Home » General Chat » Circular File » War on Iraq
| Re: War on Iraq |
Tue, 01 April 2003 19:06   |
|
|
|
People are dumb, so that's why opinion polls are next to useless. Your average dumb person against the war's opinion is no more or less valid than your average dumb person for the war's opinion. The polls just tell what the dumb people are thinking - i.e. not much.
The problem is, it's what I call the Memento problem - like in the movie, it would be nice to figure out what's going on, and who's right and who's wrong, but we don't get enough information to distinguish correctly, so we go ahead on misinformation and deceit fed to us by people who have ulterior agendas - whether they're government or anti-government.
Nothing spooky in 'ulterior agenda' either - just leaders who're more interested in personal power gain than any objective assessment of the situation.
So because of that, I just vote for my local Greens party, but don't expect me to be out on the streets protesting Australia taking part in the war, and don't expect me to be at the ticker-tape parade when they come back. Only if things got a lot worse either way, when it becomes more clear whichever side of the issue, will people be moved to action.
Alex (disclosure: a Stars! player who thinks words before weapons lets him win!)
they made me do itReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: War on Iraq |
Wed, 02 April 2003 16:47 |
|
|
|
Right lets clear up the UK governmental system....
"traditionally"....
The Monarch made ALL the decisions and was in ultimate control. Parliament was a body set up to bring about the public view, to present and advise the monarch as to what the people need/want etc... and at the end of the day the monarch could do as he/she wished... only REALLY risking civil war (which happened every now and then). This is only a basic view of things, but you understand that the leader of parliament (prime minister) is 100% democratically voted into place, unlike the US president who doesn't have to get the most votes over the ENTIRE US, just enough points from the Electoral college to win (correct me if I got that bit wrong). As such the prime minister "should" put forward the views of the people and make decisions based on what they need/want.
Actually...
The Monarch is in power... but this is virtually un-used. There's loads of bye laws etc.. in this country that go un-noticed and ignored. At the end of the day the Prime Minister is in power. But people still vote based primarily upon which person will best support their views... there's alot of party loyalty but that seems to be going out the window a bit now.
I wouldn't say people are dumb... only uneducated. There's alot of the facts we all don't have access to. This is because A) it would take an age to educate EVERYONE. B) even if everyone had access to the facts, not everyone would understand. It's such a pain in the backside that there are so many people that don't care - thats the real problem. People who don't care still make opinions based on NOTHING. I say take all the people who don't care and slap them in the war zone (on either side) and see how long it takes for them to care.
Memento is a fantastic film and one of my favourites. But it does again bring about a great point... if someone alters the facts... even slightly and the whole thing can go wrong. Teddy was innocent remember!!!! All it takes is for one person to get a
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: War on Iraq |
Thu, 03 April 2003 12:43 |
|
|
|
Apologies.
I suppose there's not that much difference between the UK and US in that respect after all.
But at least if X party doesn't win they still have a quantity of their people in some form of position of power. I have no idea how the "losers" in a US presidential election are used.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Thu, 03 April 2003 15:21 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I have no idea how the "losers" in a US presidential election are used.
|
Generally our comedians make fun of the losers for a while and then they are promptly forgotten about by the majority of the country. Most people who run for president are either already in a powerful government role (Senator, Representative, State Governor, etc.) or have lots of money through business ventures so they still tend to have influence despite not becoming president.
We also have 2 other branches of government which are meant to balance out the President's power. It doesn't work so well right now since Republicans control all three branches and it's considered unpatriotic to disagree with the president right now.
Because OOMATTERReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Fri, 04 April 2003 00:03 |
|
 zoid |
 | Ensign |
Messages: 348
Registered: December 2002
Location: Murray, KY - USA | |
|
| OOMatter wrote on Thu, 03 April 2003 12:21 |
it's considered unpatriotic to disagree with the president right now.
|
 Damn right!
BTW, freakyboy, the electoral college has nothing to do with how the people are represented after election. Even if the election was strictly a popular vote, the US is still a republic, and so we elect a leader that we THINK will represent us, and once elected he should make his own informed decisions, rather than soliciting the uninformed opinions of the common people. That goes for members of our senate and congress as well as the presidency.
I'M NOT AN EXPERT AND I'M OFTEN PROVEN WRONG. TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU READ MY POSTS.
Math?  Ummm, sure!  I do FREESTYLE math.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: War on Iraq |
Fri, 04 April 2003 12:26 |
|
|
|
I would vote on the above poll but my country IS the UK!!!
