida are buddies and there is convincing evidence based on reliable sources to confirm that it is really true and not just another made up piece of crap to try and convince the gullible .:yes:
She also said we shouldn't do diplomacy at the UN over this , but I think she was just upset about the silly unbelievers and naysayers laughing at the evidence .
A great woman really , though somewhat shy and reserved yet with a capacity for honesty that is truly rare among politicians . She would make a great candidate for higher office but due to her wish to remain an obscure backround figure I doubt she coud be convinced to stand in the near future .
“Yugoslavia”: This country doesn’t exist any more. About old news...
“Yugoslavia has been broken up into several nations - so which new republic should we invade”: Considering NATO bombing, a Protectorate in Bosnia with several Foreign Troops on it territory, a Protectorate kind of Panama model in Kosovo "Self Proclaimed Country" helped by Foreign Troops, carved in a other State which refuses to recognise the spoil of war, we can consider that it is “mission accomplished”… :beam:
When did that happen ?Quote:
“Yugoslavia”: This country doesn’t exist any more.
Where is Tito nowadays ?
Isn't it about time she threatened Iran then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
No because after the invasion Iran will be quaking with fear and they will have seen what happens to countries that have WMDs .Quote:
Isn't it about time she threatened Iran then?
This Invasion will completely sideline the Iranians throughout the region and eliminate any marginal influence that they may currently have .
So even if edmund should stand for higher mountains I cannot see that the office at the peak would have do make any threats at all about Iran since the veracity of the intelligence operation and the astounding military and political prowess of the coilition shall have them Araby Persiany ...ah well they are all the same as the go to the bakery lots and lots as they are really into bread ..... begging for the mighty forces of democracy to liberate them too .
They're only elected as members of parliament.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
I don't know how coalition's are born in your country, but over here it basicly comes down to that two (sometimes three) large parties make deals about what to do and what not, and divide ministry posts as spoils of the election. We only have an indirect voice in how the executive branch is going to look like.
Tribesman you just crack me up with your comments on Hillary.:laugh4:
Sure sure, but couldn't Hillary, you know, say something like 'If Iran's president is prepared to wipe Israel off the map, I am prepared to wipe Iran off the map' - 'wiping off' being shorthand for 'I am a two-bit dictator with crackpot ideas, no sense of responsibility and a remarkably small penis'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Nah, Edmund probably wouldn't be that silly. :no:
Just about everyone is implying that everything from my government is trash,while everything from their governments is the gleaming symbol of truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
That's why I didn't put a link. Not everybody has the stomach to handle that kind of thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
Here's further proof of Saddam's possible nuclear capability at least 10 years prior to the first Gulf War (which has nothing to do with a US military strike):
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_196..._iraq_1981.php
Here's more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
That's thirty years ago! :yes:
All the more reason to attack Iraq, as they'll have had 30 years in which to rebuild their nuclear programme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
Imagine Hitler with nuklear arms! :dizzy2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
ah of course the small penis complex , that explains why Tenzing Nogay had such a big smile in the newphangled photogrphic images , the smug little inbred indonesian (or is he mongolian ? doesn't matter as they are all the same)was relying on his imbreeding to furnish himself with a todger the size of a donkeys .Quote:
Sure sure, but couldn't Hillary, you know, say something like 'If Iran's president is prepared to wipe Israel off the map, I am prepared to wipe Iran off the map' - 'wiping off' being shorthand for 'I am a two-bit dictator with crackpot ideas, no sense of responsibility and a remarkably small penis'?
Nah, Edmund probably wouldn't be that silly.
But anyway its all irrelevant now , the young boy from the town has presently arrived on his velocipede bringing a telegram , the news has been delivered from the colonies aboard a clipper bringing wool that Hillary has indeed died .
A rather unfortunate epitaph though , apparently on being questioned about his reasoning to Nuke Iran he replied "because it was there" . Luckily he never got to the peak of high office eh :yes:
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Just about everyone is implying that everything from my government is trash,while everything from their governments is the gleaming symbol of truth.
