!!!IRAQ ATTACK!!!

No topic. Everything you want to speak about. Please just stay courteous.

Moderators: Mug UK, Silver Surfer, Moderator Team

User avatar
goldman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 5:03 am
Location: New Hampshire USA

!!!IRAQ ATTACK!!!

Postby goldman » Mon Mar 03, 2003 9:42 pm

Were about to step into a war with Iraq down here in the states! Everythigs gettin tense. Folks are buying duct tape and theres all kinds of stuff happening.

You know I know that most people here in the forum are french and no doubt you know that Chirac is backing out of this and wants nothing to do with the war. I don't hold it against you guys. I'll bet most of you are pretty angry with him as well and want to see Saddam taken down just as well.

Well... I hope Portsmouth New hampshire USA Is still intact and that Im well.

User avatar
Mr Nours
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 11:10 am
Location: Montpellier, France
Contact:

Postby Mr Nours » Mon Mar 03, 2003 9:58 pm

Bush is getting mad. He's a fornicating bellicist.

I'm ashamed for the americans.
______
Fuzion, the best french Atari CD crew ->The Fuzion Shrine!
ST emulation and more ->Emulation Atari ST(fr)!

User avatar
Brume
Red eyes
Red eyes
Posts: 4178
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 10:16 am
Location: France
Contact:

Postby Brume » Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:02 pm

I'm not angry with Chirac, and I support him totally.
And before you ask... yes I'm french.

User avatar
MoodST
Brume's Right Hand
Brume's Right Hand
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 10:03 am
Location: The Web
Contact:

Postby MoodST » Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:17 pm

Hi Goldman,

I think problems can be resolved in a pacifist way most of the time and I think it's good to have a balance between pressure and compromise to get Irak disarmed as long as the international rights are preserved.

I'm french native and Irish at heart. I am not in favour of a new war and for that I fully support Chirac too.

Please, everybody
, before this thread is going too far as already seen on other forum, don't generalize in any ways. Please don't say "The american this", " The french that...". Just keep in mind that in every country there are detractors for each positions.

We can all have different opinions, this does not make anybody worst than the others...


All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance

John Lennon
<font color="darkblue"><< MoodST >>
------------------
http://whynotfree.atarizone.com
Freeware Directory and Atari Remakes Archive.</font>

User avatar
Batman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 12:19 pm
Location: Gotham City
Contact:

Postby Batman » Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:18 pm

At this point I personally think that there is nothing that is going to stop a war happening. I don't think that the American government cares what their allies says anymore, they have pretty much decided that there will be a war.... and it is just a matter of time before troops will cross the borders of Iraq to end that regim. I just hope that the war will be very short and spare as many Iraqi/american lives as possible. The shorter the war the better...

There is something I have been thinking about lately, why move against Iraq? I mean, ok so Saddam is no choir boy but there are regimes out there that treat their population just as bad or worse. Like the military regime of Burma for instance or North Korea, Syria, Iran, Sudan and many others.

I can imagine that the general american public must be quite upset with their european allies not wanting to support their war in the middle east. And they have their points and some I find to be valid.

But what I think must be considered more is that after the war, what happens then? I get the feeling that the Arabic community will be less and less friends with the US then. And I also suspect that most arabs see the european contries as the same "evil" as the US. I think that in the worst case this war could lead to the Arab League enacting "Kill all the white people" policies. And then we have about one billion angry muslems to juggle with. :roll:

Goldman You have to explain this thing with the duct tape. I saw Letterman the other week making some jokes about it but as I don't watch US news I have no idea of the background story on this :?:

I hope I haven't offended anyone with my thoughts, it isn't my intention at all. In anycase I apoligize if I have offended anyone. :wink:

Batman

User avatar
[ProToS]
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2242
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 2:09 am
Location: Lourdes / France
Contact:

Re: !!!IRAQ ATTACK!!!

Postby [ProToS] » Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:32 pm

goldman wrote: I'll bet most of you are pretty angry with him as well


no angry sorry but I agree 100% with him in this point
and yes I'm french too
SeeU
[ProToS]/Facebook

Soluzar
Atari freak
Atari freak
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:02 pm
Location: The U.K.
Contact:

Postby Soluzar » Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:04 am

Just wanted to say: This is quite a multi-national forum, so please, Goldman, tread lightly with your words. It's not impossible that there could actually be people from Iraq or other Moslem countries reading this, who would be sure to find such discussions distastefull, and even if not, I believe that your post could have been construed as offensive to some. A French citizen with deeply held pacifist beliefs, for example.

