Political Motivation

[Watchman]

You know, the last I heard a rather large segment of the voting-age population of the US was deprived said right due to an array of circumstances involving the law enforcement system...

And given that the last time I checked the US had per capita more people in prison alone than the next three or so states put together...

[Kralizec]

Moral outrage at the fact that inmates in the US can't vote?

Slightly more than one in a hundred, or so I recall. Even if they were all democrats they wouldn't have changed the outcome.

[Beirut]

And given that the last time I checked the US had per capita more people in prison alone than the next three or so states put together...

Between the absurdity of the War on Drugs, certainly one of the single largest US social disasters since slavery, and the reckless and mindless stupidities of Three Strikes Your Out, mandatory minimums, and for-profit incarceration, I'm surprised the entire adult population 18 to 35 isn't locked up.

[Watchman]

Moral outrage at the fact that inmates in the US can't vote?

Slightly more than one in a hundred, or so I recall. Even if they were all democrats they wouldn't have changed the outcome.

Mainly just pointing out that's not exactly going to increase the ratio of folks at the urns there.

[Tribesman]

Haha, the funniest bit is that they're using WMD's(in the form of chemical weapons) in the current Iraq war...

They are not chemical weapons , they are target markers , you set the people on fire so they are easy to identify and shoot .

Anyhow strictly speaking it isn't a war in Iraq so none of those rules apply .
Just as it isn't an occupation so none of those rules apply either .
If however someone finally does confirm the obvious and calls it a civil war then the coilitions gets to stand on really dodgy ground (rather than just being stuck in a really dodgy situation up to their necks with no way out) .

[Watchman]

Anyhow strictly speaking it isn't a war in Iraq so none of those rules apply .
Just as it isn't an occupation so none of those rules apply either .
If however someone finally does confirm the obvious and calls it a civil war then the coilitions gets to stand on really dodgy ground (rather than just being stuck in a really dodgy situation up to their necks with no way out) .

I'm kind of reminded of The Onion's country-fact box on Iraq... "Primary cause of death: Victory"

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Oh dear , another one who can line up behind Mars to read the treaties on war crimes

Subtle, but unnecessary. You noticed by the end that I did read it, to your disadvantage.

Please excuse me, .ORGahs. Back to the debate.

[Tribesman]

Subtle, but unnecessary. You noticed by the end that I did read it, to your disadvantage.

Not in the slightest , since as you shoud know by now (nasty as the events were) there is no way that they constituted a war crime under the legislation in effect at the time .
Like I said , if you want to call that method a war crime you will have to use a different example as Dresden doesn't fit the bill at all . Its all covered in the get out clauses .

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Not in the slightest , since as you shoud know by now (nasty as the events were) there is no way that they constituted a war crime under the legislation in effect at the time .
Like I said , if you want to call that method a war crime you will have to use a different example as Dresden doesn't fit the bill at all . Its all covered in the get out clauses .

Yes, I've heard that argument, and Panzer and myself have both been over it, and it's bullox.

Anyways, this is not the place.

[Tribesman]

Yoo hoo Mars , was Dresden a defended city ?
Was it garrisoned in divisional strength ?
Did the method differ from other raids ?
Was it full of legitimate military targets ?
Where the incendiary bombs designed to kill people or destroy buildings ?
Was the bomb mix loaded on the basis of the best combination to destroy buildings or people ?
Does the German declaration make all workers a legitimate military target ?
Was the aiming point chosen for its proximity to the two main train stations ?
Were those train stations allocated for priority military traffic ?

Yeah Panzer and yourself have both been over it

[Spartan198]

Oooh, Google is nice.

http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Occasional_Papers/OP5.pdf

When I click on that,it tells me I have to download some program to view it. Could you cut and paste whatever relevant info is there?

[Spartan198]

For all the nuclear weapons naysayers:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../19/wirq19.xml
http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz060903.asp

[HoreTore]

So? That's not exactly unique.

I never said it was, did I?

Besides, Jens Stoltenberg isn't elected at all

Huh? He most certainly is.

Our head of state isn't elected though, if it was him you were talking about. But then kings are rarely elected...

[Spartan198]

"What the media reports of the world disagrees with what I want to believe, so obviously the media is wrong and/or lying."

Hålla mig handen.

It only proves they're just biased,when their job is to be neutral.

[Spartan198]

This just gets funnier and funnier , keep it up Spartan you are a real scream .