Oh dear havn't you downloaded adobe yet , the report linked that shows the claims were bollox is from your government , unless of course you think the US government publishers are doing some moonlighting for another government .
I've got close family friends that immigrated from Iraq in the late '80s and still have relatives currently living over there,plus ones that have died under Saddam's regime.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Is that a good enough reason?
Pay close attention to this sentence:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Would a country not need nuclear capabiltiy to construct any kind of nuclear facility? And henseforth the capability to construct said nuclear facility would mean the capability to produce nuclear weapons. Said nuclear facility would produce radioactive material usable in constructing said nuclear weapons.Quote:
On June 7, 1981 Israeli warplanes struck the Osirak nuclear facility near Baghdad.
And look closely at the date. Israeli bombers destroyed the facility in 1981,which was a bit less than 20 years and 1 month before the official US invasion.
That gives Saddam more than enough time to rebuild said facility.
Edit: And on top of that,why don't you open up this link,and look at the source of the info at the bottom of the page:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...ry/Osirak.html
ok...first of all pay close attention to THIS sentence..
that was a while ago wasn´t it?....between then and 2003 wasn´t it there like a war that basically destroyed the infrastructure they would need to such an endeavor?Quote:
On June 7, 1981
also...second....
I wouldn´t trust the israel defense forces to tell me the truth on information regarding Iraq any more that I would trust Hammas to give me the straight truth about Israel....
Yes and ???????? Oh I get it , it was destroyed , and then the Americans made sure it was definately destroyed , and the UN checked to made sure it was really destroyed so....errrrr doesn't that mean it didn't exist in 2003 ?Quote:
Pay close attention to this sentence:
Or am I missing some really cunning punchline you are about to deliver ?
Ok now I don't know how to put this politely , but it appears that not only don't you think , cannot read and have such strange definitions of what constitutes truth that it really beggars belief , it appears you add not having a clue about nulclear science to the equation .Quote:
Would a country not need nuclear capabiltiy to construct any kind of nuclear facility? And henseforth the capability to construct said nuclear facility would mean the capability to produce nuclear weapons. Said nuclear facility would produce radioactive material usable in constructing said nuclear weapons
As Hillary recently said Iran has oil , oil can be made into petrol , petrol fuels internal combustion engines , those engines can be found in cars , so that means Iran has the worlds leading car manufacturing plants .
Though in fairness it was suggested that Hillarys rant was the much delayed after effect of altitude sickness .
I must ask though , if your own government says the claims it made were bollox, all the other governments say the claims were bollox , the weapons inspectors say the claims were bollox how is it you cannot comprehend that the claims were indeed bollox ?
Now I know you said you don't hold with conspiracy theories , but it certainly appears that you have a little conspiracy theory going yourself , the entire world is lying and you alone know the truth :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Before the election, the three parties of our governing coalition all named stoltenberg as their choice for PM, should they get majority together. Three other parties did the same for Bondevik.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenring
Anyway, a PM is completely different from a president. Stoltenberg doesn't have a lot of power here; he has to do exactly what the party tells him to do. If at any time the party is unhappy with him, he will be removed instantly. If the republicans are unhappy with Bush, all they can do is yell at him. The PM position is a position of power for a party, the presidential position grants a lot of power to an individual.
You remember that Duelfer report Redleg refered to in post 94? The CIA homepage was hacked 4 years ago by leet skillz liberal hackers that put that report on the homepage (sometimes later in a nice html format). At this day the CIA still haven't been able to remove this. :no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Well if what I've heard the oil money will be so much that it will basically pay the war and rebuilding by itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
As for the actual rebuilding it will end up in competent hands (who can say that opportunists and Bush lovers aren't naturally compentent and won't ever put thier own interests over the common good) and by loading tons on money without any supervision the money will automatically end up in competent hands helping rebuildingswimming pools in the USIraq.
So Cheney is on it then? Let's hope he doesn't shootQuote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
his hunting partnerhimself in thefacefoot.