Secondly, I believe that the 'duct tape' reference (or as we in the UK know it, Gaffer tape) is about people supposedly taping up the openings in their doors and windows, etc, in order to avoid being contaminated with biological and chemical agents.

Soluzar

User avatar
goldman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 5:03 am
Location: New Hampshire USA

Thank you

Postby goldman » Tue Mar 04, 2003 1:33 am

Yeah... I gotta be careful with what I say. But hey! Aren't I always?

Oh yeah... About the tape. My landlord has been stocking up on that at our apartment building. I know it's good for Anthrax but the way I see it, it's gonna be a Nuke.

I see no reason Why a war with Iraq will work. See theres this dude I know named Micheal Mesh, He's this right wing commentator and a fanatic, (Kinda like Pat Robertson) and he says he has a plan to destroy Sadam without a war. It actually involves a coup. This could get sticky. I just hope for Bush's sake if he does go throught with this he doesn't get too many people killed.

As for any muslims and arabs reading this topic just know that we are still a free country and down in Portsmouth you're welcome to stay here as long as you abide by the law like we all do. Got alot of indonesians in our town, many of them Muslim I'll bet, they're all law abiding and the best people you could know. Were not all like Franklin Graham and Jerry Vines.
http://www.msnbc.com/m/mw/mw.asp?t=v&id=nn_faw_preacher_030225&sk=&pl=&name=&opt=0
You're in safe hands. Trust me. Never mind what that nut says.

Well... that's all for now. I just hope I live to see tommorow.

User avatar
MoodST
Brume's Right Hand
Brume's Right Hand
Posts: 185
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 10:03 am
Location: The Web
Contact:

Postby MoodST » Tue Mar 04, 2003 5:08 am

A letter to the London observer from Terry Jones (yes, of Monty Python).

Letter to the Observer Sunday January 26, 2003

I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience. And so am I! For some time now I've been really pissed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street. Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far I haven't been able to discover what. I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is.

As for Mr Patel, don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources - that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one. Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police? But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours. They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people.

Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I want! And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security.

The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us. That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way.

Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction - even if no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq. Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'.
It's such a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it? How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist isonly a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves. Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Muslims might convert to fundamentalism.
Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims? It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up.

Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come. It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing - and, in contrast to what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.

Terry Jones
<font color="darkblue"><< MoodST >>

------------------

http://whynotfree.atarizone.com

Freeware Directory and Atari Remakes Archive.</font>

User avatar
ST Graveyard
Obsessed with homicide
Obsessed with homicide
Posts: 2126
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 11:53 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Postby ST Graveyard » Tue Mar 04, 2003 4:15 pm

This is a sensitive topic, and it really gets me going. And I should keep quite. But I completely agree with Batman.

You know (let's just say one little thing) ... Bush and his war against terrorism is just starting to become really ridiculous. To me, America has commited to biggest act of terrorism in the history of mankind ... 2 A bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (SP?) ... 1000 of innocent civilians ... People are still suffering from it to this day...

maybe off topic, but it just makes you wondering ... Here in Europe, most people are against a war, and they should! Sadam is an evil man, no doubt about it (testing bio weapons on his own people...). But Bush, he isn't any better. And sadly, he is gonna prove it real soon :-(

These are just the days I'm even more proud to be a Belgian :-)

Cheers,
Atari Legend IS back!

www.atarilegend.com

User avatar
Batman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 12:19 pm
Location: Gotham City
Contact:

Postby Batman » Tue Mar 04, 2003 4:49 pm

Maarten Martens wrote:Sadam is an evil man, no doubt about it (testing bio weapons on his own people...). But Bush, he isn't any better.


I'll have to disagree with you here Maarten. I do think that Bush is better then Saddam. If I was the one who was deciding whom was going to lead my country and the only options was Bush or Saddam... I would pick Bush seven days a week and twice on Sunday.

Now this doesn't mean that I agree with much Mr Bush is saying or doing but he is a most likely a saint compared to Saddam.

Has other solutions then war been seriously considered? Maybe sending in the cia/gru or some special forces to take Saddam out? I think that the Iraqi people has suffered enough now, god knows how many years that mad man Saddam has been terrorising his people, the last gulf war put them through even more suffering and the UN sanctions has probably killed more people then the war. To see another half million to a million people getting slaughtered when the bombs start raining again can't be something they are looking forward to.