You know,I was thinking I could bring this topic here and discuss it without being called stupid,but clearly I was wrong.

[Tribesman]

For all the nuclear weapons naysayers:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../19/wirq19.xml
http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz060903.asp

I really must ask again , where the hell have you been for the past 5 years ?

You know,I was thinking I could bring this topic here and discuss it without being called stupid,but clearly I was wrong.

Hey Spartan I didn't call you stupid, I said
you appear to be largely devoid of anything mildly relating to the thought process.

It only proves they're just biased,when their job is to be neutral.

Oh stop will you , for gods sake their job is to make money , plain and simple .

When I click on that,it tells me I have to download some program to view it.

Errrrrr...thats adobe , since you say you don't do media because it is clearly biased I wonder how you are getting your info since most lenghty government reports , documents from the UN about WMDs and a host of other really relevant material to what you are trying to talk about are presented in pdf. format .
Could it really be that you are attempting to make an arguement using years old inaccurate news articles and widely discredited claims by politicians without viewing any of the material that has long established them as being inaccurate and discredited .
That really does put your statement into a new light

You know,I was thinking I could bring this topic here and discuss it without being called stupid,but clearly I was wrong.

You know , you wasn't thinking at all was you

[Watchman]

It only proves they're just biased,when their job is to be neutral.

You seem to have rather... interesting... standards for "proof" and "bias" you know.
...
...
...okay, to be honest, I think they're just blatantly tendentious.

[HoreTore]

For all the nuclear weapons naysayers:
http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz060903.asp

Thank you, that one really cracked me up

But then, it is dated June 2003, so he might have come to his senses by now...

[Pannonian]

You're all talking nonsense, and this kind of scepticism will lead to problems in the future. Luckily the US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld does not share your doubts, which is why the war has been a great success. We only need one more thing, the capture of Saddam Hussein (where is he anyway?), and we'll have achieved all our objectives. Just you guys wait.

[Tribesman]

But then, it is dated June 2003, so he might have come to his senses by now...

Nope Kurtz still writes crap .
Apparently being wrong about the WMDS isn't important

Not nearly as important as the deterrent effect of an America willing to brave 3,000 casualties for the sake of proving our willingness to take down rouge states.

Frigging moonbat isn't he . he swings month to month from OMG get the nukes , bring down rogue states and lets have democracy to .....support dictators that sell nukes , support terrorsts and bugger democracy because people vote the wrong way and governments don't do what he wants .

But anyway I think people should really thank Spartan for this topic and his "thoughts" . It does everyone good to have a really heartfelt laugh and Spartan has certainly supplied them aplenty

[Ronin]

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

[Spartan198]

:Hey Spartan I didn't call you stupid, I said
you appear to be largely devoid of anything mildly relating to the thought process.

Yeah,that's a nice way of camouflaging an insult.
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.

[CrossLOPER]

BTW,those reports I linked to are dated 2003 for a reason. They prove Saddam had a nuclear weapons program.

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.

Also, download Adobe Reader. You will probably need it in the future, if not now.

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.

I am more than sure he was being sarcastic.

[Adrian II]

You're all talking nonsense, and this kind of scepticism will lead to problems in the future. Luckily the US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld does not share your doubts, which is why the war has been a great success. We only need one more thing, the capture of Saddam Hussein (where is he anyway?), and we'll have achieved all our objectives. Just you guys wait.

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.

Pannonian, is there some sort of post-invasion planning being done, that you know of?

[Pannonian]

Also, download Adobe Reader. You will probably need it in the future, if not now.

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.

I am more than sure he was being sarcastic.

No, I'm being perfectly serious. BTW, is anyone going to contribute to the kitty for President Bush's re-election campaign next year?

[Lemur]

The PDF file format has a well-known liberal bias.

[Kralizec]

Huh? He most certainly is.

Our head of state isn't elected though, if it was him you were talking about. But then kings are rarely elected...

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.

[Tribesman]

Yeah,that's a nice way of camouflaging an insult.

Is it ?
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 .
though of course some people are being very generous and extremely patient in their replies , like

You have been told repeatedly that that information is outdated and has been disproved.

Maybe it might be a good idea to actually think .

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.

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 .

[Adrian II]

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 .

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.

[Vladimir]

When I click on that,it tells me I have to download some program to view it. Could you cut and paste whatever relevant info is there?

You mean Adobe? It's a 60 page report on the decision to invade Iraq and its aftermath.

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.