So we didn't oppose it. As for the population opposing it...
I guess for the same reasons as me... innocents don't deserve to die (which makes me against pretty much any war virtually) for a fight they aren't willing the fight for themselves.
One worry I do have is that this whole situation started with WOMD and the removal of production facilities... then suddenly Saddam was given 1 week to leave... and he didn't... so the war started.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Fri, 04 April 2003 21:42 |
|
|
|
It seems like the only three countries throwing themselves into this war, guns blazing, is the US, Australia, and the UK. NZ is totally opposed to the war - but noone really cares about them.
(as an aside, there was a really funny column in the Sydney Morning Herald shortly after Fellowship of the Ring came out saying that there was a very good reason why Lord of the Rings were filmed in New Zealand - it resembles Middleearth so much!)
Australia's population, according to those oh-so-relevant opinion polls, is pretty divided over it, but I've received an email from your university saying that 'according to resolutions decided in early Mar., students will be penalised for classes Thursday 10th April after 12pm -' basically so that students can attend a massive anti-war rally and not be worried about their precious futures.
I'll probably go along, take a couple of photos. It could be fun, maybe a couple of police horses'll be taken down. I can't believe protestors do that sort of thing, but as long as I'm not taking part...
Alex.
they made me do itReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Sun, 06 April 2003 15:17 |
|
| yucaf |
 | Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 100
Registered: December 2002
Location: India | |
|
Hello Guys.
I just want to say that I was disgusted by that thread, but don't worry, I'll try not to be too long and I won't try to persuade you. I aknowledge there is no way to succeed at that.
All this "we are the heroes" masturbatory stuff is just plainly subjective and first level vision of things that I wanted to vomit after 2 or 3 messages. A couple more and I was willing to cry to such insensitivity. Some words can be even more cruel than the worst images. Most of you seem to ignore what is the real meaning of "sympathy". I didn't even care to finish reading the thread, I just realized you were all agreing with each other so you are pretty sure you are right, climaxing at finding yourself part in a community of people who at last -after all those millenia and countless leaders- know how to fix the world and actually are engaged in doing it. Because suddenly, you cannot stand it anymore. You will fix it, once and for all. In a couple of years, the whole planet will live in happiness, I can't wait to see that!
Saying that the true and prime reason to attack Irak is to restore democracy and believing this is the real primary Bush reason and belief is just being blind to history and geopolitics, but whatever! Is there any reason to think when we are the world leader?
Mind you, I'm french and I am anti-war. However I disapprove completely the reasons why the French government took this decision. And I really think Germany sucks even more for being "antiwar whatever happens". If you don't want to buy anything french, then just don't. But be logic: Don't forget to ask the US companies in France to abandon everythink and come back. Then I will believe you. (BTW I think that would be stupid, but I'm trying to think in line with you)
I like very much the USA but I disapprove this engagement (oh! a blasphemous guy! shame on him! He can't have a different opinion, we are the democratic model after all, so why does he differ???!!! Who gave him this right!!! Us? AAAAAARRRRGGH
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Sun, 06 April 2003 18:15 |
|
|
|
| Quote: |
All this "we are the heroes" masturbatory stuff is just plainly subjective and first level vision of things that I wanted to vomit after 2 or 3 messages.
|
I read your material, looked at it again, and took a couple of headache tablets. I strained for a point to your post, some sort of arguement, but it appeared to boildown to "I don't agree" although you didn't really discuss why
| Quote: |
Mind you, I'm french and I am anti-war.
|
Does it matter what nationality you are? No to me, and it appears you are expecting people to assume French ergo anti-war.
| Quote: |
I like very much the USA
|
I have to admit, Americans are not my favourite people. There are plenty of nice Americans out there (including many on these boards) but whenever I meet an american I almost normally get annoyed by them. Interestingly(?) though, I had a wonderful girlfriend from America 
| Quote: |
I investigate, the less "good" poeple I can see
|
Tony Blair. At least give him the creidt for controlling Dubbya and prevent him from making too many faux pas. To a lesser extent Powell.
| Quote: |
If you want to *really* debate about the war, try posting on more open forums.
|
I have posted on the Moby.com forums, Iraq.net, LiverpoolFC.tv forums, SIGames.com forums and a few others. It's amazing the variety of response out there.
| Quote: |
AutoHost is not the most representative of all mindsets and culture you can find out there.
|
Actually it is quite broad. Granted Americans consitute a majority, but there are plenty of Europeans, and a smattering of Australians and Africans.
| Quote: |
your university saying that 'according to resolutions decided in early Mar., students will be penalised for classes Thursday 10th April after 12pm -' basically so that students can attend a massive anti-war rally and not be worried about their precious futures.
|
We had a lot of protests from teenagers protesting the war. Of course what a group of 16 year olds know about the war is highly debateable, and it's been cynically sugge
...