Back in the day when Saddam was supported by western governments, you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Yeah that should be interesting , when they eventually catch him and put him on trial it will be fascinating to see what Saddam says about his western suppliers and backers in relation to his gassing of the Kurds .Quote:
Back in the day when Saddam was supported by western governments, you mean?
Oh well if that is the case I will definately support the troops and vote for the funding , after all its only right that Iraq revenue should be used for the benefit of Iraq , if however they change the bill and lumber the US taxpayer with all the expense I might have to reconsider and perhaps flip my vote over to a no , after all its only reasonable and no one could possibly hold such a change of vote in those circumstances against me .Quote:
Well if what I've heard the oil money will be so much that it will basically pay the war and rebuilding by itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Just for the record, one of the nations resulting from the fragmentation of Yugoslavia goes by the name of . . . wait for it . . . Yugoslavia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
That certainly makes a particular concern for the people of that nation more believable. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Ajax
Wow! Worthy of Gregoshi! :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Ajax
:laugh4: “Just for the record, one of the nations resulting from the fragmentation of Yugoslavia goes by the name of . . . wait for it . . . Yugoslavia.” :beam:
I suggest you to read newspapers (from between 5 and 3 years old) and watch news. Yugoslavia doesn’t exist any more. The last “Yugoslavia” was the Union of Montenegro and Serbia. Montenegro broke the Union, with a Referendum, I think 2 years ago, then the Yugoslavia (The Slave of the South) ceased to exist, living Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia (Federation and Republic of the Serbs) Macedonia (Former Yugoslavv Republic of Macedonia), Montenegro, Slovenia as independant States and distinct.
Good to be sarcastic, better when it is on informed basis…:beam:
Cheney is on it and so it Rumsfeld, who suggested that we might be able to reduce the number of troops to about 30.000 at the end of the year. So according to plan, almost all the troops will be home in less than a year. Very impressive. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
Cheney seems to be a bit more pessemistic and expects an insurgence, but it will most certainly be at it's last throes by the middle of 2005.
Or the satellite pictures the U.S. provided to him. Or the virus cultures they sent him with which to expand his biological warfare capability. Or the chemicals and expertise sold to him by the Europeans. Or the $1bn US contract to design and build a petrochemical plant which Saddam planned to use to produce mustard gas right after the Halabja massacre. Or the U.S. and UK blocking UN investigations into his gassing of Iranians. Or the hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. loans with which Saddam paid for Russian and Chinese expertise and weapons systems which they sold to him in spite of all the sanctions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Wait.
I'm getting really bad vibes of a sudden.
You don't suppose they sentence him to death or a relatively minor charge and hang him before all of this transpires, documents appear, present and former heads of state from around the world are called to the witness stand and so on. :dizzy2:
Enemies change with the times,just like warfare itself. Today's closest ally could end up being tomorrow's bitterest enemy.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
No matter where I go,some people will doubtless assume this and that simply on the basis of my nationality. There's no escaping it,so I might as well disprove said assumptions where ever I can and not let the rest of it bother me.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Just for the record,though,I do believe that everyone has the right to live without being persecuted for who they are,what they believe,etc.. But there are still individuals who won't ever get the cheuvanistic American stereotype out of their heads. Doesn't matter to me,anyway. Has no baring on who I really am,after all.
I suppose Britain should start preparing for war with the US then, on the back of this observation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
Yes, but can you really pick on him for what he did when he was your own ally...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198
you took the works out of my keyboard...Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...pt/moo2ms3.jpg
Haha, man I got such a laugh at that :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Of course you can , as long as you avoid questions about why you helped him do it . A quick execution might solve that issue though .Quote:
Yes, but can you really pick on him for what he did when he was your own ally...?
I mean you could of course explain that these Kurds were evil Iranian backed terrorists who were fighting against a good Iraqi dictator and were aiming to establish a Kurdish homeland in Iraqi territory which would be a good reason really as to why they deserved to be gassed
But then you would have to explain why these evil Iranian backed terrorists fighting for a Kurdish homeland in Iraq are now called a stabilising influence .