Anyway, Saddam has to go but I am not completly on par with Bush when it comes to the how. I'm just hoping that when/if the war comes all other options has been tested. Maybe US/France could give Saddam the same deal that they gave to Baby Doc?

These are very though issues but I hope the solution will be swift and possibly even a peaceful one. :)

Batman

User avatar
ST Graveyard
Obsessed with homicide
Obsessed with homicide
Posts: 2126
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 11:53 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Postby ST Graveyard » Tue Mar 04, 2003 7:24 pm

Well, Batman, you are the man with the knowledge when it comes to dictators. So I won't disagree with anything you said above...

I agree with you that Sadam has to go. But what makes Bush a bad man is the fact the he is going to use brute force, even if the whole world is opposed to it. And he is using his "war against terrorism" as an excuse. I mean, this guy is completely ruining the other peacefull solutions with his war this and war that. I'm even starting to agree with Iraque that they won't participate with Hans Blix and the rest in completely disarming. I mean, if Bush is going to attack them anyway in 2 weeks, why should they?

I've always been a very pro American guy, but this time I completely disagree with the whole thing. I feel very very sorry for the people of Iraq. Sadam really has to go, he has caused enough suffering, I agree. But I'm getting a feeling that this war wil not really be fought to accomplish just this task. It almost feels like a contest of some sort :-(
Atari Legend IS back!

www.atarilegend.com

User avatar
Doctor Bob Gordon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 9:30 pm
Location: undisclosed location

Postby Doctor Bob Gordon » Tue Mar 04, 2003 9:28 pm

Well.

Saddam is a cruel dictator. He should be put on trial for his crimes. But the truth is that the goverment of the United States have never been concerned about the human rights or the enforcement of UN's Security Council resolutions. They only want to put there a puppet government and get Irak´s oil. Check the past history of the middle east (Iran, Irak). U.S. and U.K. supported a military coup on Iran to install the puppet government of the Sha. Some time after that, U.S. supported Saddam against Iran (where did Irak get the technology and the original strains to produce biological weapons?). The U.S. supported the bloody coup of Chile on the seventies. The U.S. currently support a military dictator on Pakistan. The U.S. support (politically and with funds) the Israeli terrorism against the Palestinian people.
dBG

User avatar
ST Graveyard
Obsessed with homicide
Obsessed with homicide
Posts: 2126
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 11:53 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Postby ST Graveyard » Tue Mar 04, 2003 9:45 pm

Well, I can't comment on all the history you mention here, as I wasn't following it all back then (some of the stuff is before my time, I guess), and I never really payed attention in history class :-)

But that's what I'm thinking too ... Bush just wants more power ... And oil ...
Atari Legend IS back!

www.atarilegend.com

User avatar
Batman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 12:19 pm
Location: Gotham City
Contact:

Re: Thank you

Postby Batman » Tue Mar 04, 2003 10:47 pm

goldman wrote:Oh yeah... About the tape. My landlord has been stocking up on that at our apartment building. I know it's good for Anthrax but the way I see it, it's gonna be a Nuke.


If you are expecting a Nuke from Iraq, I think you can calm down. I don't think that Iraq has any ballistic missiles. The scud missiles they have don't reach that far but they do reach to Israel though. I think that it is more than certain that they don't have any Nuclear weapons either. Saddam is a lunatic so if he had had any nuclear weapons I am sure he would have used them already.

The only countries with nuclear weapons in the region is Pakistan and possibly Israel and as far as I know they are allies to the US. I'm not counting Russia, India and China. I don't think that North Korea has any nukes, they are just rumbling over there because USA cut off their food supplies. As soon as they get their food again they will probably calm dawn again.

And I think that if bin Laden and his people would have a nuclear bomb they would probably go for London, New York or Washington DC. I'd doubt that they would go for anything else. But on the other hand if they would want to prove that they hate all the western countries they could probably pick any country in Europe. I might be wrong here but I have the feeling that Al Qaida don't have the power to detonate a nuke in USA even if they had one, they might be able to do that in some European country or Russia but in the US, No. In my opinion the terrorist awareness in the US since september 11th is too high for bin laden to succed with smuggling in an A bomb into United States, at least the news reporting from the US leads me to belive that.