[img]http://www.ukrockers.com/forum/attachments/si.gif[/img]Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Sun, 06 April 2003 18:22 |
|
|
|
| freakyboy wrote on Fri, 04 April 2003 18:26 |
I would vote on the above poll but my country IS the UK!!!
So we didn't oppose it. As for the population opposing it...
|
First of all it was voted upon in the commons, the people you vote for. Secondly public opinion is overwelmingly in favour of war now.
| Quote: |
I guess for the same reasons as me... innocents don't deserve to die (which makes me against pretty much any war virtually) for a fight they aren't willing the fight for themselves.
|
Innocents never deserve to die, but it always happens. Of course, innocents were starving beforehand (because of a UN resolution, which goes some way to demonstrate their effectivness). As for fighting themselves, they did 12 years ago Basra attempted to resist Saddam after promises from America. America did promise to help uprisings, but they never did. If anything, this gives America increased moral justification to right the wrongs of 12 years ago.
| Quote: |
One worry I do have is that this whole situation started with WOMD and the removal of production facilities... then suddenly Saddam was given 1 week to leave... and he didn't... so the war started.
|
It is generally thought that there is only a handful of Iraqi's with the stomach to use WMD's (Saddam, his sons and "Chemical Ali" are the four on the list I recall).
[img]http://www.ukrockers.com/forum/attachments/si.gif[/img]Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Sun, 06 April 2003 19:43 |
|
|
|
In Ref to YucaF:
You obviously didn't read my posts!!! Pretty much the opening part of the thread because I am against the war, but I justify it. I have my reasons and my dounts based upon what I have been told, some of which I believe, some of which I don't. I'm basing my opinions on what I have learnt, what I know from my knowledge of history and politics and most of all from that in-built "bull#### detector" that we all have (with varying degress of accuracy).
I wouldn't say me and Zoid are agreeing with each other!!  But at least we're friendly, not making personal attacks and calling each other "brain washed" etc... In fact I have the utmost respect for Zoid because he is making a solid and strong arguement based mostly upon the situations he has been in and can empathise with - situations that I, thankfully, have never been in and hopefully never will.
I NEVER said the true reason for the war on Iraq (note the Q) was to "restore" democracy because (A) there is no democracy to restore and (B) imposing (because thats a more accurate description) democracy ISN'T the main goal (I believe the main goal is to end Saddam's regime and to eliminate WOMD production facilities.
Good vs Evil is such a black and white term. The removal of Saddam in my eyes is a good thing, war is a bad thing. As such I am against the war 100%, but now it's started I'm in the position of "Now it's started they better do it quick, do it right, and do it well. If they fail there's a huge price to pay... of which many innocents will have already paid themselves"
I don't believe in ANY religion - but I don't see what that has to do with this war? It's not musilms vs hindus or catholics vs protestants or anything like that - it's Modern World Republics vs Middle East under-developed dictatorship.
From reading this thread I'd say Autohost forum is VERY broad. We've got both extremes, the non-voters and the middle ground: Yourself being the hardcore Anti war, the 6 people that clicked
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Mon, 07 April 2003 00:38 |
|
| yucaf |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 100
Registered: December 2002
Location: India | |
|
| freakyboy wrote on Sun, 06 April 2003 18:43 |
In Ref to YucaF:
You obviously didn't read my posts!!! Pretty much the opening part of the thread because I am against the war, but I justify it. I have my reasons and my dounts based upon what I have been told, some of which I believe, some of which I don't. I'm basing my opinions on what I have learnt, what I know from my knowledge of history and politics and most of all from that in-built "bull#### detector" that we all have (with varying degress of accuracy).
|
You are right, I could not finish the thread and I did not see there where 2 pages aready. In fact I was feeling so bad after reading Zoid's serie of "I believe" that I could not focus on the next messages and went directly to express my feelings. Sorry for all the rambling, it was not particular attack upon any of you and I was more expressing the fact this war makes me sick and I cannot really explain why. This is the world I live in after all. Why should it be so difficult to accept it? I was not really making a point (you can rightfully blame me for that), in fact I did not want to participate in the thread. I just suddenly needed to say how I felt. That was selfish and I'm not proud of it. I was not expecting extreme opinions here, it took me by surprise.