Now now Adrian be fair , many western governments including your own helped him with his nastyness , not just the US and Britain , and many countries sold him weapons despite the sanctions......Quote:
Or the satellite pictures the U.S. provided to him. Or the virus cultures they sent him with which to expand his biological warfare capability. Or the chemicals and expertise sold to him by the Europeans. Or the $1bn US contract to design and build a petrochemical plant which Saddam planned to use to produce mustard gas right after the Halabja massacre. Or the U.S. and UK blocking UN investigations into his gassing of Iranians. Or the hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. loans with which Saddam paid for Russian and Chinese expertise and weapons systems which they sold to him in spite of all the sanctions.
actually which was the country that sold him helicopter gunships but called them agricultural machinery because to do otherwise would have been breaking not only its obligations under international sanctions that it approved but breaking its own national laws too ?
hmmm ....hard question that one isn't it , I think the answer is out there on a carrier pigeon somewhere .
Though obviously you will have to obtain the correct crib sheet to read it after you catch the pigeon as the answer is encrypted since such information is of course extremely sensitive and it wouldn't do for just anyone with the new babbage engine to be able to access it .
Plus there is the advantage that you can eat the pigeon after you retrieve the information , these new methods of information transmission are not only highly informative they are rather nutritious too .
That is exactly what I did, good Sir. I would prefer it if you read my posts before swallowing them whole, wrenching the pigeon's neck, changing into enemy enemy uniform and sleeking inconspicuously into yonder brushwood, brandishing nine inches of cold Irish steel beneath your sly grin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
:coffeenews:
Well color me embarassed :embarassed:. I generally pride myself on a decent knowledge of geography, but that change sailed right by well below my radar. I'll be sure to take your advice on sarcasm to heart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Ajax
Ajax , a small questionhow does it ?Quote:
That certainly makes a particular concern for the people of that nation more believable. Thank you.
His friends left Iraq when Saddam was killing Iraqis with Spartans governments(amonng others) assistance , surely if his concern was more believable he would be really critical of his governments role .
Its about as believable as the person who said they hated Chavez because he knew people who had fled from persecution by his government years before he had got anywhere near government .
I think of it in terms of the monkeysphere. There are only so many people you can comprehend as having humanity at a time. People inside of that circle matter. People outside are statistics. While he may not know people currently living in Iraq, knowledge of people from there could put a face on the idea of the Iraqi citizen, giving them more humanity and prompting more empathy. I can at least imagine Spartan feeling more concerned about the people of Iraq than a nation he is completely unfamiliar with.
As to the second part, having a concern for someone doesn't mean you necessarily help them in the most reasonable way. Lack of understanding or critical thinking, or the blinders of preconception could still prevent it.
Ajax
Yeah I know what you mean , some peoples idea of help is to support a dictatorship when it is killing its population , then impose sanctions that hurt the population and enrich the dictator , then break those sanctions in a manner that enriches the dictator more , then bomb the population , then invade and kill them , then execute the dictator and carry on killing the population and pretend you really care about them .Quote:
As to the second part, having a concern for someone doesn't mean you necessarily help them in the most reasonable way.
Hey Adrian it was just a good lead into the gunships into ploughshares dig .Quote:
That is exactly what I did, good Sir. I would prefer it if you read my posts before swallowing them whole
Who needs nine inches , an inch knuckleblade does the job much better .Quote:
brandishing nine inches of cold Irish steel beneath your sly grin.
But as Hillary said size doesn't matter , which of course made Tenzings smug smile even bigger .
Yeah well, you probably already knew it, but with the name of "Serbia and Montenegro"...Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Basically what happened is that everyone else split up and made new states, and the only territory left was what made up Serbia and Montenegro, neither of which declared any independence, but decided to stick with a semi-union. They've declared independence by now though, first Montenegro, then Serbia a few days after, and that was the final end of Yugoslavia.