I don't belive that the oil or humanitary concerns are the only reasons why the US wants to get ugly with Iraq but I have no real clue to what that would be. I don't belive for a second that Saddam is in bed with bin Laden, that is highly unlikely... I think that bin laden would be shot on sight if he would set foot in Iraq. Saddam don't want any competition from some raving religious lunatic. The why is really a though one for me, atleast a why that I can believe fully.

About US(and other countries) support of hideous dictatorships around the world. The list is unfortunetly soooo much longer. About the US support of Sadam during the Iraq-Iran war, that is true. What is even worse then that.... the Iran-Contras deal was struck during the war. Meaning that the US armed both sides of the war. :?

Batty

User avatar
Ayreon
Obsessive compulsive Atari behavior
Obsessive compulsive Atari behavior
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 8:44 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Ayreon » Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:09 pm

Usually i stay out of political debates, but here are my 2 cents..

There's no peacefull way to get rid of saddam and his loyals. You can talk him to death, but that will take at least another 2 decades.

And yes i believe that Bush's intentions aren't primarely humane ones, but political and economical. He could make the world a little better too by spending the whole war and army budget on reorganizing the US industry to make it less poluting. :)

This war will lead to more terrorrisme if you ask me. And what will happen after the war. Several groups inside iraq want their own state. It might become a 2nd ex-yugoslavia.

Still i can't say NO or YES to the war. There are pro's and con's and i haven't figured out wich outweights wich.
And i still don't understand the German and France goverments. They were the EU countries that were very active during the gulf war, Together with the US and UK, leaving a mess there and didn't finnish the job. Wich led to this upcomming war. Now if they had any other solutions it would be different, but to me they don't seem to want to solve this problem in anyway. They even refuse(d) to help defending Turkey if the war gets bigger than anticipated and saddam decides to pick on Turkey. Somehow Turkey was good enough to use during the gulf war but now they can drop dead?

Well i got to say something about my country too. The Netherlands... We're trying to always be politically correct, we're always behind our allies.. far behind :D
Oh well blame them.. when they tried to have a leading role once they got screwed.
I'm not accusing anyone of anything, but thats how things look to me at the moment. It's time they stop playing games, start to clearify some things and be honest about their intentions.

User avatar
ST Graveyard
Obsessed with homicide
Obsessed with homicide
Posts: 2126
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 11:53 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Postby ST Graveyard » Wed Mar 05, 2003 8:49 am

France and Germany will support Turkey when they get attacked, I guess. They just won't do it now, cause it might seem provocative and lead to an unnecesary war. That's the main reason. No war, no civilian casualties. As to why they act so differently than 10 years ago ... Maybe they learned from their mistakes???

And why bush wants to go to war with Sadam? Not only for oil, not only for a puppet gouvernement, not to only dethrone Sadam ... Maybe to finish of some work daddy didn't do???

It beats me ... I don't know much about politics, I do find it an interesting discussion ...

Cheers,
Atari Legend IS back!

www.atarilegend.com

User avatar
JustExhumed
Atari freak
Atari freak
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 5:47 pm
Location: Manchester, U.K.

Maarten Martens

Postby JustExhumed » Wed Mar 05, 2003 6:35 pm

[ To me, America has commited to biggest act of terrorism in the history of mankind ]

Perhaps you'd have liked to say that to the Allied POWs held in Japan at the same time war in Europe was over?

War is an emotive subject but to come out with the above quote is distasteful with the events of Sept 11th still all-too-fresh in everyone's minds.

Japan were warned and given the option to surrender, they declined.

America was given no warning, no option for a peaceful resolution and no chance to save their countrymen.

For the last 50+ years America have defended the free world after helping us ensure we still had it!

Also, MoodST, Paul wrote all the best Beatles songs! :D
End vivisection: http://www.uncaged.co.uk

User avatar
Batman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 12:19 pm
Location: Gotham City
Contact:

Re: Maarten Martens

Postby Batman » Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:19 pm

JustExhumed wrote:Japan were warned and given the option to surrender, they declined.

America was given no warning, no option for a peaceful resolution and no chance to save their countrymen.


Sorry to jump on this one but you kinda left it wide open. According to what you just said, it would have been ok if bin Laden would just have demanded the surrender of the US first, been laughed at as response and then smashed two airliners in to the world trade center buildings?