| Quote: |
I wouldn't say me and Zoid are agreeing with each other!! But at least we're friendly, not making personal attacks and calling each other "brain washed" etc... In fact I have the utmost respect for Zoid because he is making a solid and strong arguement based mostly upon the situations he has been in and can empathise with - situations that I, thankfully, have never been in and hopefully never will.
|
Well I cannot say I agree either. I respect his career and as I say I understand his viewpoint. I still believe that in the army your are brainwashed. You are also at work (I know well that one), you are when you look TV, you are when you live in a non-democratic community...
| Quote: |
I NEVER said the true r |
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Mon, 07 April 2003 20:21 |
|
| zoid |
| Ensign |
Messages: 348
Registered: December 2002
Location: Murray, KY - USA | |
|
| yucaf wrote on Sun, 06 April 2003 12:17 |
I just want to say that I was disgusted by that thread, but don't worry, I'll try not to be too long and I won't try to persuade you. I aknowledge there is no way to succeed at that.
|
You're quite right; I doubt anyone here is going to convince anyone else to change their opinions. But that really isn't the point of the discussion - I doubt anyone is writing with the idea that the person with the opposite view is going to say "Gee, I never thought of that, and you're so right! I guess I was wrong, you changed my mind."
| Quote: |
If you want to *really* debate about the war, try posting on more open forums. AutoHost is not the most representative of all mindsets and culture you can find out there. I would even say it is a quite US/US compatible and military/strategist community... Ever though about that? (not that it is a problem per se, I am part of that community)
|
For me, it's only about sharing my own perspective and feelings on the topic with this community that I loosely consider "friends", and trying to understand their viewpoints as well. I consider it a discussion, not a debate, and outside of my community of family and friends I don't really care to discuss it, because I have as little interest in the opinions of people I have nothing to do with as they do for mine. Just as you may consider my views to be radical and foolish, I consider the views of many on the other side to be radical and foolish and couldn't care less what they have to say. I do care what YOU have to say, because I "know" you in some small way, at least. I'm glad you decided to voice your sentiments after all because now I know you a little bit better, and it's okay with me that you have a perspective opposite of mine.
| Quote: |
All this "we are the heroes" masturbatory stuff....
|
Good hyperbole. I can see how that seems like an accurate description to someone so different from me, even if it is a bit colorful. I feel like the US and allies are on the right side of t
...
I'M NOT AN EXPERT AND I'M OFTEN PROVEN WRONG. TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU READ MY POSTS.
Math? Ummm, sure! I do FREESTYLE math.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Mon, 14 April 2003 18:49 |
|
| yucaf |
| Master Chief Petty Officer |
Messages: 100
Registered: December 2002
Location: India | |
|
Hi Zoid and all.
Sorry for answering so late, had no time lately.
First I want to say I am amazed by the correctness that Zoid is showing up. After all that negative waves I sent out, you are amazing at keeping your head cold and just be so polite answering. I even thought for a while it was not the same Zoid I had a clash with some time ago in a Stars thread. I really admire your capacity to cool things off.
Second, I must recognize I was not a nice pal with what I wrote. Reading it again after some time and reflexion made me wonder what happened on those days to lead to me to react so strongly and emotionally. After that and some other things in my real life, I came to the conclusion that my wife's pregnancy is affecting much more than I wanted to admit previously. I have strong emotions about the future of the world like back when I was 18, and I guess most of that "impetu" is related to the fact I would like to have my future little daughter to grow up in a better world, free of wars, terrorist attacks, hatred and contaminated water. I guess I will have to do my best to admit it and hide the ugly side to her until she's big enough to understand it. This is really new for me and now that I start seeing this little things on ultrasonic photographs and monitors, I have to introspect and take a look at what is happening inside me...
| Quote: |
You're quite right; I doubt anyone here is going to convince anyone else to change their opinions. But that really isn't the point of the discussion - I doubt anyone is writing with the idea that the person with the opposite view is going to say "Gee, I never thought of that, and you're so right! I guess I was wrong, you changed my mind."
|
Well, I'm quite disappointed to read that. If I go into forums on-line or on-life, it's generally because I want to find people with more expertise on what I want to know in order to be able to make more informed decisions. Personnally I don't care to expose my views only to show anybody I have an opinion. I
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Tue, 15 April 2003 18:31 |
|
| BlueTurbit |
 | Lt. Commander
RIP
BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 |
Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002
Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
The zest in this thread seems to have faded out... needs a boost or something. 