I don't think that the attrocities commited by either bin Laden or US is ok. There is nothing that can justify either of these acts. On the other hand it's quite possible that an invasion of the japanese mainland would have been even worse when it comes to losses in human lives. But still can an A bomb on civilians really be ok?

Batster

User avatar
ST Graveyard
Obsessed with homicide
Obsessed with homicide
Posts: 2126
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2002 11:53 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Postby ST Graveyard » Wed Mar 05, 2003 8:02 pm

Justexhumed ... Sorry if I offended you, or anybody else with my quote, which might have sounded pretty harsh...

But it hasn't changed my opinion ... An A bomb on civillians? why?
If it was a war target ...

This is getting of topic ... I'm gonna shut up now :-)
Atari Legend IS back!

www.atarilegend.com

User avatar
Doctor Bob Gordon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 9:30 pm
Location: undisclosed location

Re: Maarten Martens

Postby Doctor Bob Gordon » Wed Mar 05, 2003 9:19 pm

Some recent examples of America´s freedom:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... tivists_16

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... ay/4917998

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2692479.stm

JustExhumed wrote:Also, MoodST, Paul wrote all the best Beatles songs! :D


Paul wrote some of the most popular songs, like 'Yesterday', 'Hey Jude', 'Let It Be'. But he also did a lot of crap like 'Ob la di, ob la da'...

In my opinion, the best song they made are:

I want you (Abbey Road)
Something (Abbey Road)
Dear Prudence (The Beatles - "white album")
While my guitar gently weeps (The Beatles - "white album")
Cry baby cry (The Beatles - "white album")
dBG

User avatar
moondog/.tSCc.
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 10:00 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Postby moondog/.tSCc. » Wed Mar 05, 2003 10:08 pm

ok, peeps...

just want to tell you my humble meaning...

atm -bush- is the most dangerous person on this planet, as he wants this war, with or without the united nations, so what makes him better than saddam?

what gives him the right to drag a whole region into the chaos of war if the majority of the nations on this world are against this move? esp. since he speaks about "free world" who is free if the us. are speaking for the whole world?!

in fact i´m a very proud about our chancellor who always was and is against a war and against a german -yes- to america´s war, it doesn´t matters what bush and his ugly surrounders are throwing at us...

he call france and germany the "old europe"... but think, old europe has seen so many wars, sorrow and misery in its history that makes us think twice before grabbing a weapon to bomb someone away... but as always the US always appeared on the plan far away from home, they always were able to make war without seeing the own country, the own home in danger to be bombed or burned, so it´s quite easy for them to make war as they don´t know what war REALLY is!

the US feel quite save behind the ocean, the us never had a war flooding with all its fears over its land, they DON´T know about the consequences of a war as they never felt some... consequences the people at home were able to feel too... in fact we´re speaking about OUR borders to this conflict area, we aren´t that far away,
we can´t feel save behind 1oooth of miles of water...

furthermore i wonder about that arrogant way, the US are acting,
"if you aren´t with us, you are against us", this is no solution! what is the next step? what will happen if we are against the US, just because we don´t support their moves? will we the next ones to be bombed away?

i think its time that the ugly bush-asshole is going back to texas, cluck some horse and leave politics into hands of people that think before they´re acting, in the 21th century the times should be over where bombs are used to solve problems, this reminds me hard to the stone age: gimme your cave or you get a hit with my clubb! plush... so i wonder who is the "old" one here...

i still hope that there will be another solution as to bomb the iraq
back into stone age, since we all know, the US AREN´T able to rebuild the country after destroying it, they need US, the old europe, OUR money, to rebuild the things they destroyed with THEIR money... and i don´t want to pay for the stupidness of george bush...

peace, eric

ps - 1 - at first, afgahistan, then iraq, next one korea? sudan? libya? who´s the next one?!

ps - 2 - Who used the nuclear bomb?! Who used "agent orange"?
So who obviously belongs to the terrorists?!
Undercover Magascene - observing the Atari scene since 1993

User avatar
goldman
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 5:03 am
Location: New Hampshire USA

WHOA!

Postby goldman » Wed Mar 05, 2003 10:12 pm

hmmmm... looks like I started somthin!