Alright! Iraq is free and the evil regime is neutralized. Smooth. God bless the USA! Home of the free and land of the brave. Hot dogs, apple pie, and chevrolet! And Budweiser! And Playboy technical articles. And Windows, God, don't forget Windows!
Now we can go get all that oil that we don't want to go and get. That's why we put out the fires, so we have more to get. And maybe sell all the French and Russian weapons to buy more tankers for moving oil. Did someone say sanctions? And already turned off the illegal pipeline pumping to Syria. Did someone say sanctions?
And maybe kill some more civilians so they don't look so happy all the time. Nothing more pitiful than a bunch of happy conquered civilians. After all, they will miss the torture and inhumane treatment and suffering they have lived with most of their lives.
Next is Syria to get the rest of the regime and some more chemicals and then N. Korea, they sure been quiet lately?
Maybe in a couple months France, and Panama too, so Yucaf don't feel left out. Just kidding, Yucaf, just kidding. Don't get your dander up.
PS: Special thanks also to Britain and Australia and Poland for their warriors...
in addition to the dozens of other countries that are helping and understand the meaning of evil and repression, and have the courage to stand up against tyranny. What would this world be without people who believe in doing the right thing? The only thing that bothers me is that it took over 20 years of suffering for the world to respond to human rights.
Shame to those who just talk, and sell things to despots in order to fill their pockets. Like thieves wandering about the temple of God. In the end they too will get their just rewards.
To those who say: who is next? I would hope whoever deserves it the most! Too many people suffering in this world. To just sit by and watch and do nothing is in itself evil. 
[Updated on: Tue, 15 April 2003 18:49]
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: War on Iraq |
Wed, 16 April 2003 22:45 |
|
| zoid |
| Ensign |
Messages: 348
Registered: December 2002
Location: Murray, KY - USA | |
|
| EDog wrote on Tue, 15 April 2003 16:37 |
| BlueTurbit wrote on Tue, 15 April 2003 16:31 |
Maybe in a couple months France
|
Oh, please. What could they possibly have that we want?
|
Well, I've heard there's a certain ummm... shall we say "sexually non-discriminating" type of folk in San Francisco who really like Perrier. 
Then there's the wine. "Haha, stupid Americans, we sold them a bottle of vinegar for 300 Euros!" 
As for their bizarre cuisines, I've long suspected they only feed that to American tourists so they can laugh at them. "Haha, stupid Americans, we serve them disgusting snails on a plate, say "Bon Apetit", and they actually EAT IT!" 
Nobody likes Citroens, though. NOBODY. 
I'M NOT AN EXPERT AND I'M OFTEN PROVEN WRONG. TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU READ MY POSTS.
Math? Ummm, sure! I do FREESTYLE math.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | |
| Re: War on Iraq |
Tue, 22 April 2003 17:21 |
|
| BlueTurbit |
| Lt. Commander
RIP
BlueTurbit died Oct. 20, 2011 |
Messages: 835
Registered: October 2002
Location: Heart of Texas | |
|
| mazda wrote on Tue, 22 April 2003 07:52 |
You mean for target practice ?
|
No, I meant what I said, "thanks". Friendly casualties are not "target practice" and have always been a part of wars. The results in this war have been a historical record low, much lower than other wars. It is an unavoidable fact that human error can't be totally eliminated. However, it can be reduced, as it has been. When there are tens of thousands of combatants and thousands of sorties flying it would be near impossible to not have some errors causing unwanted results.
| Quote: |
More British soldiers were killed by American fire than anything else. Perhaps we did the same back, I don't know.
|
Not true according to official records. With respect to UK it was something like 5 died from friendly fire, 8 from action and about a dozen and a half from accidents. This was out of 159 coalition death total on the 21st of April.
BlueTurbit Country/RockReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: War on Iraq |
Tue, 22 April 2003 17:52 |
|
|
|
Friendly fire casualties are due to the Rules of Engagement used by the US, UK and god knows how many other countries.
If a target is believed to be a threat then the military personel in question have the right to fire at the afore mentioned target. This is due to modern warfare being a one shot one kill kind of affair and as such getting the first shot in is the most important thing to a soldier - because if you don't and someone else does... you're going home in a box.
I'm not supporting this scenario - but I understand it. Because if it was not this way... soldiers would still fire if they felt threatened... it's human nature. In fact it's true of all creatures in nature - it's the Fight or Flight response, and if you're holding a machine gun... flight isn't the first idea that springs to mind.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 07:14:06 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
3 / 30%