User avatar
Doctor Bob Gordon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 9:30 pm
Location: undisclosed location

Postby Doctor Bob Gordon » Wed Mar 05, 2003 10:25 pm

Mr. Bush, Mr. Powell, Mr. Rumsfeld, Condoleezzaa and every Joe Sixpack should read this:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,


AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and

to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and

to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and

to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,


HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.


Preamble, Charter of the United Nations
dBG

User avatar
Luna Manar
Atariator
Atariator
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 2:36 am
Location: Atlanta, GA - USA
Contact:

Postby Luna Manar » Fri Mar 07, 2003 8:00 am

Sometimes I feel like I'm the only American who really doesn't agree with what Bush is doing...my thoughts on this subject are so muddled it is hard to articulate them all...but I guess here is what I believe...

I think Bush has a good heart that does not understand the enormity of what he is about to do. I think that he honestly believes he is right. But he can't understand the situation of a poor country because he has never been poor, himself. He has never known what it means to struggle to put food on the table, or to have limits placed on your freedoms, and he therefore cannot identify with either the Iraqis or even the impoverished of his own country--his "ends justify the means" strategy is proof that he does not understand how war with Iraq will bring about the immediate catastrophic change in the lives of people around the world. He IS arrogant, but I, an American, do not share his views. I don't like the image that he is painting of Americans as a whole, because most of us really are not like him. Even of those Americans that support a war, most do so under the stipulation that we have UN approval.

Saddam is an evil man, but you do not solve the problem of bullies on the playground by beating up the bully. That only makes you the NEW, BIGGER bully--regardless of what your intent was; whether or not you're a nicer bully is irrelevant. Everyone sees you as the new threat, because you took matters into your own hands without listening to any of the people who asked you to reconsider. If America suddenly becomes a threat to world peace in the eyes of all the other nations, I shudder to think what could happen...when nations start to take sides, that is a dead giveaway for war on a larger scale. I might also note that Bush keeps saying, America is going to protect the Iraqis, America is going to do this, America thinks that...when in reality, what he should be saying is, I am going to war with Saddam, I believe this, I believe that (and if America doesn't like it, I "respectfully disagree," but I'm the president and I can do what I want). Don't think for a moment that the American's really have any say in this...because we don't, not divided like we are. Thousands upon thousands of protesters have not changed Bush's mind, and he makes no indication that they ever will. He simply says "that's what makes America great, we can all state our opinions" and "I respectfully disagree," but if this country was as free as he indicates it is, if Bush respected us as much as he says he does, then our words would be having some impact, and they're not. It's a bunch of squawking falling on deaf ears.

I'm not in total agreement with Chirac, either...but I think he's got some good points. What I don't like is the potential for Americans as a people to be hated because of what our president decides to do...half of us didn't vote for him, after all (I didn't vote at all, because I didn't like Gore, either), so you can't blame his actions solely on the people's decision. I don't like how this little country is splitting up the UN. I think there are alternatives to war that should be explored and have not. I think that N. Korea is a bigger threat than Saddam...I think a lot of things that my president doesn't. I feel hurt and even a little betrayed when someone from France or Britain says that everyone in America is as arrogant as Bush, because I don't think I am (at least, I HOPE I'm not...).

The whole situation between Saddam and N. Korea and Al Quaida is one big mess, no doubt about it...but if America goes to war, I would plead with other nations to realize that we do so because our president said so, out of duty to our country, and not necessarily because it is our first choice. The people that support Bush's decision for war do so because they believe his claims that that there is no other alternative--those of us who think there is a better way do not agree with him, but if we are called to arms, we will go because it is our duty as citizens. America, I believe, is no one's enemy...but Bush himself may be another matter. He is dangerous for the sole reason that he weilds the entire American military at his command, and he is willing to use it for what he THINKS is good, even though he may be very, very wrong. America doesn't like to think its president it wrong...we look for reasons to believe that he is right...we want to believe we're the good guys. If it turns out our government has turned us into the aggressors, it will be us, the people of America, that suffer the world's anger for it. I hope it doesn't come to that. The whole situation has me very frightened--and the backwards part of it is that I am more afraid of the hatred from nations that are my country's allies than I am of the countries Bush calls 'the axis of evil.'

Ugh. Okay, I've babbled enough. I am sincerely sorry if I've offended anyone...I know I'm a newbie and probably shouldn't be talking...
Image
Thank you, Atari and Missile Command--because of you, I am now a master of shooting down popup ads.


Social Media

     

Return to “Chat forum [ENG]”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest